News & Events

Guardian website

06/07/2012

Youth Justice

7th June 2012

An article recently appeared on the Guardian's website regarding the changing shape of youth justice services in many local authorities. Please see link to the article below:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/local-government-network/2012/may/23/get-ahead-youth-offending-services

AYM responds to consultation with members and Yot Managers

08/20/2012

There are two documents which are located in the members only section under 'other documents'

Document 1 is the Survey and document 2 is the response summary

AYM gives evidence at Justice Select committee

09/07/2012

Gareth Jones AYM Vice Chair and AYM members Paul O'Hara and Wendy Poynton gave evidence to the Justice Select committee enquiry into Youth Justice on 10/7/12

a transcript of their oral evidence can be found under the other documents folder within the Publications section of the website

AYM chairing arrangements

09/19/2012

On 14/9/12 at an executive committee meeting of the Association of Yot Managers

On 14/9/12 at an executive committee meeting of the Association of Yot Managers, Lorna Hadley the Chair of the AYM tendered her resignation. Lorna informed the meeting that as she had not been a Yot Manager for several months she felt unable to continue as Chair as the position needed a Yot Manager who was in touch with the issues affecting Yots than she was currently able to be.

Gareth Jones the current AYM Vice Chair agreed to act as interim Chair until the election of a new Chair at the AYM AGM in May 2013. Pat Jennings (Tameside Yot) has agreed to act as interim vice chair until that point. Lorna Hadley will remain a Director of AYM Ltd and a member of the AYM executive and will continue to lead the AYM's work on workforce development.

The AYM executive were unanimous in their support of Gareth and Pat in their interim positions and their appreciation for Lorna for her service as Chair of the AYM for the last 3 years.

AYM sponsor Award in memory of former Treasurer

10/26/2012

John Hawkins Memorial Award

John Hawkins Memorial Award

The Association of YOT Managers Ltd is pleased to announce that it is sponsoring an award to be presented at this years annual Youth Justice Convention in November 22nd-23rd in Birmingham.

We are seeking nominations from AYM members who can demonstrate an Innovative and Creative approach to Youth Justice in the last 12 months and can evidence why they should receive the inaugural John Hawkins Memorial Award.

John was a founder member of the AYM and a committed and enthusiastic member until his untimely death in August 2011. He was the AYM Treasurer from its inception until April 2011 as well as being Head of Service at East Sussex YOT until his retirement in 2010.

John was a passionate advocate for quality work and positive outcomes for young people, victims and communities. It is in this spirit and with the support of his family that the award has been devised.

To apply for the £500 award, which is to be spent on furthering the winning project and it's aims, all you need do is;
• Work for a YOT with an AYM member within the management team
• Be able to write a submission outlining why you/your project deserve the award with a maximum of 500 words
• Be available in person or to have a representative present at the Youth Justice Board Convention to receive the prize from members of John Hawkins' family.
• Be prepared to be involved in any publicity emanating from the award and endorsed by AYM Ltd

Please send your submission by 5pm 16th November 2012 to;
Ian Langley,
Secretary,
Association of Yot Managers (AYM)
c/o Elizabeth Court II,
The Castle,
Winchester,
Hants
S023 8UG
E-Mail: ian.langley@hants.gov.uk
The winner will be chosen by the AYM Executive Committee and be advised by telephone on the 19th November. The decision of the judges is final and not open to discussion or debate.

Sign up for AYM winter conferences

10/29/2012

Association of YOT Managers winter conferences: Open to YOT Manager non- members.

Register Now!
Southern area conference: Surrey, 5 December 2012 (Royal Alexandra and Albert School, Reigate, RH2 0TD. Times: 1.15 lunch, 2.00-4.30 conference)
Northern area conference: Leeds, 28 January 2013 (details of venue and times tbc)
The Association of YOT Managers is the only professional body for managers in youth offending teams in England run by YOT managers. Support your association and find out more about its past achievements and future plans by attending one of our half day winter conferences.
Speakers include:
John Drew, Chief Executive, YJB, reflecting on his time in office and giving his views on the future for YOTs
Julie Fox or Andy Smith, from HMI Probation, introducing their report on the thematic inspection of youth to adult transitions in youth justice, and outlining the future of YOT inspections
Gareth Jones, Chair of AYM Ltd, describing the work of the association and its future plans
A representative of the newly formed Police and Crime Commissioners Association, providing an opportunity to find out more about how YOT managers and PCCs can work together.
To register for either event, complete the details below and email Phil Sutton (philsuttonathome@hotmail.co.uk) or call 07514 248 313
There is no charge for these events, but places are limited by venue size, so please be sure to register no later than 30 November for Surrey and 22 January for Leeds.

Name and job title
Name of team/service
Registering for Southern/ Northern area event (please delete as appropriate)
Dietary or other requirements

Leeds Youth Offending Service girls programme wins first John Hawkins Award

11/26/2012

John Hawkins Award

The first John Hawkins award has been won by Leeds Youth Offending Service for their work with girls. John Hawkins was the Head of East Sussex Yot and Treasurer of the AYM for over ten years until his untimely death in June 2011. It was fitting that John's wife Chrissy and their three sons were present, along with Gareth Jones (AYM interim chair) at the Youth Justice Board annual convention in Birmingham last week to present the Award to Andy Peaden, Head of Leeds YOS.

Andy Peaden said 'Winning the John Hawkins award is a fantastic recognition for the hard work the team has put into the programme and into this area of practice and the award will allow the workers to purchase dedicated resources for the group in the future, and to provide an even better service for the next cohort of young women within the service.'

Gareth Jones said 'The girls programme implemented by Leeds YOS was a worthy first winner of the John Hawkins award for good practice in youth justice by AYM members or the Yots they represent. John would have throughly approved.'

The winning programme set up by Leeds YOS has a ‘virtual team’ of specialist workers across the service in order to develop their work with girls, recognising that providing the same services to both boys and girls does not produce equitable outcomes. A key objective is to provide the Court with a range of options equal to those that they have for boys, particularly as alternatives to custody.

The team includes two lead managers and specialist workers situated in area and specialist teams. The team has been trained in effective practice in this area and the training included how to formulate assessments and proposals in a way that is research-based. The specialist team has then rolled out further training to the rest of the YOS and our volunteers around working with girls.

The team developed a programme including a range of modules around self-esteem; healthy relationships; sexual health; managing strong emotions and cognitive skills. All YOS groups are now run on a single-gender basis and consideration is given to the working environment. Research indicates that girls need their own space to make disclosures; form relationships (both with each other and members of staff), free from distractions and the influence of boys; and that the nature and reasons behind their offending is likely to be very different and therefore the content needs to be different.

AYM support for Wipetheslateclean campaign

11/28/2012

http://www.wipetheslateclean.org.uk

The Association of Yot Managers (AYM) is pleased to support the Wipetheslateclean campaign launched by Bob Ashford, former Yot Manager & Director at the Youth Justice Board. It is absurd that Bob was forced to stand down as a Police & Crime Commissioner candidate in the recent election campaign due to a minor conviction he received as a youth over 30 years ago for which he was fined £5.

Bob said "I am really pleased that the AYM have agreed to support this important campaign. As a previous YOT manager myself and someone involved in the youth justice for many years it wasn't until I was forced to resign and was deluged with e mails from other people whose lives had been blighted by criminal records that I realised the full extent of the damage that can be caused by the current systems and policies. With the support of AYM and other organisations I believe we can make a real difference to what is an extremely confusing, complex and un-coordinated area of the CJS"

Wipetheslateclean is a non-political campaign that works collaboratively with organisations and people to shape practice and challenge the law in this area. The AYM supports the principle that young people and adults who have committed offences should not be damaged throughout their lives by a criminal record. Having accepted responsibility for their actions, they should be allowed to fulfil their potential and play a full and productive part in society. It's a social and economic tragedy that we spend billions each year on criminal justice but then prevent people who turn their lives around from working and paying taxes.

Further details can be found on the Wipetheslateclean website http://www.wipetheslateclean.org.uk/ and via twitter @wipetheslateclean

Follow the AYM on twitter'

12/03/2012

@AssnYOTManagers

For up to date information and discussion on the work of the AYM you can now follow us on twitter via @AssnYOTManagers

AYM responds to Looked after Children Inspection report

12/18/2012

Press Release: Publication by HMI Probation of the thematic, joint inspection report:

“Looked after children: An inspection of the work of youth offending teams.”
The Association of Youth Offending Team Managers (AYM) welcomes the thematic report on Looked After Children published today by HM Inspectorate of Probation, and appreciates the fact that HMIP has taken up our suggestion that they inspect this area of practice. We have had concerns for a long time about the outcomes of care placement decisions for young offenders and their communities.
We agree that there are far too many young people in care within the youth justice system, particularly in the secure estate, and that often many of them have been subject to numerous placements, some of which are clearly inappropriate. Our members share the inspectors’ concerns about the quality of care, and the commitment to the prevention of youth crime in some children’s homes, especially those in the commercial sector. The AYM would like to make it clear that in almost all cases placement decisions relating to looked after children are made by local authority children’s services departments, rather than by multi-agency youth offending teams (YOTs).
The AYM will continue to support YOT managers in their efforts to work with children’s services colleagues and other partner agencies with the aims of keeping young people in the care system from entering the youth justice system in the first place, and of reducing re-offending by those who do, unfortunately, come to the attention of the police and courts.
END
Notes to editors
1. Gareth Jones the interim Chair of the AYM is available for comment/interview. Gareth Jones is the Head of Cheshire West, Halton and Warrington Youth Offending Service, one of the six areas inspected as part of this inspection. He can be contacted on 0151 495 5840 or 07879 493583
2. The Association of Youth Offending Team Managers (AYM) is the professional association for heads of Youth Offending Services and managers in Youth Offending Teams in England.
3. The Association is able to draw on the wealth of knowledge and the breadth of members’ experience to promote public understanding of youth crime issues and to play its part in shaping the youth crime agenda.

4. Our members run services providing community-based supervision for children and young people who offend. We also work closely with staff in secure units and young offender institutions to ensure that young people in custody have as smooth a transition as possible back in to the community.

AYM host sucessful Winter events for YOT Managers

01/30/2013

Reigate and Leeds

The AYM Winter Events in Reigate and Leeds were attended by more than 30
heads of service and YOT managers. A number of these colleagues were
attending one of our events for the first time and we hope that this
experience will encourage them to support the work of the association in
the future.

Julie Fox, Asst Chief Inspector of Probation, gave a detailed account of
the Inspectorate's plans for YOT inspections in the next round, as well
as the Ofsted-led child safeguarding inspections. Members were able to
give feedback on their recent, more positive experiences of the
inspection process.

Nathan Oley, from the Association of Police and Crime Commissioners took
questions on the portion of YOT budgets that, in the past, came from the
Home Office, and offered to work with the AYM on a national survey of
PCCs as to how they plan to use their budgets to support YOTs and youth
crime prevention

John Drew, attending his last AYM event before leaving YJB, reiterated
his personal support for the association and gave a detailed and open
description of the current challenges facing YOTs and the YJB

AYM Chair has constructive meeting with Shadow Youth Justice spokesman

02/04/2013

Gareth Jones

On the 1st of February Gareth Jones, interim AYM Chair had a positive first meeting with Rob Flello MP (The Opposition spokesperson for Youth Justice). It was pleasing to hear that Mr Flello is a firm believer in the concept of YOTS and in particular preventative work to keep young people out of the youth justice system. Amongst the issues disussed were the current reviews of the Youth Justice Board and Probation, resouring of YOTS, secure estate provision for young people, YOT engagement with the new Police & Crime Commissioners, youth homelessness, YOT inspections and work with gangs. In the near future the AYM hopes to arrange for Mr Flello to spend some with a YOT to experience some of these issues first hand.

AYM response to HM Inspectorate of Probation thematic report on work with children who commit sexual offences

02/07/2013

published today 7/2/13

The AYM welcomes the report of the inspection of work with children and young people who commit sexual offences, published today by HM Inspectorate of Probation.

The debate about children and sexual offending almost invariably, and understandably, focuses on children as victims. This report helpfully addresses another side to the debate, which is the supervision of children and young people when they themselves are the offenders. Research in this area has consistently demonstrated four key principles: that children and young people who offend in this way have often themselves been the victims of abuse; that most adult sex offenders began to offend during their adolescence; that multi-disciplinary interventions are necessary to deal with the complex needs of these young people, and that early intervention is far more effective than doing nothing in the hope that young people will grow out of it.

Since their establishment in 1999/2000, youth offending teams (YOTs) have been uniquely well placed to supervise these young people across England and Wales. YOTs bring together police officers, probation officers, social workers, health workers and educationists to work together under the direction of one manager. Between them they have the skills and the networks to be able to provide services that no single agency could provide on its own.

We are pleased that the inspectors found that multi-agency interventions have had a positive impact on reducing reoffending and protecting the public, and they found many examples of effective and high quality work undertaken by our staff. This is challenging and complex work. We accept the inspectors’ findings that YOTs need to do more improve the quality of assessments and supervision plans in such cases, to follow through the resultant actions and to ensure the effect of our work is properly evaluated.

We accept the recommendations of the inspectorate, and share their frustration that, despite many improvements over recent years, they still found unacceptable delays in the progress of these cases though the justice system. In addition a reluctance by agencies to intervene earlier in cases where there had been worrying signs even before the first criminal offence was committed, and a lack of coordinated work to support victims, especially where the victims were also children.

AYM responds to YJB review

02/15/2013

Tri-ennial review regarding the Youth Justice Board

AYM Ltd response to the call for evidence on the Tri-ennial review regarding the Youth Justice Board.

The Association of YOT Managers is the national association for Youth Offending Service Managers and represents 82 m
anagers in 57 YOTs across England. Wales has it’s own Association-AYM Cymru .
We will make our comments in line with functions as described in the consultation document

A- Overarching Duty- principle aim of the youth justice system, s 37 of Crime and Disorder Act 1998
We regard the YJB as addressing this overall function well but also feel that a stronger refocus on the monitoring of quality of intervention and delivery of services by YOTs to ensure a more consistent quality of delivery across the national landscape. Whilst we acknowledge the importance of the role of the various Inspectorates as arbiters of quality there are many other issues which require a National focus- i.e. YOS governance- workforce developments- national protocols re transfer of cases- work with foreign nationals et etc.

We are concerned at the increasingly fragmented approach to local delivery of youth justice services since the YJB adopted a more long arm stance to youth justice issues at the local level. We regard the regional structure of the YJB as an important element of assisting develop consistent good practice and therefore improved outcomes and this area appears to have at best been sadly neglected and at worst dismantled in recent years. We are also concerned that the YJB needs to have a stronger focus on youth justice partnerships to promote the evidence of what success looks like – it is an irony that the strength of the YOT model as a format for delivery of other types of public service is occurring at a time when the existence of many YOTs across the country is under significant question.

Whilst YOT Managers have views on the Secure Estate provision we acknowledge our area of expertise lies predominantly within the community provision of youth justice services which deals with the overwhelming majority of children and young people within the youth justice system. The fact that these community based interventions have been so successful and the confidence of the sentencers so high has been in part the reason for the considerable decline in the numbers in the secure estate and this is an area we would urge the YJB to continue to focus.
Overall we see the YJB achieving in the principle aims and see little value in dismantling or replacing an organisation that works well overall. The impact of huge change at the current time would be colossal as at the front line workers and partnerships are dealing with considerable restructuring and downsizing- another area of instability would be most unhelpful.

B Advising and publishing of Information-
This is an area that requires a central function and also one which has the expertise to understand and analyse and report on the nuances of the highly specialist sector that is Youth Justice. Whilst we acknowledge that further improvements are required we feel the YJB has fulfilled this function well and should continue to do so as an Independent adviser to Government at both local and National level.

B- Good Practice.
This is a function that requires a national co-ordination and the YJB is ideally placed to fulfil this area. Indeed it has clear evidence of having done so;
ASSET- and the soon to be rolled out new version
Intensive Supervision
Youth Inclusion and support panels
Certificate of Effective Practice
Speech and Communications
Work with gangs etc.
Restorative Justice

We do regard this area as having a lower profile in YJB than it should and would strongly urge a stronger leadership approach in this changing public sector environment where the pressure to localise everything is leading to isolationism and increasing silos being developed in local authority areas.
d- Making grants and E – Commissioning Research

This function requires a centrally accountable organisation who can develop and implement a fair and equitable level of central funding which encourages and in some cases requires local commitments to ensure youth justice success of the last ten years are not lost in a piecemeal disinvestment in effective and efficient services.

There is still much to do in this area and it is disappointing that the YJB have not taken a more prominent position in the commissioning of research into areas of need and the subsequent dissemination of useful interventions for professionals to implement. This has led to much duplication of design with a very piecemeal approach across the country- the fact that many of the interventions have proved very successful does not obscure the fact that they are not originating from evidenced basis but more of a professionally assumed experience. The two elements of practice and academic rigour are required to further the future development of effective quality intervention.

We feel there has been a ‘disconnect’ in recent years between the YJB and the frontline in YOTs- partly caused by funding and organisational questions of their continuing existence. The time is ripe to refocus the role as a central and independent curator of good practice, academic research linked to focussed grant making ability to ensure the research findings lead directly to improved outcomes. We also feel that the areas for future research should be being informed by the frontline itself so that practical, useful and realistic tools can be developed rather than esoteric or irrelevant areas of study being commissioned.

F,G,H, I ,J K,- pertaining to secure estate.

We feel it is essential that a central body commissions and identifies placements within the secure estate and ensures the safety and wellbeing of all children who need to be incarcerated for the protection of others. We regard the YJB as the suitable vehicle for this due to their understanding of the national and local issues for justice, children, young people and communities. We would be concerned if an adult focussed service such as NOMS assumed this role. Children’s Services locally were disaggregated from adult services for precisely the reasons that concern us, in adult focussed organisations children are always regarded as less important or peripheral- young people’s health services are consistently inferior to adult service for example. As children who offend are a particularly vulnerable group we advise that a specific and experienced organisation is needed to continue to commission the secure estate and to hold it accountable in safeguarding, welfare educational and value for money terms. . However, the forthcoming transfer of remand budgets to Local Authorities means that LA’s will want to influence such placements and the YJB are best placed to develop this building on existing relationships with LA Children’s Services Depts.

Areas for potential YJB control.

We regard the YJB has having the potential for a much stronger workforce development role- i.e. stipulation as grant conditions of training needed, qualifications etc. for youth justice staff and seconded staff , to be able to deliver the core functions of a youth offending service

Conclusion
We are optimistic that the Youth Justice Board will continue to evolve and improve in it’s support for the development and delivery of high quality youth justice services that ensure the outcomes for children, young people and communities are increasingly positive. We regard the adage of ‘It’s not broken so don’t fix it’ to apply. Notwithstanding this we regard the overly central and to us- top heavy structures in YJB could be reviewed to place a stronger emphasis on regional development and accountability to ensure there is a direct connection between policy and quality practice at the front line.

AYM 8th February 2013

AYM responds to Probation consultation

02/22/2013

Transforming Rehabilitation

Response by the Association of YOT Managers (AYM) to the Transforming Rehabilitation consultation paper published by the Ministry of Justice.
1. Context
1.1 The AYM is the professional association for the heads and managers of multi-agency Youth Offending Teams (YOTs) in England.
1.2 YOTs are multi agency teams with the statutory responsibility to prevent offending and reoffending by young people under the age of 18. Probation Trusts are statutory YOT partners as defined by the Crime & Disorder Act (1998). The AYM would want this to remain the case, particularly as YOTs value the contribution many Probation Trusts make in the secondment of skilled probation officers to YOTs, and in their membership of local YOT management boards.
1.3 Whilst the proposals state that Probation Trusts will retain their responsibilities to YOTs there is no suggestion as to how this can occur in reality, if, as proposed, the public sector Probation Service experiences a reduction in size of two-thirds to three-quarters. The majority of cases transferring from YOTs to Probation will be categorised as low risk of harm but a higher risk of re-offending. If Probation Trusts are not responsible for those cases at age18 it is difficult to see the incentive for their continued commitment to YOTs and to other local partnerships such as Troubled Families, Community Safety Partnerships etc.
1.4 One of the major advantages of the current secondments of Probation staff into YOTs is the ‘upskilling’ in both adult and youth criminal justice offender management spheres. This is particularly important in youth justice risk management and the safeguarding of children linked to adult youth justice services via MARAC or child protection procedures. We are concerned that some of the agencies who take on Probation’s workload may not recognise their obligations under the “Working Together” procedures. This issue would need to be addressed in any contractual and commissioning arrangements.
1.5 Many senior YOT management personnel have been recruited from an extensive Probation background. This has greatly added to the multi-agency skill base of YOTs and is a feature that we would want to continue.
2. Proposal to extend post release support to prisoners serving less than 12 months
2.1 The AYM welcomes this proposal. We note the significant difference in rates of reoffending quoted in the consultation paper between those prisoners leaving custody subject to Probation supervision following a sentence in excess of 12 months custody (35.9%) and those serving less than 12 months and therefore not subject to Probation supervision (57.6%). This clearly shows the benefits of Probation supervision and the AYM believes that a significant reduction in the 57.6% reoffending rate of this sizeable cohort would occur if all prisoners leaving custody were supervised and supported on release. Although given the significant numbers involved, additional resources would be needed. All young people under 18 leaving custody have benefitted from similar support from YOTs for many years and this proposal would replicate that.
2.2 Since 2008/9 the Youth Justice Board (YJB) have instigated and “pump primed” the costs to local partnerships of setting up of several resettlement consortia across the country. Such consortia are partnerships between the statutory, voluntary and private sectors providing a ‘enhanced offer’ of resettlement support which is in addition to the normal licence conditions. The enhanced offer is overseen by YOTs and made available to all young people in consortia areas leaving custody. The enhanced offer combines existing service provision with additional elements e.g. in respect of key issues such as accommodation and education, training and employment. Take up of the enhanced offer by young people is high and independent academic evaluation commissioned by the YJB shows strong inter-agency working and improved outcomes for young people. The AYM believes that this model if extended across the rest of the youth justice and adult sector it would make a significant contribution to reducing the rate of custody and reoffending rates.
3. Proposal to commission out the supervision of low and medium risk offenders to the private/voluntary sector
3.1 Whilst we welcome the fact that offenders subject to MAPPA procedures will continue to be supervised by Probation, there are many offenders who do not qualify for MAPPA registration yet who nevertheless pose a risk to the public or family members. Therefore, the AYM opposes this proposal as it creates a dangerous split in service delivery and would in our view increase the risk posed to the public by some offenders. The experience YOTs have in supervising young people is that risk is a dynamic factor which can change quickly. If an offender who was assessed as medium risk suddenly becomes high risk due to a change of circumstances such as a loss/lack of suitable accommodation, then a rapid response is required. The transfer of a case between different agencies creates an additional risk factor which is open to manipulation by the offender.
3.2 An additional concern is the transfer of supervision from YOTs to adult offender management services for young people aged 18. We agree with the statement of the Chief Inspector of HM Inspectorate of Probation following the publication of a thematic report of transition arrangements from youth to adult services in the criminal justice system in October 2012:
“Transitions matter. They are important rites of passage which, if successfully negotiated, can advance a young person’s journey to adulthood. For young people who offend, this period can be problematic and signify changes in key relationships, often at a time of peak reoffending. Effectively handling the many transitions that young people in the criminal justice system have to make is challenging but of paramount importance.”

3.3 The AYM view is that the proposed fragmentation of the supervision of adult offenders will serve to make this process even more difficult than the current arrangements and can only serve to increase reoffending risks. The proposals do not make it clear who will be the responsible officer in community orders where there are multiple requirements and, critically, who is responsible for the arrangements for breach and recall to prison.
3.4 The AYM supports the engagement of other organisations in the management of offenders. Our objection to this proposal is not one of principle but one of practice, in particular the management of risk posed by offenders.
3.5 The AYM acknowledges that the voluntary sector in particular can have a valuable role to play in supporting both offenders and YOT/Probation case managers to mitigate risks of reoffending. Many YOTs have successfully commissioned and worked in partnership with the voluntary and private sectors e.g. in intensive supervision, education, training and employment, accommodation, substance misuse and restorative justice. However, crucially, oversight and responsibility for each case is retained by the YOT using professionally qualified staff to ensure risks are properly managed. We believe Probation Trusts are, in the main, effective in providing this case management role with adult offenders; and the current proposals introduce unnecessary risks to public protection.
3.6 The key to the success of work undertaken by the private and voluntary sectors will be the quality of the commissioning and of the management of contracts. In our experience, commissioning and contract management are best undertaken at a local level, and we believe that Probation Trusts are best placed to manage this work.
3.7 We are also concerned that the proposed size of the contract areas being larger than the current Probation Trust areas will mean each contract are will cover a large number of YOTs. This will make it more difficult to form effective partnerships than currently. It is our firmly held view that such partnerships are critical in managing risk and the transition of cases.
3.8 We are also mindful of the need for experienced well trained and suitably trained personnel to work with high risk cases. It is a possibility that if the caseload of the public sector Probation worker consists solely of high risk cases, staff will experience ‘burn out’ more quickly and there will be no alternative solutions in terms of workforce development. This is particularly a concern in the management of sex offenders where the risk of desensitisation of staff is already a noted risk. In addition some staff may feel unable to work with certain types of cases at certain times within their own lives- i.e. paedophiles. Currently there is scope for those staff to still take on such work at a later date- we are fearful this facility may be lost under the new proposals.
4. Proposal to introduce Payment by Results (PBR)
4.1 The AYM does not have a fixed view on this but is concerned that the experience of the four youth custody pathfinder pilots provides evidence that applying PBR within the criminal justice system is fraught with difficulty. One of the pilot areas (Birmingham) has withdrawn and the two pilot areas in London are way off target.
4.2 The Youth Justice Board has historically incentivised the work of YOTs through an invest to save model e.g. through funding intensive supervision and resettlement support schemes. Over the years this has seen a major reduction in the use of custody for young people which has seen significant financial savings amongst other benefits. We would suggest that consideration be given as to how the gains in the youth justice system might incrementally be applied to reducing the adult custodial population.
4.3 Many YOTs have close links with the Troubled Families programme that has a PBR element to it in the form of an upfront attachment fee which provides solidity and a reward grant paid against fixed criteria. The success of this model is yet to be seen but the attachment fee principle has allowed creativity and local commissioning of services in line with the ‘localism’ agenda.
4.4 We note that re-offending rates appear to be being quoted on a binary level and feel that PBR should also take into account seriousness and frequency levels. We have seen massive reductions in offending through some Integrated Offender Management schemes across the country resulting in fewer victims and less disruption to communities. However, under a binary measure this would not be captured event though it is of significant importance to the local experience.
5. Summary
5.1 The AYM would propose that Probation retains a wider remit for the case management of all community orders with multiple requirements and for post release supervision of all prisoners sentenced to more than 12 months custody. This will resolve many of the concerns outlined. It would also ensure that qualified probation staff can continue to have oversight of those offenders who pose a medium but not insignificant risk of harm.

AYM responds to Justice Select Committee announcement

03/14/2013

AYM agrees

AYM responds to Justice Select Committee announcement
'The AYM agrees with the findings and recommendations of the Justice Select Committee announcement that the Youth Justice System (YJS) is failing vulnerable children. The AYM recognises that Looked After Children (LAC) in particular are over represented in the YJS, in particular within custodial settings. We agree that too often LAC are prosecuted due to the reporting of challenging behaviour to the police that would have been dealt with by the family had they not been looked after.

Youth Offending Teams have played a significant role in reducing the number of young people entering the YJS in recent years and will continue to work with partners to prevent wherever possible Looked After Children entering the YJS, however such preventative action has been made more difficult by the reduction in Government grant for such work.'

AYM response to Transforming Youth Custody consultation

04/29/2013

Response

AYM is pleased that the Government has recognised the key role that YOTs have
played in working with their partners to reduce the numbers of young people coming
into the criminal justice system in the first place, and reducing the numbers going on
to receive custodial remands and sentences. One consequence of this success is,
we believe, that those young people for whom a custodial remand or sentence is the
only option deemed suitable by the courts will tend to be those who have either
committed very serious offences or have not taken advantage of many opportunities
made available to them thorough community penalties. They are the most
challenging and needy young people; many of them will have spent most of their
young lives in the local authority care system and have multiple difficulties. It should
come as no great surprise that reoffending rates are high and that effective care and
supervision is expensive.

We wish to make a number of general points, which, we hope, can be taken into account as
the Government’s proposals are developed over the coming months;

1. Improvements in the quality of custodial regimes always carry the inherent
risk of making custodial remands and sentences more attractive to sentencers
as well as to practitioners in schools and children’s services who are
frustrated by young people’s failure to thrive in a community setting. This
could result in an increase in the number of young people going into custody,
as happened when the Detention and Training Order was introduced.
Therefore, at the same time as improving custody, the Government will need
to consider how it can move the threshold for a custodial sentence upwards
and reinforce the message that deprivation of liberty should always be a last
resort. It should also consider how it could tackle the perverse incentives that
currently exist for local authority children’s services: effective community
interventions can be expensive for them, whereas a custodial sentence
carries very little cost. For a local authority it can be cheaper to not intervene
and wait for the level offending to merit custody.
2. Secure accommodation needs to be situated within relatively easy reach of
the young person’s home area in order for family members and professional
workers to retain contact. Such contact is a vital element in the young
person’s reintegration on release. There have previously been commitments
to ensuring that secure placements are normally within 50 miles of the home
area. For large parts of the south of England from Cornwall to Sussex, this
commitment was rarely realised. There is now an opportunity to develop a
new configuration of secure accommodation which is more local.
3. Secure accommodation for children and young people should have strong
links with the children’s services of the local authority in which it is located,
and represented at a senior level on the local safeguarding children board.
These are highly vulnerable young people who need to be managed with an
effective multi-agency care plan. There needs to be a clear delineation of
responsibility between the staff of local authority in which the accommodation
is sited and the staff of the local authority from the young person’s home area.
4. Since the introduction of Approved School and Borstal Training in the first half
of the twentieth century there have been many attempts in the UK and
elsewhere to ensure that education is the key rehabilitative tool of secure
accommodation for young offenders. However, from our own experience we
know that many of the young people who go into custody are not ready for
traditional education. Some have not been in school for two or more years;
others have significant mental health or language and communication deficits
which form a barrier to their learning. There is sure to be a wealth of evidence
as to what works and what does not work and we would expect to see a
strong evidence base to the Government’s final proposals for the secure
estate.
5. A restorative justice (RJ) approach should be central to way relationships are
managed in the secure estate. RJ has been at the heart of the reformed youth
justice system for over a decade. We are aware of many schools which have
successfully adapted RJ to form the basis of their anti-bullying strategies, and
of several local authorities who have introduced RJ across all their residential
units. The latter has resulted in significant reductions in incidents of violence
towards staff and the number of police call-outs. We would expect to see
maximum use of restorative justice techniques and minimum use of physical
restraint in secure accommodation.
6. Staff and management from the secure estate should play an active role in
the young person’s whole sentence, not merely in the management of the
custodial part of the sentence. As it was originally envisaged, the detention
and training order would have involved staff from secure accommodation
attending post-release reviews in the community. In practice this happens
rarely. In the future they should have a role not just in attending review
meetings, but also in working with YOTs to ensure effective transfer to
community-based education.
7. New models should build on the success of resettlement consortia. Local
authorities in several parts of England – Greater Manchester, the South West,
Hampshire, Yorkshire and others – have, with support from YJB,
demonstrated what can be achieved when local authorities and the third
sector work together and focus their efforts on improving resettlement. The
relationships that have developed, and the improved understanding of “what
works” could be a useful building block for the new arrangements.
8. The use of information technology has traditionally been poor across the
secure estate. Effective use of video conferencing for case reviews and
meetings with case workers has the potential to save money. Implementation
has failed because of the reluctance of secure accommodation providers,
both in the state sector and the private sector, to spend money on technology.
Access to the internet, an essential tool for young people undertaking course
work at schools and colleges, is often denied them in secure accommodation
because of a perceived security risk. This perception needs to be challenged
and any risks properly managed.

ADCS & YJB support membership of the AYM

05/10/2013

Joint letter

The AYM are delighted that a joint letter from Andrew Webb (Chair of the Association of Directors of Childrens Services) and Lin Hinnigan (the new Chief Executive of the Youth Justice Board)supporting membership of the AYM by heads of Youth Offending Teams and their managers has today been sent to all Directors of Children's Services and Chairs of Yot Management Boards.

The letter states 'YJB and ADCS share a view that it would be highly desirable for all Youth Offending Team (YOT) Managers in England to be members of AYM, so that the AYM can represent, without ambiguity, the whole sector.'

New YJB CEO speaks at sucessful AGM

05/14/2013

Chief Exec Lin Hinnigan

New YJB Chief Exec Lin Hinnigan told AYM members today at their AGM today in Birmingham that 'her heart was with children and young people' Ms Hinnigan also spoke about the challenge of reducing reoffending rates particularly for young people leaving custody as something she wanted to happen during her tenure.
Gareth Jones (Halton, Warrington & Cheshire West) was re-elected as Chair reported that the membership and profile of the AYM had risen over the last year. The chair also announced that John Drew, Lin Hinnigan's predecessor as YJB Chief Exec had become the first non Yot Manager to be granted honourary membership of the AYM due to his support of the AYM whilst at the YJB.
Pat Jennings (Tameside), Ian Langley (Hampshire) and Adrian Quinn (Bristol) were re-elected as Vice Chair, Secretary and Treasurer respectively although Adrian Quinn stated he was unlikely to seek re-election next year.
Terry Gibson (Devon) stepped forward to fill the vacant Assistant Secretary role and Amrik Panesar (Oxfordshire) did likewise to become an additional AYM Executive member along with Charlie Spencer (Sandwell) & Lorna Hadley who were re-elected.

Govt Legal Aid proposals do not consider effect on young people.

06/03/2013

Legal Aid

The AYM has today responded to the Governments proposals on Legal Aid. The AYM is concerned that neither the consultation document nor the associated impact assessments appears to make any reference to the specific challenges of implementation in the youth secure estate and in the youth court. One of the principal responsibilities of youth offending teams is to work in partnership with the police and other court users in order to deliver swift and effective justice to young people when they offend. In our view, some of these proposals have the potential to have a negative impact on the youth justice system.

We maintain that legal practice on behalf of children and young people under the age of 18 years requires specialist expertise. The needs of young people should be considered separately from those of adults.

The AYM has responded to four chapters of the proposed reforms which we believe will have the greatest impact on young people: “reforms to prison law to ensure that legal aid is not available for matters that do not justify the use of public funds such as treatment issues” (Chapter 3), “proposals for introducing price competition into the criminal legal aid market, initially for the full range of litigation services and magistrates’ court representation only”, (Chapter 4) “expert fees in civil, family and criminal proceedings” (Chapter 7) and “impact assessments” (Chapter 8).

A copy of the full response is available to AYM members on the member section of this website. Non members can obtain a copy on request from Ian Langley the AYM Secretary ian.langley@hants.gov.uk

We now represent the majority of Yots in England!

06/11/2013

Representation

Our Membership has risen sharply over the last few months in particular following the joint letter supporting AYM membership from the Association of Directors of Childrens Services and the Youth Justice Board to Directors of Children's services and Chairs of Yot Management Boards. We now have membership within 71 Yots out of the 136 Yots in England, so can now claim to represent the majority which adds greater weight when dealing with Ministers and Govt officials in particular.

AYM Hon Member gets CBE

06/17/2013

John Drew

The AYM was delighted to learn that John Drew was made an Honourary Life Member of the AYM in April this year has been awarded a CBE in this years Queens Birthday Honours for his services to youth justice. John retired as the Chief Executive of the Youth Justice Board in March 2013 and was very supportive of the AYM whilst in that role. His award is well deserved.

AYM welcomes removal of all young women from prison.

07/03/2013

In Custody

The AYM welcomes the announcement by Youth Justice Board Chair Frances Done that all young women in custody are to be withdrawn from the three remaining HM Prison Young Offender Institutions that hold young women due to the fall in numbers who need to be securely held. Young women will now be held in either privately run Secure Training Centres or Local Authority Secure Children's Homes.

Whilst the AYM supports this move our view is that the few young women the Courts need to remand or sentence to custody should be held placed in Local Authority Secure Children's Homes who are best placed to meet the high levels of vulnerability that many of these young women face. In due course the AYM would like to see the removal of young women from Secure Training Centres as well.

Successful North West Regional seminar

07/15/2013

Two presentations

The AYM seminar held a successful seminar at Oldham Yot on 11/7/13 which was attended by 25 YOT Managers. The session started with passionate presentation by Jenny Bright (Leeds Yot) on their award winning work with girls who offend or at risk of doing so. Jenny stressed the need for high level support for such an approach and the use of specialist Yot staff to work with girls.

Sue Hall, Chair of the Probation Chiefs Association (PCA) and Chief Executive of Yorkshire and Humberside Probation Trust provide a great insight into the seismic changes facing the Probation Service due to the Ministry of Justice proposals. AYM members shared the concerns of the PCA of the likely impact of the changes within such a short timescale and the probable impact on Yots. The AYM will continue to do all it can to support the PCA in opposing the split in case management between the public and private sector.

The final session of the day was led by Andrew Webb, President of the Association of Directors of Children's Services and Director of Children's services at Stockport Council,who talked about the challenges facing local authorities. A discussion took place about the early impact on Local Authorities of the transfer of remand costs to them from the Youth Justice Board.

Our next members newsletter in August will contain a full write up. Jenny Bright and Sue Hall's presentations are available in the members section of our website.

Chief Prison Inspector to speak at AYM event

08/21/2013

Nick Hardwick CBE

The AYM is delighted that Nick Hardwick CBE, Chief Inspector of Prisons has agreed to be our keynote speaker at our London Regional event for members on the 20th of September. AYM members will be particularly hear his comments following the recent HMIP inspection report criticising the levels of violence in Feltham YOI.

Following their excellent presentation at AYM’s successful North West event @ Oldham Yot in July members will once again have the opportunity to hear about the terrific award winning work with girls by Leeds YOS to share good practice in this area of work.

Also speaking will be Emma Jones, Deputy Director of the Troubled Families unit. It is already apparent that quite a few current and former Yot Managers have responsibility for TF work in their area due to the links with youth crime and the multi agency approach that is required.

Closure of Feltham YOI welcomed

09/04/2013

Super Jail not the answer

Closure of Feltham YOI welcomed but Super Jail not the answer



The Association of Yot Managers (AYM) welcomes todays announcement by the Secretary of State for Justice that Feltham Young Offenders Institute is to close. The recent report by HM Prison Inspectorate starkly outlined the levels of violence in Feltham and that it is a thoroughly unsafe place to hold young people in custody.



Feltham is the largest YOI in the UK and it is quite clear that the size of the institution made it unmanageable, so therefore we are sceptical about the Governments plans to build a ‘Super Jail’ on its site with a youth facility attached. Our view is that the few young people that need to be held in custody should be placed in small units across the capital and elsewhere. It is a scandal that there is currently no Local Authority Secure Homes in London where young people can be safely held.

AYM’s London region event

09/20/2013

Nick Hardwick

Chief Inspectors say all young people in custody should be treated as children’

At AYM’s London region event on 20/9/13 Nick Hardwick, Chief Inspectors of Prisons said that all young people aged under 18 in both prison and police custody should be treated as children. In a hard hitting presentation to AYM members he also condemned the routine strip searching of young people upon arrival in custody and that the cancellation of prison visits should not be used as a punishment. Discussion also took place about the recent inspection of Feltham YOI which highlighted high levels of violence and the subsequent announcement that it is to close. He also highlighted the proportionately high numbers in custody of young people who described themselves as from the travelling community.

Delegates also heard from Pauline Burke of Cheshire West, Halton & Warrington Yot about their Divert project which has been successful in keeping young people with health needs/learning disabilities out of the youth justice system and from Sarah Ross of Leeds Yot about their groundbreaking approach with young women which has led to dramatic falls in offending by this group. Other speakers included Supt Lawrence Jones representing the Association of Chief Police Officers who spoke about the ACPO children and young people’s strategy and current Stop and search proposals and Emma Jones, Deputy Director of the Troubled families Unit at the department of Communities and Local Govt who talked about how Yots could engage with the troubled families agenda

Yot Managers are unsung heroes

10/28/2013

Former Home Secretary says

Jack Straw MP has given the AYM an exclusive interview to mark 15 years since as Home Secretary he oversaw the Implementation of the Crime and Disorder Act in 1998 that created YOTs.



In response to the following question posed by the AYM :



What has been the most positive aspect of the establishment of YOTs, and if you could have done one thing differently when YOTs were established, what would it be?

Mr Straw said: ‘Actually, I am very proud of what’s been achieved, as indeed should you be!. Look at the figures: first time entrants are way down. Use of custody is way down. You never hear of YOTs being panned in the press in the way that other parts of public sector are. YOTs are never part of that narrative. You YOT managers are the unsung heroes. I was very actively involved in youth justice from 1994 until 2001, and then again in 2007 when I shared responsibility with Ed Balls in what was then the Department for Children, Schools and Families.

I got on very well with Ed. His department had more money that mine and I think that together we were able to take the youth crime prevention agenda a big step further.’

Swindon Yot scoops AYM Award

11/29/2013

AYM Chair Gareth Jones announced

Swindon Yot scoops AYM Award

At the Youth Justice Board convention yesterday (27/11/13) in Birmingham, AYM Chair Gareth Jones announced that Swindon Yot’s Young Volunteers Project had won the John Hawkins Award for innovative practice in youth justice.

John Hawkins was a founding member of the AYM and Treasurer for many years before his life was tragically cut short in the summer of 2011 and it was fitting that members of John’s family were present to present the award to Kevin Leaning, Head of Swindon Yot.

The judges of the award were the staff and young people from last years winners the Girls programme at Leeds Yot who unanimously voted for the Swindon Young Volunteers programme and said; ‘ We felt that they provided an excellent application which included clear evidence of a successful impact. The project is being led by young volunteers and delivered to their peers at an early, and very responsive, age. We felt that targeting this age group was very innovative and that it placed the children’s voices centrally. The project is empowering and provides role models who could continue to have an impact well after this piece of work has finished. We thought that it was an ambitious project but that it also has the potential to be scaled-up. There is evidence provided that the delivery has also been well-thought through, is professional and values those involved.’ AYM Chair Gareth Jones announced

“Learn lessons from the youth justice system”

01/07/2014

say YOT chiefs

The Government should consider the lessons that can be learned from the reform of the youth justice system before embarking on a major change of the way young adults aged 18 to 22 are placed and managed in custody, says the Association of Youth Offending Team Managers (AYM).

The Government has been consulting on plans to change the current arrangements for young adults sentenced to custody. It wants to be able to place them in jails with older adult offenders, so that they can have access to a wider range of rehabilitative programmes and be better prepared for release. It plans to repeal laws which establish the sentence of detention in a young offender institution (YOI) and will bring to an end the designation “YOI” for young adults in the prisons estate.

Responding to the consultation document, AYM argues that not only should these young adults continue to be managed separately, there should be a fresh look at how agencies, including local authority services, work together to improve the way they are managed in custody and supported on release.

AYM Chair, Gareth Jones, Head of Cheshire West, Halton and Warrington Youth Offending Service, said: “For many years, legislation has, quite rightly, protected young adults from older, more experienced offenders in custody. These young adults are still in a process of physical and emotional development and many of them are at high risk of reoffending. There are, sadly, significant numbers of young adult offenders who have been looked after by local authorities; they continue to have an entitlement to support services until their early twenties. We are concerned that these proposed reforms will make access to these services more difficult for them. Instead of mixing young adults with older offenders, the Government, in our view, should learn from the reforms of the youth justice system. Here we have an integrated sentence planning and sentence management system involving staff in YOTs and the secure estate working closely together to ensure that the sentence plan and resettlement arrangements tackle the risks and meet the support needs of the young person. In the last few years we have invested heavily in improving the transition arrangements for young offenders who reach the age of 18 and are still in the criminal justice system. We fear that this investment will be lost if young adults are placed in large, adult-orientated institutions. Instead of treating young adults the same as older prisoners, we believe there are strong arguments for retaining and enhancing the current system of separation so that there is a proper, multi-agency investment in this group of offenders”.

High profile speakers

02/18/2014

attend AYM NE event

The AYM held a successful regional event in South Shields at the end of January. Jacqui Cheer, Chief Constable of Cleveland and ACPO lead for children & young people was present for the whole day and in her speech made it clear that ‘the police don’t want to hold young people in custody’ and that ‘young offenders are often victims’.



Later in the day Dan Jarvis MP the shadow Youth Justice spokesman, accompanied by Lord Jeremy Beecham said ‘Yots were integral to the success of the youth justice system’ and that ’18-21 year olds may benefit from a similar approach’.



The event also featured valuable contributions from Ben Estep of the New Economics Foundation about the value of YOT prevention work. Jonathan Carver from the CPS Inspectorate spoke about how CPS liaison with Yots could be improved and Thiza Smith and Dave Clarke from the Secure Accommodation Network spoke about the value of secure Children’s Homes and concerns about future funding.

AYM gives evidence to All Party Parliamentary Group for Children

02/19/2014

on: The prosecution and over-representation of looked after children’

Nick Wilkinson (Head of Kent Yot & AYM Exec member), told the APPG that prior to his current role he had been a police officer for 30 years. He felt that unless officers were in a specialist unit, they did not understand the needs of children and young people.

Risk factors for looked after children

It is important to remember why children become looked after:

o Family breakdown

o Homelessness

o Abuse and neglect

o Absent parenting, including unaccompanied asylum seeking and migrant children

Childhood trauma is therefore highly prevalent.



Looked after children have a range of needs:

o Health needs, for example dealing with substance abuse

o Behavioural needs

o Accommodation needs and the problem of being moved around a lot

o Education and future opportunities: figures show that amongst looked after children a high number have educational statements or a history of exclusion, and a high number go on to be NEET.



As a result, looked after children are more like to come into contact with the police. There are also risks around children going missing from care, which can lead to further problems like gangs and child sexual exploitation.



Areas for improvement

College of Policing has a key role in implementing evidence-based strategy.

A strategic approach is needed at force level. For example, the Police and Crime Commissioner can play an important role in prevention.

At an operational level, officers need to understand local children’s homes and what they do.

Corporate Parenting Boards also have an important role to play. For example, it is worth questioning how many CPBs have local police officers sitting on them. Police could support CPB with their aim of reducing the criminalisation of looked after children.



Examples of good practice

A working group for developing protocol was set up in Sussex and there are examples of restorative justice being used here very successfully.

In 2012, Surrey set up a protocol for the South East which involves four-steps:

1. There is an expectation that behaviour is resolved internally without calling the police.

2. If this is not appropriate, then the police are called, but the police should then consider discretionary powers and implement a community resolution or restorative justice.

3. If this is not appropriate, then a Youth Restorative Intervention is used. A multi-agency panel will consider the options for restorative justice instead of going to court.

4. If this is still not appropriate, the incident will be dealt with in court.

There is work going on to put this protocol in place in the South East.

South West sucess

02/27/2014

Presentations

YOT managers from across the South West and further afield enjoyed an interesting and challenging set of presentations when they met at Taunton earlier this month. This was the last in a series of regional events that the AYM has run in 2013/4, and attracted the highest attendance. In view of their popularity, a further series of events is already being planned for 2014/5.

Two managers of secure children’s homes, representing the Secure Accommodation Network (SAN) kicked off the day. They emphasised the quality of education provided in children’s homes and made the point that if they were funded as education providers including being given the ‘pupil premium’, their costs would be almost at the level expected of the proposed new secure college.

Ben Estep of the New Economic Foundation reported on his analysis of the work of YOTs to prevent first time offending, and the potential cost savings further ‘downstream’ in the criminal justice system.

Colleagues from Swindon YOT gave an uplifting presentation, including a new DvD, of the work of their young volunteers who go into primary schools to inform their peers about youth justice. This project won our John Hawkins Award last year.

After a short break, we heard from Lucy Russell, Senior Campaigns Coordinator with the Howard League. Lucy left us with plenty of printed material for young people and encouraged us to support and promote their “U R Boss” campaign to inform and empower young people in the YJS.

Lastly, Sally Lewis, Chief Officer for Avon and Somerset Probation and Probation’s lead officer for IOM, provided a briefing on ‘Transforming Rehabilitation (TR)’. The ‘Rehabilitation Revolution’ is apparently now an ‘evolution’; TR is entirely based on an ideology- hence the refusal to seek evidence through pilots; TR’s rapid timetable is dictated by the need for legislation to be passed in the lifetime of the current parliament. Lastly, Sally showed a couple of graphs to illustrate year-on-year reductions in serious acquisitive crime, de-bunking the myth that TR is needed because current systems are failing to deliver.

Presentations from the event are available in the members’ section of the website

AYM responds to DoH consultation

03/31/2014

Department of Health's consultation

The AYM has today responded to the Department of Health's consultation on proposed "wilful neglect" legislation, following the Government's announcement that they are considering creating a new offence of ill-treatment or wilful neglect of users of health and social care. These proposals largely concern adult service users, but there was an opportunity to help ensure that children and young people receive an equal or better level of protection under the proposed new arrangements. To view our response, click on the following link:

http://consultations.dh.gov.uk/quality-regulation/wilfulneglect/consultation/my_response?user_id=ANON-27M2-EJ7A-F&key=6223808f0832fd45487f89979ca62854d80a544e

Adrian Quinn's Reflections

05/01/2014

adrianquinn2@aol.co.uk

Everything Changes But Nothing Changes - Or Perhaps It Does?

Reflections of a retiring YOT manager and former Head of Service in Bristol

Upon my departure from Bristol YOT, and from youth justice, and, in May, from the AYM Board, a couple of AYM colleagues suggested I might reflect on my 40 years working in the criminal justice system, many of those years in youth justice. I hope at least some of these reflections resonate for all of you.

It is instructive, and if nothing else, gives a chronological perspective to these reflections, to note the first young person I reported on to the juvenile court would now be 53, if, as I can only hope, he is still alive. One of the lessons from not knowing whether he is or he isn’t alive of course, is that rarely do we know whatever happened to ‘so an so’, in this case as he grew from the 13 year old I knew, into the adult he hopefully became. In those days, in the mid 70’s, it was common practice to more often charge to Court and then intervene at quite a high level in the tariff, even with a first offence, as this was - burglary of the ‘tuck shop’ at his school. He was given a supervision order and when last seen in June 1974 was still compliant, but who knows what that level of intervention might have meant for his later progress through the criminal justice system. I can only hope that having to see me on a weekly basis was a sufficient deterrent to further involvement.

My first experience of the juvenile custodial system was an open Borstal called Gaynes Hall set in an idyllic spot on the edge of Grafham Water, a lake on the Cambridgeshire/ Bedfordshire borders. A wonderful place, or so it seemed on a sunny August day in 1973, with a Governor who seemed to be the epitome of the best head teacher you could possibly hope for, evoking all the positives and great hopes for the future for the boys who were there. Whether Gaynes Hall was as good as it seemed or not, the reality, from the tales told by the young men who I supervised, was that many of the Borstals and Detention Centres of that era were brutalising institutions where occasional arbitrary terror was the order of the day, particularly if you were vulnerable, whether that brutality came from other inmates or from staff. The juvenile custody system reflected the era in which it was located.

By the late 70’s and in to the 80’s my 13 year old above would have been dealt quite differently by the YJ system. A caution would have been more likely, and even if he had gone to Court the outcome would probably have been a conditional discharge. The era of ‘non-intervention’ (radical or not) had begun. Police and social workers working together in what were often called juvenile bureaux introduced a new approach in many areas of the country. The police officer and the social worker walking hand in hand in to the future started a long time before 1999 and YOTs. In its approach that way of working, using prevention and early intervention without recourse to the Courts, is echoed in the current out of court disposals arrangements. But the political impact of repeat cautions, and some high profile cases where young offenders were seen as being ‘let off’ again and again, put paid to that approach by the early 90’s, and in due course led to the automatic escalator of reprimands, final warnings, and charge to Court.

In the meantime, by the early 80’s, the juvenile custody system had also re-invented itself. Borstals became Youth Custody Centres, and eventually, in yet another cosmetic change, became young offender institutions. On the positive side, this at least brought to an end the totally arbitrary system of being sentenced to Borstal Training which generally meant between 6 months and 3 years in custody, largely regardless of the offence, and primarily determined by the young person’s behaviour and progress in custody. A sentence, where getting your bed pack right for inspection on Saturday morning, was more important in determining the date of your release, than your attitude to your offending or your risk to the public. Determinate sentences reflecting the current offence and previous convictions came in to being. Of course indeterminate sentences made a bit of a comeback as we moved in to this century, but at least were based on somewhat more comprehensible criteria.


Youth justice has always been subject to changing fashions, eras of non-intervention, of early and later intervention have all occurred at least twice in my working lifetime. Youth justice like the fashion industry itself, reinvents itself from time to time often repeating itself but in slightly different forms. Reason and rational thinking, learning the lessons of history, basing policy on what an empirical perspective tells us about the best long term way to deal with juvenile crime and what’s actually needed to make those policies work, rarely enters the political calculation. Belief tends to trump reason every time.

The belief that custody that for those who have to go there, should have better have outcomes is one of those beliefs amongst politicians, and on the face it sounds like reasonable proposition. And we are now witnessing the latest crop of government ministers, the new fashionistas of the youth justice system, a little like the tailors in the Grimm’s fairy tale, convincing themselves, and trying to convince us, that the new cloth of the so called ‘secure colleges’ will make a fine coat in to which will be weaved improved re-offending outcomes in the secure estate. Transferring the best of educational and training provision to the custodial setting can only be good can it not? Yet you only have to look at contemporary accounts of the Borstal system in it’s first 50 years and the public school ethos that abounded there, if you want to decide how confident you are in the latest version. You can take the boy or girl out of…and so on. Secure colleges will become a deceptive, and expensive fallacy, and policy failure, unless the politicians give equal attention, drive, statutory guidance, and resources from the centre, to ensure that improved education and training in custody, and employment opportunities are followed through on release. Sadly I see no sign of that.

At the beginning of the 21st century something new did happen in youth justice that was about as significant for youth justice as the 60’s were for fashion and music. And in youth justice, unlike the 60’s, if you were there, you will remember it. The changes in the secure estate in 1999, promised much, but, harnessed to the bureaucratic dragline of the prison service, never amounted to much. Secure colleges are doomed to failure for the same reason. In contrast, the new youth justice system in the community, as set out in the 1998 Act, promised much and has delivered most of it.

The development of youth offending partnerships was localism before localism was thought of, with 157 YOTs, and 157 varieties, supported relatively benignly, but firmly, by the YJB at the centre. YOTs were the centre of the new youth justice system but not the only part of it, as the tentacles of the multi agency partnerships spread to all parts of the overall YJ system in local areas, forging a sea change in the way youth crime is managed. The success of the changes in the community are system wide, and not for YOTs alone to claim.

Two of the main outcomes required of the YJ system have been achieved over the past decade, quite spectacularly in fact, with the use of custody and the number of entrants in to the formal YJ system halving across that period. That reduction in first time entrants started to be achieved once the police (in their role as part of the wider YJ partnership) dropped the sanctioned detection targets, started to focus on prolific offenders, and introduced ‘informal’ RJ approaches for lower level offences, as a more effective way of bringing offenders to justice. These reductions are positive in and of themselves. As important, there have been significant reductions in costs to the public purse, both in the short term costs of youth crime, and in the longer term impact on costs as young offenders avoid going on in to the adult system. These cost benefits have rarely been given the publicity they deserve.

So why are these successes spoken of in relatively muted terms, and not trumpeted anywhere near as loudly as the political fashionista’s current obsession with re-offending rates ‘remaining stubbornly high’? Maybe because reducing the numbers of young people going to Court and reducing the numbers of young offenders ending up in custody is not a media vote winner? Maybe because the drive to success came from the previous government? Maybe because one of the real success stories in youth justice in recent years is just a bit too complicated to understand and to explain? This is the story of reduction in the numbers of re-offences committed by those supervised by YOTs. Across the country, particularly in city YOT areas, the numbers of re-offences committed by young offenders have been reducing annually. The proportion re-offending has not changed but the numbers of offences committed by those re-offending has reduced, reflecting a different, more productive focus, on those most likely re-offend, and on reducing the numbers of victims of crime.

Everyone working in youth justice should be proud of that. Just as they should be proud that this approach, re-modelled as ‘tough choices rehabilitation’ has been replicated with adult offenders in the burgeoning, and generally very successful integrated offender management schemes that are now a feature in most police and probation areas.

However, the underpinning success of the ‘new’ youth justice system is not just about outcomes, important though they are, but is also about outputs. It is about the delivery of youth justice services, and, most importantly, it is about the multi agency partnerships that deliver those services.

As a concrete example of how things have changed and how the partnership approach in youth justice has delivered far more than just the YJ outcomes required, there was a recent story about an 18 year old young woman in a Sunday newspaper as part of a piece on the housing situation in the UK. As a younger teenager, this girl had found herself unable to live with her mother because of her mother’s mental health problems, and having moved in with her Dad, had ‘difficulties’ there too. She had got in to some minor offending and ASB, and as it was described in the paper, the ‘youth offending nurse’, as well as dealing with her self worth issues, facilitated her getting accommodated by the local authority. By the time the story appeared she had now moved in to supported accommodation, having been in a children's home until her 18th birthday. Short of her parents being able to provide the care she needed, this seemed the best outcome for her in the circumstances, and one that probably prevented her getting in to further trouble with the law. All initiated by the YOT health worker.

That would never have happened before YOTs came in to being, and the involvement of health, as well as the other partners, in the YOT partnership. In contrast in the pre YOT system, that girl would possibly have been referred to CAMHS, would possibly have been offered an appointment, probably several weeks away, would probably not have attended, and if she did attend, would have probably have shown ‘a lack of readiness for treatment’ or ‘a lack of cooperation with therapy’, and her case would probably have been dropped. What is certain is that this girl would not have got the care and attention for her emotional needs, and the stability of being accommodated, all in one place.

The story is a parable of how far the youth justice system has moved on, and is an exemplar of what can be achieved by delivering a holistic service to the ‘troubled and troublesome’, by putting the right professionals in a room together, with a unified mission. Everybody now favours multi agency approaches to deliver shared goals and they feature increasingly across a range of children’s and adult’s services, but the partnerships that support this form of organisation are delicate organisms, that need constant attention to bloom and give of their best. It would be unwise to be blasé about the permanence of those partnerships, since it would be very easy at a time of pressure and challenge, for the statutory agencies involved, and for other linked external organisations, to focus on their own internal organisational challenges, and put YOT partnerships, and the improvement in outcomes made over the past few years, at real risk in the future.

‘Modern YOT Partnerships’, the new guidance issued by the YJB, is a welcome support to maintaining YOT Boards and YOTS as they have entered the choppy waters of the sea of austerity. It is also true that many local YOT partnerships are held together not just by guidance, and the legislative framework, but as much, if not more, by the strong and sustained relationships, and commitment to the mission, of the YOT Board members, and the influence they have in their own agencies. However, neither guidance or local commitment may be entirely sufficient at a time of such threats to YOTs as exist now. On the other hand history would suggest that in retaining local commitment in providing resources, in particular the local authority, there was nothing quite like the YJB’s ‘£ for £ rule’ to concentrate local minds and local pocket books in supporting adherence to the guidance and the commitment to YOTs at strategic level.

For those of you who might have forgotten it, the ‘£ for £’ rule stated that for every £ the local partnership reduced the YOT budget by, the YJB would reduce their contribution by the same amount. Rarely, if ever, used by the YJB, it was nonetheless a powerful inhibition to reducing the local core budget. Under this current government and the modern YJB, the ‘£ for £’ rule” seems to have slipped off the radar. It’s apparent absence has not been unnoticed by local partnerships, and is leading a more cavalier attitude to resourcing YOTs. The rule is well overdue for a comeback. The YJB is now generally contributing at least 30% of the resources of YOTs, in some cases considerably more, albeit, reframed, under MoJ pressure, as a grant to improve effective practice. In reality without the YJB resources the vast majority of YOTs would be ‘bankrupt’ overnight, and be unable to deliver the minimum statutory requirements of the YJ system.

As the ‘sleeping partner’ in local YOTs, if it is serious about supporting modern YOT partnerships, the YJB needs to revive the ‘£ for £ rule’ with some urgency.That indirect, but nonetheless key executive influence, over the resourcing of local YOT partnerships, and its reintroduction, would be an important element as a forerunner to a more mature and grown-up discussion that needs to take place between the Government, the YJB, the LGA, ADCS and AYM about the future resourcing of YOTS. This debate is critically important, in order to mitigate the risks to sustaining the success of community youth justice, and to avoid an inadvertent return to a postcode lottery of service provision, and the costs that such a deterioration in services will bring to communities and the public purse further down the road.

This piece started with recollections of my early experience of the youth justice system. I have been privileged to work with some inspiring and talented colleagues from all professional backgrounds over the past 40 years. The first person in the CJ system who inspired me was a rather eccentric assistant chief probation officer, who single-handedly (those were the days!) ran the local training course for probation volunteers I attended in 1972. At the start of the course, he said that, ‘you can measure the civilisation of any society by the way it treats it’s children, it’s criminals, and it’s mentally ill.’

Whatever else has changed in the intervening years, the essential truth of that quote is timeless. For those of you who will be ensuring that the ‘troubled and troublesome’ young people we have the privilege of serving, continue to receive that compassion, that care, and that commitment to their best interests, as represented in the best practice you help to deliver, you have my continued admiration and good wishes for the future.

New Vice Chair elected at sucessful AGM

05/28/2014

23/5/14 in Rugby

At the AYM's AGM on the 23/5/14 in Rugby, Lesley Tregear (Warwickshire) was elected as Vice Chair replacing Pat Jennings (Tameside) who has stood down. Gareth Jones (Cheshire West, Halton & Warrington) was relected unopposed as chair.

Prior to the AGM members heard from several high profile speakers, including Paul McDowell, the new Chief Inspector of Probation who hinted that the grade descriptions for Yot Inspections may change to allow outstanding work to be recognised.

Frances Crook, Chief Executive of the Howard League challenged members to think about the use of electronic monitoring as part of Intensive Supervision and Support licence conditions for young people leaving custody which then result in breach and a return to custody.

Members also heard from Ali Wigzell, Lead Researcher from the Carlile inquiry into Youth Courts about its findings that are due to be published in the next month and from Kate Jones, Director at the Youth Justice Board.

AYM academic focus

09/25/2014

at University of Bedfordshire

The latest AYM event on 24/9/14 had an academic focus hearing from Prof John Pitts & Dr Paul Olitain (Univ of Bedfordshire) abut their research on gangs and how all young people living in areas where gangs are present are vulnerable and that professional elitism is a barrier to talking gangs. Dr Tom Ellis ([Portsmouth Univ) spoke about the evidence that community payback/reparation works best when combined with community supervision and a meaningful activity of clear benefit to community. The Youth Justice Board’s head of research Dr Louise Moore gave an update on YJB research activity in particular the use of restraint on young people in secure settings.

Delegates were also addressed by Kathy Harrison, Chair of the Youth panel at the Magistrates Association about their response to the Carlile report on Youth courts and in particular their proposal for pre court problem solving panels for young people involving JP’s and Yots.

The Skill Mill scoops AYM’s John Hawkins Award

11/20/2014

Yesterday (19/11/14)

at the Youth Justice Board Convention in Telford it was announced that the Skill Mill project run by Newcastle Youth Offending Team had won this years John Hawkins Award for innovative practice. The Skill Mill is a not for profit social enterprise set up in 2011 which provides training and employment for young offenders in flood risk prevention through the management of watercourses in local parks, nature reserves etc and now provides paid employment and qualifications for 10 young people.

The judging was undertaken by staff and young people from Swindon Youth Offending Team whose Young Volunteers project won the Award last year. The judges said;
‘The Skill Mill project appeals to young people, is innovative in delivery, and demonstrated success for all those who took part. The entry was also strong in terms of its partnership working and potential for sustainability to inspire and engage other young offenders.’ Davie Parks, Team, Manager at Newcastle YOT said ‘It is amazing news and we are chuffed to bits and will help the project on a number of fronts’.

John Hawkins was one of the AYM’s founding members and treasurer for many years whilst Head of East Sussex YOT. John died within a few months of retiring in 2010 and with the support of his family the AYM instigated an annual award in his name in 2012. AYM Secretary Ian Langley said ‘Yesterday would have been John’s 63rd birthday so it was fitting that the award was made to the Skill Mill on the same day as it is exactly the sort of innovative practice John would have thoroughly approved of.’

AYM award winners celebrate 1st birthday

02/16/2015

On the 12th of February

On the 12th of February the Skill Mill Limited a social enterprise set up by Newcastle YOT and the Environment Agency and winners of the AYM’s John Hawkins Award last November held an event in Newcastle to celebrate its first birthday. The event was attended by John Hawkins son, Roddy who said ‘I think the whole enterprise is truly inspirational’.

The Skill Mill provides a reparation system for young people to serve their court orders by working on flood and other water management tasks, and horticultural projects. Young people who successfully complete their “paybacks” are given the opportunity of another six months of work on similar tasks, with pay, leading to a qualification.

Further details about the work of the Skill Mill can be found on their website http://theskillmill.org/

AYM to be part of new Laming enquiry

04/21/2015

Prison Reform Trust’s independent inquiry

The AYM will be part of the expert group informing Prison Reform Trust’s independent inquiry into Looked After Children and Offending in England and Wales that will be chaired by Lord Laming. Looked After Children and Care Leavers are sadly over represented in the youth justice system (estimated to be 25 to 40%) and it is shocking that Children in Care today are as likely to be sent to prison as they are to go to University.

AYM member, Ben Byrne Head of Surrey Youth Support Service will represent the AYM on the expert group, which meets for the first time on 13/5/15. Ben will be supported by AYM Secretary, Ian Langley.

YJB Chair addresses

05/20/2015

sucessful AYM AGM

Lord Tom McNally, Chair of the YJB addressed AYM members at their AGM in Rugby on the 19th of May saying he wanted to forge close links with the AYM. He also thanked Youth Offending Teams for the warm welcome that they had given him and other Board members on their recent visits to Yots. He added he had been inspired by the creativity and dedication of Yots staff and that it had really helped to inform the YJB's report that has gone alongside the Ministry of Justice's 'stocktake' report undetaken by Deloittes. Lord McNally said both reports had drawn similar conclusions about the value of Yots and in particular the preventative work they do.



AYM members were also adressed by Penelope Gibbs, chair of the Standing Committee for Youth Justice who gave an overview of the work of the SCYJ and urged Yots to forge closer links with the Local Goverment Association who could further increase the voice of Yots in what was likely to be challenging times. Members also heard from Dr Louise Moore Head of Research at the YJB about the new Learning and Resource hub and Trudy Birtwell of Solace, who along with Tony Begley and Jeanette Staly of Warwickshire Yot spoke about their positive experience of the first 'Aspiring Yot Managers Leadership' course run by Solace in conjunction with the AYM.



At the AGM, the following were re-elected;

Chair Gareth Jones (Cheshire West, Halton & Warrington)

Vice Chair Lesley Tregear (Warwickshire)

Treasurer Terry Gibson (Devon)

Secretary Ian Langley (Hampshire)

Assistant Secretary Joel Hanna (Sheffield)

Additional Executive members Amrik Panaser (Oxfordshire)

Charlie Spencer (Sandwell)



Davie Parks (Newcastle) was elected as an Additional Executive Member replacing Louise Hill (Sunderland) who has stepped down.

Joint AYM/NAYJ event 14th October 2015

07/09/2015

in Liverpool

The AYM and the National Association of Youth Justice (NAYJ) are delighted to be working together to offer an event covering contemporary youth justice issue. The event ‘The costs of youth justice?’ will be held at John Moores University in Liverpool. The confirmed keynote speakers are Anne Longfield, Children’s Commissioner for England and Ian Pilling, Assistant Chief Constable, Merseyside Police (representing the National Police Chief’s Council).

The reduced cost to AYM members is £20 and you can book your place via http://thenayj.org.uk/

There will also be the opportunity for delegates to participate in practice based workshops. If you believe your work (practice, policy or research) would be of interest and would like to run a workshop, please contact the NAYJ on info@thenayj.org.uk

save the date

08/13/2015

NAYJ

AYM is working in partnership with NAYJ on an important joint event to be held at Liverpool John Moore University on 14 October. The theme is “The Cost of Youth Justice”. AYM members should register via phil.sutton@aym.org.uk. Non-members may register via NAYJ’s website. More details will be in our September members’ bulletin.

AYM opposes in year budget cuts

08/18/2015

YJB

The Youth Justice Board (YJB) is currently consulting with youth offending teams (YOTs) as it seeks to make its contribution to the Ministry of Justice’s (MOJ’s) efforts to model the impact of the significant budget reductions that are likely to be imposed on it by the Treasury.



While we expected a difficult financial settlement for the 2016-7 financial year, it came as a huge surprise to YOTs to be asked to provide an assessment the impact of an in-year (i.e. 2015-16) reduction of 14% in its funding from YJB.



We recognise that since 2010 YJB has prioritised its commitment to giving grant aid to YOTs and has reduced its expenditure on the secure estate and its own operating costs. YJB grants to YOTs support effective practice in the community and currently amount to £ 91m . In spite of all YJB’s attempts to safeguard YOT grants over the last 5 years they have still reduced by 18%. This reduction is already having a significant impact on services.



The Association of YOT Managers (AYM) wants to ensure that MOJ fully recognises how YOTs are funded. By far the largest part of our funding comes from local authorities, with local police and health services, and the National Probation Service making contributions as part of their statutory duties. Contributions to YOTs from all of these partners has been reducing during the recession. However, despite the pressures they all face, local partners in the main, stick to the commitments that they have given for each financial year. They recognise that it is totally unacceptable to reduce their contributions midway through the year. We are concerned that if the YJB is forced to take such unusual action it will give licence to our local partners to follow suit.



YOT funding for each year is fully committed to staff costs and to contracts for specialist services and facilities. YOTs are local partnerships and not independent, permanent organisations with monies held in capital reserves, such as buildings which could be sold off. There are no capital reserves. There is a significant cost to breaking contracts or to laying of staff midway through the year. These costs would outweigh any potential savings.



AYM Chair, Gareth Jones, said: “AYM fully supports the YJB’s efforts to resist further reductions in the grants it make to YOTs. The success of the youth justice system in the last fifteen years has been due in large part to the investment in preventing youth crime at an early stage, and in ensuring young people face up to the consequences of their offending for their victims through restorative justice. These innovations are likely to be the first to be cut if YOTs only have sufficient funds to carry out their statutory work for the courts.”

AYM joins forces with ACDS

09/17/2015

against YJB proposed in year cuts to Yot budgets

The Association of Directors of Children’s Services (ADCS) and the Association of Youth Offending Team Managers (AYM) have today, Wednesday 16 September, submitted a formal response to the consultation issued by the Youth Justice Board (YJB) on an in-year reduction to the Youth Justice Grant (YJG).

Both Association’s fundamentally disagree with the proposals put forward to reduce the Youth Justice Grant (YJG) by an additional £9million and warn that cuts will have a direct impact on youth offending services.

Alison O’Sullivan, President of ADCS, said: “Early intervention and preventive work underpins the success of Youth Offending Teams (YOTS) and is a crucial part of keeping our children, young people and communities safe before problems escalate. Some YOT’s have already seen a 40% reduction to their budgets and have responded by pooling their resources in an effort to protect outcomes. To propose further in-year reductions is unreasonable and will directly impact the delivery and effectiveness of services leading to poorer outcomes for vulnerable young adults. Savings of this scale cannot be made particularly when these haven’t already been budgeted for. Government must recognise that further reductions to funding will have a clear impact on the local preventative offer and on what we may or may not be able to do in the future.”

Gareth Jones, Chair of AYM, said: “It is a supreme irony that a model for effective and efficient public service such as youth offending services which has been successful in cutting youth crime and thereby reducing numbers of victims as well as saving the public purse many millions of pounds is being starved of the necessary investments to continue to deliver high quality high value services. The cuts will mean increased costs to the public in the medium to longer term in both financial and emotional and physical harm. We think the scale and thoughtless nature of these considerable cuts are doomed to backfire with ordinary people ultimately paying the costs. This is a strange way to incentivise success.’’

Read the full consultation submission from ADCS and AYM
http://www.adcs.org.uk/download/consultation-responses/2015/ADCS_YOT_response_YJB_YOT_funding_consultation.pdf

Sucessful joint AYM/NAYJ event

10/14/2015

in Liverpool

On the 14th of October the AYM jointly hosted 'the costs of youth justice' event with the National Association of Youth Justice (NAYJ) at Liverpool John Moores University. The event was a sell out with 120 delegates attending including a sizeable AYM contingent.

The event was opened by NAYJ Chair Pam Hibbert OBE who reminded the audience that the ultimate cost had recently been paid by Merseyside Police Officer Dave Phillips which meant keynote speaker Asst Chief Constable Ian Pilling could no longer address delegates so Temporary Asst Chief Constable Rob Carden had stepped in at short notice.



Temp ACC Carden told the audience that it is estimated that the costs to the Police of late intervention with young people was 1.8billion per annum and went onto say that the 36% of young people in the secure estate being Looked After Children was 'deeply disturbing'.



Anne Longfield the Children's Commissioner for England was the other keynote speaker. In a wide ranging speech she urged Yots to fully engage with the review of Youth Justice led by Charlie Taylor to put forward evidence of 'what works' to reinforce the point that the social costs of young people offending are paramount and prevention will produce cash savings in the long term.



In the afternoon delegates were able to choose from 12 workshops covering a wide range of topics before the event was closed by AYM Chair Gareth Jones.

Guardian website

Youth Justice

7th June 2012

An article recently appeared on the Guardian's website regarding the changing shape of youth justice services in many local authorities. Please see link to the article below:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/local-government-network/2012/may/23/get-ahead-youth-offending-services

AYM responds to consultation with members and Yot Managers

There are two documents which are located in the members only section under 'other documents'

Document 1 is the Survey and document 2 is the response summary

AYM gives evidence at Justice Select committee

Gareth Jones AYM Vice Chair and AYM members Paul O'Hara and Wendy Poynton gave evidence to the Justice Select committee enquiry into Youth Justice on 10/7/12

a transcript of their oral evidence can be found under the other documents folder within the Publications section of the website

AYM chairing arrangements

On 14/9/12 at an executive committee meeting of the Association of Yot Managers

On 14/9/12 at an executive committee meeting of the Association of Yot Managers, Lorna Hadley the Chair of the AYM tendered her resignation. Lorna informed the meeting that as she had not been a Yot Manager for several months she felt unable to continue as Chair as the position needed a Yot Manager who was in touch with the issues affecting Yots than she was currently able to be.

Gareth Jones the current AYM Vice Chair agreed to act as interim Chair until the election of a new Chair at the AYM AGM in May 2013. Pat Jennings (Tameside Yot) has agreed to act as interim vice chair until that point. Lorna Hadley will remain a Director of AYM Ltd and a member of the AYM executive and will continue to lead the AYM's work on workforce development.

The AYM executive were unanimous in their support of Gareth and Pat in their interim positions and their appreciation for Lorna for her service as Chair of the AYM for the last 3 years.

AYM sponsor Award in memory of former Treasurer

John Hawkins Memorial Award

John Hawkins Memorial Award

The Association of YOT Managers Ltd is pleased to announce that it is sponsoring an award to be presented at this years annual Youth Justice Convention in November 22nd-23rd in Birmingham.

We are seeking nominations from AYM members who can demonstrate an Innovative and Creative approach to Youth Justice in the last 12 months and can evidence why they should receive the inaugural John Hawkins Memorial Award.

John was a founder member of the AYM and a committed and enthusiastic member until his untimely death in August 2011. He was the AYM Treasurer from its inception until April 2011 as well as being Head of Service at East Sussex YOT until his retirement in 2010.

John was a passionate advocate for quality work and positive outcomes for young people, victims and communities. It is in this spirit and with the support of his family that the award has been devised.

To apply for the £500 award, which is to be spent on furthering the winning project and it's aims, all you need do is;
• Work for a YOT with an AYM member within the management team
• Be able to write a submission outlining why you/your project deserve the award with a maximum of 500 words
• Be available in person or to have a representative present at the Youth Justice Board Convention to receive the prize from members of John Hawkins' family.
• Be prepared to be involved in any publicity emanating from the award and endorsed by AYM Ltd

Please send your submission by 5pm 16th November 2012 to;
Ian Langley,
Secretary,
Association of Yot Managers (AYM)
c/o Elizabeth Court II,
The Castle,
Winchester,
Hants
S023 8UG
E-Mail: ian.langley@hants.gov.uk
The winner will be chosen by the AYM Executive Committee and be advised by telephone on the 19th November. The decision of the judges is final and not open to discussion or debate.

Sign up for AYM winter conferences

Association of YOT Managers winter conferences: Open to YOT Manager non- members.

Register Now!
Southern area conference: Surrey, 5 December 2012 (Royal Alexandra and Albert School, Reigate, RH2 0TD. Times: 1.15 lunch, 2.00-4.30 conference)
Northern area conference: Leeds, 28 January 2013 (details of venue and times tbc)
The Association of YOT Managers is the only professional body for managers in youth offending teams in England run by YOT managers. Support your association and find out more about its past achievements and future plans by attending one of our half day winter conferences.
Speakers include:
John Drew, Chief Executive, YJB, reflecting on his time in office and giving his views on the future for YOTs
Julie Fox or Andy Smith, from HMI Probation, introducing their report on the thematic inspection of youth to adult transitions in youth justice, and outlining the future of YOT inspections
Gareth Jones, Chair of AYM Ltd, describing the work of the association and its future plans
A representative of the newly formed Police and Crime Commissioners Association, providing an opportunity to find out more about how YOT managers and PCCs can work together.
To register for either event, complete the details below and email Phil Sutton (philsuttonathome@hotmail.co.uk) or call 07514 248 313
There is no charge for these events, but places are limited by venue size, so please be sure to register no later than 30 November for Surrey and 22 January for Leeds.

Name and job title
Name of team/service
Registering for Southern/ Northern area event (please delete as appropriate)
Dietary or other requirements

Leeds Youth Offending Service girls programme wins first John Hawkins Award

John Hawkins Award

The first John Hawkins award has been won by Leeds Youth Offending Service for their work with girls. John Hawkins was the Head of East Sussex Yot and Treasurer of the AYM for over ten years until his untimely death in June 2011. It was fitting that John's wife Chrissy and their three sons were present, along with Gareth Jones (AYM interim chair) at the Youth Justice Board annual convention in Birmingham last week to present the Award to Andy Peaden, Head of Leeds YOS.

Andy Peaden said 'Winning the John Hawkins award is a fantastic recognition for the hard work the team has put into the programme and into this area of practice and the award will allow the workers to purchase dedicated resources for the group in the future, and to provide an even better service for the next cohort of young women within the service.'

Gareth Jones said 'The girls programme implemented by Leeds YOS was a worthy first winner of the John Hawkins award for good practice in youth justice by AYM members or the Yots they represent. John would have throughly approved.'

The winning programme set up by Leeds YOS has a ‘virtual team’ of specialist workers across the service in order to develop their work with girls, recognising that providing the same services to both boys and girls does not produce equitable outcomes. A key objective is to provide the Court with a range of options equal to those that they have for boys, particularly as alternatives to custody.

The team includes two lead managers and specialist workers situated in area and specialist teams. The team has been trained in effective practice in this area and the training included how to formulate assessments and proposals in a way that is research-based. The specialist team has then rolled out further training to the rest of the YOS and our volunteers around working with girls.

The team developed a programme including a range of modules around self-esteem; healthy relationships; sexual health; managing strong emotions and cognitive skills. All YOS groups are now run on a single-gender basis and consideration is given to the working environment. Research indicates that girls need their own space to make disclosures; form relationships (both with each other and members of staff), free from distractions and the influence of boys; and that the nature and reasons behind their offending is likely to be very different and therefore the content needs to be different.

AYM support for Wipetheslateclean campaign

http://www.wipetheslateclean.org.uk

The Association of Yot Managers (AYM) is pleased to support the Wipetheslateclean campaign launched by Bob Ashford, former Yot Manager & Director at the Youth Justice Board. It is absurd that Bob was forced to stand down as a Police & Crime Commissioner candidate in the recent election campaign due to a minor conviction he received as a youth over 30 years ago for which he was fined £5.

Bob said "I am really pleased that the AYM have agreed to support this important campaign. As a previous YOT manager myself and someone involved in the youth justice for many years it wasn't until I was forced to resign and was deluged with e mails from other people whose lives had been blighted by criminal records that I realised the full extent of the damage that can be caused by the current systems and policies. With the support of AYM and other organisations I believe we can make a real difference to what is an extremely confusing, complex and un-coordinated area of the CJS"

Wipetheslateclean is a non-political campaign that works collaboratively with organisations and people to shape practice and challenge the law in this area. The AYM supports the principle that young people and adults who have committed offences should not be damaged throughout their lives by a criminal record. Having accepted responsibility for their actions, they should be allowed to fulfil their potential and play a full and productive part in society. It's a social and economic tragedy that we spend billions each year on criminal justice but then prevent people who turn their lives around from working and paying taxes.

Further details can be found on the Wipetheslateclean website http://www.wipetheslateclean.org.uk/ and via twitter @wipetheslateclean

Follow the AYM on twitter'

@AssnYOTManagers

For up to date information and discussion on the work of the AYM you can now follow us on twitter via @AssnYOTManagers

AYM responds to Looked after Children Inspection report

Press Release: Publication by HMI Probation of the thematic, joint inspection report:

“Looked after children: An inspection of the work of youth offending teams.”
The Association of Youth Offending Team Managers (AYM) welcomes the thematic report on Looked After Children published today by HM Inspectorate of Probation, and appreciates the fact that HMIP has taken up our suggestion that they inspect this area of practice. We have had concerns for a long time about the outcomes of care placement decisions for young offenders and their communities.
We agree that there are far too many young people in care within the youth justice system, particularly in the secure estate, and that often many of them have been subject to numerous placements, some of which are clearly inappropriate. Our members share the inspectors’ concerns about the quality of care, and the commitment to the prevention of youth crime in some children’s homes, especially those in the commercial sector. The AYM would like to make it clear that in almost all cases placement decisions relating to looked after children are made by local authority children’s services departments, rather than by multi-agency youth offending teams (YOTs).
The AYM will continue to support YOT managers in their efforts to work with children’s services colleagues and other partner agencies with the aims of keeping young people in the care system from entering the youth justice system in the first place, and of reducing re-offending by those who do, unfortunately, come to the attention of the police and courts.
END
Notes to editors
1. Gareth Jones the interim Chair of the AYM is available for comment/interview. Gareth Jones is the Head of Cheshire West, Halton and Warrington Youth Offending Service, one of the six areas inspected as part of this inspection. He can be contacted on 0151 495 5840 or 07879 493583
2. The Association of Youth Offending Team Managers (AYM) is the professional association for heads of Youth Offending Services and managers in Youth Offending Teams in England.
3. The Association is able to draw on the wealth of knowledge and the breadth of members’ experience to promote public understanding of youth crime issues and to play its part in shaping the youth crime agenda.

4. Our members run services providing community-based supervision for children and young people who offend. We also work closely with staff in secure units and young offender institutions to ensure that young people in custody have as smooth a transition as possible back in to the community.

AYM host sucessful Winter events for YOT Managers

Reigate and Leeds

The AYM Winter Events in Reigate and Leeds were attended by more than 30
heads of service and YOT managers. A number of these colleagues were
attending one of our events for the first time and we hope that this
experience will encourage them to support the work of the association in
the future.

Julie Fox, Asst Chief Inspector of Probation, gave a detailed account of
the Inspectorate's plans for YOT inspections in the next round, as well
as the Ofsted-led child safeguarding inspections. Members were able to
give feedback on their recent, more positive experiences of the
inspection process.

Nathan Oley, from the Association of Police and Crime Commissioners took
questions on the portion of YOT budgets that, in the past, came from the
Home Office, and offered to work with the AYM on a national survey of
PCCs as to how they plan to use their budgets to support YOTs and youth
crime prevention

John Drew, attending his last AYM event before leaving YJB, reiterated
his personal support for the association and gave a detailed and open
description of the current challenges facing YOTs and the YJB

AYM Chair has constructive meeting with Shadow Youth Justice spokesman

Gareth Jones

On the 1st of February Gareth Jones, interim AYM Chair had a positive first meeting with Rob Flello MP (The Opposition spokesperson for Youth Justice). It was pleasing to hear that Mr Flello is a firm believer in the concept of YOTS and in particular preventative work to keep young people out of the youth justice system. Amongst the issues disussed were the current reviews of the Youth Justice Board and Probation, resouring of YOTS, secure estate provision for young people, YOT engagement with the new Police & Crime Commissioners, youth homelessness, YOT inspections and work with gangs. In the near future the AYM hopes to arrange for Mr Flello to spend some with a YOT to experience some of these issues first hand.

AYM response to HM Inspectorate of Probation thematic report on work with children who commit sexual offences

published today 7/2/13

The AYM welcomes the report of the inspection of work with children and young people who commit sexual offences, published today by HM Inspectorate of Probation.

The debate about children and sexual offending almost invariably, and understandably, focuses on children as victims. This report helpfully addresses another side to the debate, which is the supervision of children and young people when they themselves are the offenders. Research in this area has consistently demonstrated four key principles: that children and young people who offend in this way have often themselves been the victims of abuse; that most adult sex offenders began to offend during their adolescence; that multi-disciplinary interventions are necessary to deal with the complex needs of these young people, and that early intervention is far more effective than doing nothing in the hope that young people will grow out of it.

Since their establishment in 1999/2000, youth offending teams (YOTs) have been uniquely well placed to supervise these young people across England and Wales. YOTs bring together police officers, probation officers, social workers, health workers and educationists to work together under the direction of one manager. Between them they have the skills and the networks to be able to provide services that no single agency could provide on its own.

We are pleased that the inspectors found that multi-agency interventions have had a positive impact on reducing reoffending and protecting the public, and they found many examples of effective and high quality work undertaken by our staff. This is challenging and complex work. We accept the inspectors’ findings that YOTs need to do more improve the quality of assessments and supervision plans in such cases, to follow through the resultant actions and to ensure the effect of our work is properly evaluated.

We accept the recommendations of the inspectorate, and share their frustration that, despite many improvements over recent years, they still found unacceptable delays in the progress of these cases though the justice system. In addition a reluctance by agencies to intervene earlier in cases where there had been worrying signs even before the first criminal offence was committed, and a lack of coordinated work to support victims, especially where the victims were also children.

AYM responds to YJB review

Tri-ennial review regarding the Youth Justice Board

AYM Ltd response to the call for evidence on the Tri-ennial review regarding the Youth Justice Board.

The Association of YOT Managers is the national association for Youth Offending Service Managers and represents 82 m
anagers in 57 YOTs across England. Wales has it’s own Association-AYM Cymru .
We will make our comments in line with functions as described in the consultation document

A- Overarching Duty- principle aim of the youth justice system, s 37 of Crime and Disorder Act 1998
We regard the YJB as addressing this overall function well but also feel that a stronger refocus on the monitoring of quality of intervention and delivery of services by YOTs to ensure a more consistent quality of delivery across the national landscape. Whilst we acknowledge the importance of the role of the various Inspectorates as arbiters of quality there are many other issues which require a National focus- i.e. YOS governance- workforce developments- national protocols re transfer of cases- work with foreign nationals et etc.

We are concerned at the increasingly fragmented approach to local delivery of youth justice services since the YJB adopted a more long arm stance to youth justice issues at the local level. We regard the regional structure of the YJB as an important element of assisting develop consistent good practice and therefore improved outcomes and this area appears to have at best been sadly neglected and at worst dismantled in recent years. We are also concerned that the YJB needs to have a stronger focus on youth justice partnerships to promote the evidence of what success looks like – it is an irony that the strength of the YOT model as a format for delivery of other types of public service is occurring at a time when the existence of many YOTs across the country is under significant question.

Whilst YOT Managers have views on the Secure Estate provision we acknowledge our area of expertise lies predominantly within the community provision of youth justice services which deals with the overwhelming majority of children and young people within the youth justice system. The fact that these community based interventions have been so successful and the confidence of the sentencers so high has been in part the reason for the considerable decline in the numbers in the secure estate and this is an area we would urge the YJB to continue to focus.
Overall we see the YJB achieving in the principle aims and see little value in dismantling or replacing an organisation that works well overall. The impact of huge change at the current time would be colossal as at the front line workers and partnerships are dealing with considerable restructuring and downsizing- another area of instability would be most unhelpful.

B Advising and publishing of Information-
This is an area that requires a central function and also one which has the expertise to understand and analyse and report on the nuances of the highly specialist sector that is Youth Justice. Whilst we acknowledge that further improvements are required we feel the YJB has fulfilled this function well and should continue to do so as an Independent adviser to Government at both local and National level.

B- Good Practice.
This is a function that requires a national co-ordination and the YJB is ideally placed to fulfil this area. Indeed it has clear evidence of having done so;
ASSET- and the soon to be rolled out new version
Intensive Supervision
Youth Inclusion and support panels
Certificate of Effective Practice
Speech and Communications
Work with gangs etc.
Restorative Justice

We do regard this area as having a lower profile in YJB than it should and would strongly urge a stronger leadership approach in this changing public sector environment where the pressure to localise everything is leading to isolationism and increasing silos being developed in local authority areas.
d- Making grants and E – Commissioning Research

This function requires a centrally accountable organisation who can develop and implement a fair and equitable level of central funding which encourages and in some cases requires local commitments to ensure youth justice success of the last ten years are not lost in a piecemeal disinvestment in effective and efficient services.

There is still much to do in this area and it is disappointing that the YJB have not taken a more prominent position in the commissioning of research into areas of need and the subsequent dissemination of useful interventions for professionals to implement. This has led to much duplication of design with a very piecemeal approach across the country- the fact that many of the interventions have proved very successful does not obscure the fact that they are not originating from evidenced basis but more of a professionally assumed experience. The two elements of practice and academic rigour are required to further the future development of effective quality intervention.

We feel there has been a ‘disconnect’ in recent years between the YJB and the frontline in YOTs- partly caused by funding and organisational questions of their continuing existence. The time is ripe to refocus the role as a central and independent curator of good practice, academic research linked to focussed grant making ability to ensure the research findings lead directly to improved outcomes. We also feel that the areas for future research should be being informed by the frontline itself so that practical, useful and realistic tools can be developed rather than esoteric or irrelevant areas of study being commissioned.

F,G,H, I ,J K,- pertaining to secure estate.

We feel it is essential that a central body commissions and identifies placements within the secure estate and ensures the safety and wellbeing of all children who need to be incarcerated for the protection of others. We regard the YJB as the suitable vehicle for this due to their understanding of the national and local issues for justice, children, young people and communities. We would be concerned if an adult focussed service such as NOMS assumed this role. Children’s Services locally were disaggregated from adult services for precisely the reasons that concern us, in adult focussed organisations children are always regarded as less important or peripheral- young people’s health services are consistently inferior to adult service for example. As children who offend are a particularly vulnerable group we advise that a specific and experienced organisation is needed to continue to commission the secure estate and to hold it accountable in safeguarding, welfare educational and value for money terms. . However, the forthcoming transfer of remand budgets to Local Authorities means that LA’s will want to influence such placements and the YJB are best placed to develop this building on existing relationships with LA Children’s Services Depts.

Areas for potential YJB control.

We regard the YJB has having the potential for a much stronger workforce development role- i.e. stipulation as grant conditions of training needed, qualifications etc. for youth justice staff and seconded staff , to be able to deliver the core functions of a youth offending service

Conclusion
We are optimistic that the Youth Justice Board will continue to evolve and improve in it’s support for the development and delivery of high quality youth justice services that ensure the outcomes for children, young people and communities are increasingly positive. We regard the adage of ‘It’s not broken so don’t fix it’ to apply. Notwithstanding this we regard the overly central and to us- top heavy structures in YJB could be reviewed to place a stronger emphasis on regional development and accountability to ensure there is a direct connection between policy and quality practice at the front line.

AYM 8th February 2013

AYM responds to Probation consultation

Transforming Rehabilitation

Response by the Association of YOT Managers (AYM) to the Transforming Rehabilitation consultation paper published by the Ministry of Justice.
1. Context
1.1 The AYM is the professional association for the heads and managers of multi-agency Youth Offending Teams (YOTs) in England.
1.2 YOTs are multi agency teams with the statutory responsibility to prevent offending and reoffending by young people under the age of 18. Probation Trusts are statutory YOT partners as defined by the Crime & Disorder Act (1998). The AYM would want this to remain the case, particularly as YOTs value the contribution many Probation Trusts make in the secondment of skilled probation officers to YOTs, and in their membership of local YOT management boards.
1.3 Whilst the proposals state that Probation Trusts will retain their responsibilities to YOTs there is no suggestion as to how this can occur in reality, if, as proposed, the public sector Probation Service experiences a reduction in size of two-thirds to three-quarters. The majority of cases transferring from YOTs to Probation will be categorised as low risk of harm but a higher risk of re-offending. If Probation Trusts are not responsible for those cases at age18 it is difficult to see the incentive for their continued commitment to YOTs and to other local partnerships such as Troubled Families, Community Safety Partnerships etc.
1.4 One of the major advantages of the current secondments of Probation staff into YOTs is the ‘upskilling’ in both adult and youth criminal justice offender management spheres. This is particularly important in youth justice risk management and the safeguarding of children linked to adult youth justice services via MARAC or child protection procedures. We are concerned that some of the agencies who take on Probation’s workload may not recognise their obligations under the “Working Together” procedures. This issue would need to be addressed in any contractual and commissioning arrangements.
1.5 Many senior YOT management personnel have been recruited from an extensive Probation background. This has greatly added to the multi-agency skill base of YOTs and is a feature that we would want to continue.
2. Proposal to extend post release support to prisoners serving less than 12 months
2.1 The AYM welcomes this proposal. We note the significant difference in rates of reoffending quoted in the consultation paper between those prisoners leaving custody subject to Probation supervision following a sentence in excess of 12 months custody (35.9%) and those serving less than 12 months and therefore not subject to Probation supervision (57.6%). This clearly shows the benefits of Probation supervision and the AYM believes that a significant reduction in the 57.6% reoffending rate of this sizeable cohort would occur if all prisoners leaving custody were supervised and supported on release. Although given the significant numbers involved, additional resources would be needed. All young people under 18 leaving custody have benefitted from similar support from YOTs for many years and this proposal would replicate that.
2.2 Since 2008/9 the Youth Justice Board (YJB) have instigated and “pump primed” the costs to local partnerships of setting up of several resettlement consortia across the country. Such consortia are partnerships between the statutory, voluntary and private sectors providing a ‘enhanced offer’ of resettlement support which is in addition to the normal licence conditions. The enhanced offer is overseen by YOTs and made available to all young people in consortia areas leaving custody. The enhanced offer combines existing service provision with additional elements e.g. in respect of key issues such as accommodation and education, training and employment. Take up of the enhanced offer by young people is high and independent academic evaluation commissioned by the YJB shows strong inter-agency working and improved outcomes for young people. The AYM believes that this model if extended across the rest of the youth justice and adult sector it would make a significant contribution to reducing the rate of custody and reoffending rates.
3. Proposal to commission out the supervision of low and medium risk offenders to the private/voluntary sector
3.1 Whilst we welcome the fact that offenders subject to MAPPA procedures will continue to be supervised by Probation, there are many offenders who do not qualify for MAPPA registration yet who nevertheless pose a risk to the public or family members. Therefore, the AYM opposes this proposal as it creates a dangerous split in service delivery and would in our view increase the risk posed to the public by some offenders. The experience YOTs have in supervising young people is that risk is a dynamic factor which can change quickly. If an offender who was assessed as medium risk suddenly becomes high risk due to a change of circumstances such as a loss/lack of suitable accommodation, then a rapid response is required. The transfer of a case between different agencies creates an additional risk factor which is open to manipulation by the offender.
3.2 An additional concern is the transfer of supervision from YOTs to adult offender management services for young people aged 18. We agree with the statement of the Chief Inspector of HM Inspectorate of Probation following the publication of a thematic report of transition arrangements from youth to adult services in the criminal justice system in October 2012:
“Transitions matter. They are important rites of passage which, if successfully negotiated, can advance a young person’s journey to adulthood. For young people who offend, this period can be problematic and signify changes in key relationships, often at a time of peak reoffending. Effectively handling the many transitions that young people in the criminal justice system have to make is challenging but of paramount importance.”

3.3 The AYM view is that the proposed fragmentation of the supervision of adult offenders will serve to make this process even more difficult than the current arrangements and can only serve to increase reoffending risks. The proposals do not make it clear who will be the responsible officer in community orders where there are multiple requirements and, critically, who is responsible for the arrangements for breach and recall to prison.
3.4 The AYM supports the engagement of other organisations in the management of offenders. Our objection to this proposal is not one of principle but one of practice, in particular the management of risk posed by offenders.
3.5 The AYM acknowledges that the voluntary sector in particular can have a valuable role to play in supporting both offenders and YOT/Probation case managers to mitigate risks of reoffending. Many YOTs have successfully commissioned and worked in partnership with the voluntary and private sectors e.g. in intensive supervision, education, training and employment, accommodation, substance misuse and restorative justice. However, crucially, oversight and responsibility for each case is retained by the YOT using professionally qualified staff to ensure risks are properly managed. We believe Probation Trusts are, in the main, effective in providing this case management role with adult offenders; and the current proposals introduce unnecessary risks to public protection.
3.6 The key to the success of work undertaken by the private and voluntary sectors will be the quality of the commissioning and of the management of contracts. In our experience, commissioning and contract management are best undertaken at a local level, and we believe that Probation Trusts are best placed to manage this work.
3.7 We are also concerned that the proposed size of the contract areas being larger than the current Probation Trust areas will mean each contract are will cover a large number of YOTs. This will make it more difficult to form effective partnerships than currently. It is our firmly held view that such partnerships are critical in managing risk and the transition of cases.
3.8 We are also mindful of the need for experienced well trained and suitably trained personnel to work with high risk cases. It is a possibility that if the caseload of the public sector Probation worker consists solely of high risk cases, staff will experience ‘burn out’ more quickly and there will be no alternative solutions in terms of workforce development. This is particularly a concern in the management of sex offenders where the risk of desensitisation of staff is already a noted risk. In addition some staff may feel unable to work with certain types of cases at certain times within their own lives- i.e. paedophiles. Currently there is scope for those staff to still take on such work at a later date- we are fearful this facility may be lost under the new proposals.
4. Proposal to introduce Payment by Results (PBR)
4.1 The AYM does not have a fixed view on this but is concerned that the experience of the four youth custody pathfinder pilots provides evidence that applying PBR within the criminal justice system is fraught with difficulty. One of the pilot areas (Birmingham) has withdrawn and the two pilot areas in London are way off target.
4.2 The Youth Justice Board has historically incentivised the work of YOTs through an invest to save model e.g. through funding intensive supervision and resettlement support schemes. Over the years this has seen a major reduction in the use of custody for young people which has seen significant financial savings amongst other benefits. We would suggest that consideration be given as to how the gains in the youth justice system might incrementally be applied to reducing the adult custodial population.
4.3 Many YOTs have close links with the Troubled Families programme that has a PBR element to it in the form of an upfront attachment fee which provides solidity and a reward grant paid against fixed criteria. The success of this model is yet to be seen but the attachment fee principle has allowed creativity and local commissioning of services in line with the ‘localism’ agenda.
4.4 We note that re-offending rates appear to be being quoted on a binary level and feel that PBR should also take into account seriousness and frequency levels. We have seen massive reductions in offending through some Integrated Offender Management schemes across the country resulting in fewer victims and less disruption to communities. However, under a binary measure this would not be captured event though it is of significant importance to the local experience.
5. Summary
5.1 The AYM would propose that Probation retains a wider remit for the case management of all community orders with multiple requirements and for post release supervision of all prisoners sentenced to more than 12 months custody. This will resolve many of the concerns outlined. It would also ensure that qualified probation staff can continue to have oversight of those offenders who pose a medium but not insignificant risk of harm.

AYM responds to Justice Select Committee announcement

AYM agrees

AYM responds to Justice Select Committee announcement
'The AYM agrees with the findings and recommendations of the Justice Select Committee announcement that the Youth Justice System (YJS) is failing vulnerable children. The AYM recognises that Looked After Children (LAC) in particular are over represented in the YJS, in particular within custodial settings. We agree that too often LAC are prosecuted due to the reporting of challenging behaviour to the police that would have been dealt with by the family had they not been looked after.

Youth Offending Teams have played a significant role in reducing the number of young people entering the YJS in recent years and will continue to work with partners to prevent wherever possible Looked After Children entering the YJS, however such preventative action has been made more difficult by the reduction in Government grant for such work.'

AYM response to Transforming Youth Custody consultation

Response

AYM is pleased that the Government has recognised the key role that YOTs have
played in working with their partners to reduce the numbers of young people coming
into the criminal justice system in the first place, and reducing the numbers going on
to receive custodial remands and sentences. One consequence of this success is,
we believe, that those young people for whom a custodial remand or sentence is the
only option deemed suitable by the courts will tend to be those who have either
committed very serious offences or have not taken advantage of many opportunities
made available to them thorough community penalties. They are the most
challenging and needy young people; many of them will have spent most of their
young lives in the local authority care system and have multiple difficulties. It should
come as no great surprise that reoffending rates are high and that effective care and
supervision is expensive.

We wish to make a number of general points, which, we hope, can be taken into account as
the Government’s proposals are developed over the coming months;

1. Improvements in the quality of custodial regimes always carry the inherent
risk of making custodial remands and sentences more attractive to sentencers
as well as to practitioners in schools and children’s services who are
frustrated by young people’s failure to thrive in a community setting. This
could result in an increase in the number of young people going into custody,
as happened when the Detention and Training Order was introduced.
Therefore, at the same time as improving custody, the Government will need
to consider how it can move the threshold for a custodial sentence upwards
and reinforce the message that deprivation of liberty should always be a last
resort. It should also consider how it could tackle the perverse incentives that
currently exist for local authority children’s services: effective community
interventions can be expensive for them, whereas a custodial sentence
carries very little cost. For a local authority it can be cheaper to not intervene
and wait for the level offending to merit custody.
2. Secure accommodation needs to be situated within relatively easy reach of
the young person’s home area in order for family members and professional
workers to retain contact. Such contact is a vital element in the young
person’s reintegration on release. There have previously been commitments
to ensuring that secure placements are normally within 50 miles of the home
area. For large parts of the south of England from Cornwall to Sussex, this
commitment was rarely realised. There is now an opportunity to develop a
new configuration of secure accommodation which is more local.
3. Secure accommodation for children and young people should have strong
links with the children’s services of the local authority in which it is located,
and represented at a senior level on the local safeguarding children board.
These are highly vulnerable young people who need to be managed with an
effective multi-agency care plan. There needs to be a clear delineation of
responsibility between the staff of local authority in which the accommodation
is sited and the staff of the local authority from the young person’s home area.
4. Since the introduction of Approved School and Borstal Training in the first half
of the twentieth century there have been many attempts in the UK and
elsewhere to ensure that education is the key rehabilitative tool of secure
accommodation for young offenders. However, from our own experience we
know that many of the young people who go into custody are not ready for
traditional education. Some have not been in school for two or more years;
others have significant mental health or language and communication deficits
which form a barrier to their learning. There is sure to be a wealth of evidence
as to what works and what does not work and we would expect to see a
strong evidence base to the Government’s final proposals for the secure
estate.
5. A restorative justice (RJ) approach should be central to way relationships are
managed in the secure estate. RJ has been at the heart of the reformed youth
justice system for over a decade. We are aware of many schools which have
successfully adapted RJ to form the basis of their anti-bullying strategies, and
of several local authorities who have introduced RJ across all their residential
units. The latter has resulted in significant reductions in incidents of violence
towards staff and the number of police call-outs. We would expect to see
maximum use of restorative justice techniques and minimum use of physical
restraint in secure accommodation.
6. Staff and management from the secure estate should play an active role in
the young person’s whole sentence, not merely in the management of the
custodial part of the sentence. As it was originally envisaged, the detention
and training order would have involved staff from secure accommodation
attending post-release reviews in the community. In practice this happens
rarely. In the future they should have a role not just in attending review
meetings, but also in working with YOTs to ensure effective transfer to
community-based education.
7. New models should build on the success of resettlement consortia. Local
authorities in several parts of England – Greater Manchester, the South West,
Hampshire, Yorkshire and others – have, with support from YJB,
demonstrated what can be achieved when local authorities and the third
sector work together and focus their efforts on improving resettlement. The
relationships that have developed, and the improved understanding of “what
works” could be a useful building block for the new arrangements.
8. The use of information technology has traditionally been poor across the
secure estate. Effective use of video conferencing for case reviews and
meetings with case workers has the potential to save money. Implementation
has failed because of the reluctance of secure accommodation providers,
both in the state sector and the private sector, to spend money on technology.
Access to the internet, an essential tool for young people undertaking course
work at schools and colleges, is often denied them in secure accommodation
because of a perceived security risk. This perception needs to be challenged
and any risks properly managed.

ADCS & YJB support membership of the AYM

Joint letter

The AYM are delighted that a joint letter from Andrew Webb (Chair of the Association of Directors of Childrens Services) and Lin Hinnigan (the new Chief Executive of the Youth Justice Board)supporting membership of the AYM by heads of Youth Offending Teams and their managers has today been sent to all Directors of Children's Services and Chairs of Yot Management Boards.

The letter states 'YJB and ADCS share a view that it would be highly desirable for all Youth Offending Team (YOT) Managers in England to be members of AYM, so that the AYM can represent, without ambiguity, the whole sector.'

New YJB CEO speaks at sucessful AGM

Chief Exec Lin Hinnigan

New YJB Chief Exec Lin Hinnigan told AYM members today at their AGM today in Birmingham that 'her heart was with children and young people' Ms Hinnigan also spoke about the challenge of reducing reoffending rates particularly for young people leaving custody as something she wanted to happen during her tenure.
Gareth Jones (Halton, Warrington & Cheshire West) was re-elected as Chair reported that the membership and profile of the AYM had risen over the last year. The chair also announced that John Drew, Lin Hinnigan's predecessor as YJB Chief Exec had become the first non Yot Manager to be granted honourary membership of the AYM due to his support of the AYM whilst at the YJB.
Pat Jennings (Tameside), Ian Langley (Hampshire) and Adrian Quinn (Bristol) were re-elected as Vice Chair, Secretary and Treasurer respectively although Adrian Quinn stated he was unlikely to seek re-election next year.
Terry Gibson (Devon) stepped forward to fill the vacant Assistant Secretary role and Amrik Panesar (Oxfordshire) did likewise to become an additional AYM Executive member along with Charlie Spencer (Sandwell) & Lorna Hadley who were re-elected.

Govt Legal Aid proposals do not consider effect on young people.

Legal Aid

The AYM has today responded to the Governments proposals on Legal Aid. The AYM is concerned that neither the consultation document nor the associated impact assessments appears to make any reference to the specific challenges of implementation in the youth secure estate and in the youth court. One of the principal responsibilities of youth offending teams is to work in partnership with the police and other court users in order to deliver swift and effective justice to young people when they offend. In our view, some of these proposals have the potential to have a negative impact on the youth justice system.

We maintain that legal practice on behalf of children and young people under the age of 18 years requires specialist expertise. The needs of young people should be considered separately from those of adults.

The AYM has responded to four chapters of the proposed reforms which we believe will have the greatest impact on young people: “reforms to prison law to ensure that legal aid is not available for matters that do not justify the use of public funds such as treatment issues” (Chapter 3), “proposals for introducing price competition into the criminal legal aid market, initially for the full range of litigation services and magistrates’ court representation only”, (Chapter 4) “expert fees in civil, family and criminal proceedings” (Chapter 7) and “impact assessments” (Chapter 8).

A copy of the full response is available to AYM members on the member section of this website. Non members can obtain a copy on request from Ian Langley the AYM Secretary ian.langley@hants.gov.uk

We now represent the majority of Yots in England!

Representation

Our Membership has risen sharply over the last few months in particular following the joint letter supporting AYM membership from the Association of Directors of Childrens Services and the Youth Justice Board to Directors of Children's services and Chairs of Yot Management Boards. We now have membership within 71 Yots out of the 136 Yots in England, so can now claim to represent the majority which adds greater weight when dealing with Ministers and Govt officials in particular.

AYM Hon Member gets CBE

John Drew

The AYM was delighted to learn that John Drew was made an Honourary Life Member of the AYM in April this year has been awarded a CBE in this years Queens Birthday Honours for his services to youth justice. John retired as the Chief Executive of the Youth Justice Board in March 2013 and was very supportive of the AYM whilst in that role. His award is well deserved.

AYM welcomes removal of all young women from prison.

In Custody

The AYM welcomes the announcement by Youth Justice Board Chair Frances Done that all young women in custody are to be withdrawn from the three remaining HM Prison Young Offender Institutions that hold young women due to the fall in numbers who need to be securely held. Young women will now be held in either privately run Secure Training Centres or Local Authority Secure Children's Homes.

Whilst the AYM supports this move our view is that the few young women the Courts need to remand or sentence to custody should be held placed in Local Authority Secure Children's Homes who are best placed to meet the high levels of vulnerability that many of these young women face. In due course the AYM would like to see the removal of young women from Secure Training Centres as well.

Successful North West Regional seminar

Two presentations

The AYM seminar held a successful seminar at Oldham Yot on 11/7/13 which was attended by 25 YOT Managers. The session started with passionate presentation by Jenny Bright (Leeds Yot) on their award winning work with girls who offend or at risk of doing so. Jenny stressed the need for high level support for such an approach and the use of specialist Yot staff to work with girls.

Sue Hall, Chair of the Probation Chiefs Association (PCA) and Chief Executive of Yorkshire and Humberside Probation Trust provide a great insight into the seismic changes facing the Probation Service due to the Ministry of Justice proposals. AYM members shared the concerns of the PCA of the likely impact of the changes within such a short timescale and the probable impact on Yots. The AYM will continue to do all it can to support the PCA in opposing the split in case management between the public and private sector.

The final session of the day was led by Andrew Webb, President of the Association of Directors of Children's Services and Director of Children's services at Stockport Council,who talked about the challenges facing local authorities. A discussion took place about the early impact on Local Authorities of the transfer of remand costs to them from the Youth Justice Board.

Our next members newsletter in August will contain a full write up. Jenny Bright and Sue Hall's presentations are available in the members section of our website.

Chief Prison Inspector to speak at AYM event

Nick Hardwick CBE

The AYM is delighted that Nick Hardwick CBE, Chief Inspector of Prisons has agreed to be our keynote speaker at our London Regional event for members on the 20th of September. AYM members will be particularly hear his comments following the recent HMIP inspection report criticising the levels of violence in Feltham YOI.

Following their excellent presentation at AYM’s successful North West event @ Oldham Yot in July members will once again have the opportunity to hear about the terrific award winning work with girls by Leeds YOS to share good practice in this area of work.

Also speaking will be Emma Jones, Deputy Director of the Troubled Families unit. It is already apparent that quite a few current and former Yot Managers have responsibility for TF work in their area due to the links with youth crime and the multi agency approach that is required.

Closure of Feltham YOI welcomed

Super Jail not the answer

Closure of Feltham YOI welcomed but Super Jail not the answer



The Association of Yot Managers (AYM) welcomes todays announcement by the Secretary of State for Justice that Feltham Young Offenders Institute is to close. The recent report by HM Prison Inspectorate starkly outlined the levels of violence in Feltham and that it is a thoroughly unsafe place to hold young people in custody.



Feltham is the largest YOI in the UK and it is quite clear that the size of the institution made it unmanageable, so therefore we are sceptical about the Governments plans to build a ‘Super Jail’ on its site with a youth facility attached. Our view is that the few young people that need to be held in custody should be placed in small units across the capital and elsewhere. It is a scandal that there is currently no Local Authority Secure Homes in London where young people can be safely held.

AYM’s London region event

Nick Hardwick

Chief Inspectors say all young people in custody should be treated as children’

At AYM’s London region event on 20/9/13 Nick Hardwick, Chief Inspectors of Prisons said that all young people aged under 18 in both prison and police custody should be treated as children. In a hard hitting presentation to AYM members he also condemned the routine strip searching of young people upon arrival in custody and that the cancellation of prison visits should not be used as a punishment. Discussion also took place about the recent inspection of Feltham YOI which highlighted high levels of violence and the subsequent announcement that it is to close. He also highlighted the proportionately high numbers in custody of young people who described themselves as from the travelling community.

Delegates also heard from Pauline Burke of Cheshire West, Halton & Warrington Yot about their Divert project which has been successful in keeping young people with health needs/learning disabilities out of the youth justice system and from Sarah Ross of Leeds Yot about their groundbreaking approach with young women which has led to dramatic falls in offending by this group. Other speakers included Supt Lawrence Jones representing the Association of Chief Police Officers who spoke about the ACPO children and young people’s strategy and current Stop and search proposals and Emma Jones, Deputy Director of the Troubled families Unit at the department of Communities and Local Govt who talked about how Yots could engage with the troubled families agenda

Yot Managers are unsung heroes

Former Home Secretary says

Jack Straw MP has given the AYM an exclusive interview to mark 15 years since as Home Secretary he oversaw the Implementation of the Crime and Disorder Act in 1998 that created YOTs.



In response to the following question posed by the AYM :



What has been the most positive aspect of the establishment of YOTs, and if you could have done one thing differently when YOTs were established, what would it be?

Mr Straw said: ‘Actually, I am very proud of what’s been achieved, as indeed should you be!. Look at the figures: first time entrants are way down. Use of custody is way down. You never hear of YOTs being panned in the press in the way that other parts of public sector are. YOTs are never part of that narrative. You YOT managers are the unsung heroes. I was very actively involved in youth justice from 1994 until 2001, and then again in 2007 when I shared responsibility with Ed Balls in what was then the Department for Children, Schools and Families.

I got on very well with Ed. His department had more money that mine and I think that together we were able to take the youth crime prevention agenda a big step further.’

Swindon Yot scoops AYM Award

AYM Chair Gareth Jones announced

Swindon Yot scoops AYM Award

At the Youth Justice Board convention yesterday (27/11/13) in Birmingham, AYM Chair Gareth Jones announced that Swindon Yot’s Young Volunteers Project had won the John Hawkins Award for innovative practice in youth justice.

John Hawkins was a founding member of the AYM and Treasurer for many years before his life was tragically cut short in the summer of 2011 and it was fitting that members of John’s family were present to present the award to Kevin Leaning, Head of Swindon Yot.

The judges of the award were the staff and young people from last years winners the Girls programme at Leeds Yot who unanimously voted for the Swindon Young Volunteers programme and said; ‘ We felt that they provided an excellent application which included clear evidence of a successful impact. The project is being led by young volunteers and delivered to their peers at an early, and very responsive, age. We felt that targeting this age group was very innovative and that it placed the children’s voices centrally. The project is empowering and provides role models who could continue to have an impact well after this piece of work has finished. We thought that it was an ambitious project but that it also has the potential to be scaled-up. There is evidence provided that the delivery has also been well-thought through, is professional and values those involved.’ AYM Chair Gareth Jones announced

“Learn lessons from the youth justice system”

say YOT chiefs

The Government should consider the lessons that can be learned from the reform of the youth justice system before embarking on a major change of the way young adults aged 18 to 22 are placed and managed in custody, says the Association of Youth Offending Team Managers (AYM).

The Government has been consulting on plans to change the current arrangements for young adults sentenced to custody. It wants to be able to place them in jails with older adult offenders, so that they can have access to a wider range of rehabilitative programmes and be better prepared for release. It plans to repeal laws which establish the sentence of detention in a young offender institution (YOI) and will bring to an end the designation “YOI” for young adults in the prisons estate.

Responding to the consultation document, AYM argues that not only should these young adults continue to be managed separately, there should be a fresh look at how agencies, including local authority services, work together to improve the way they are managed in custody and supported on release.

AYM Chair, Gareth Jones, Head of Cheshire West, Halton and Warrington Youth Offending Service, said: “For many years, legislation has, quite rightly, protected young adults from older, more experienced offenders in custody. These young adults are still in a process of physical and emotional development and many of them are at high risk of reoffending. There are, sadly, significant numbers of young adult offenders who have been looked after by local authorities; they continue to have an entitlement to support services until their early twenties. We are concerned that these proposed reforms will make access to these services more difficult for them. Instead of mixing young adults with older offenders, the Government, in our view, should learn from the reforms of the youth justice system. Here we have an integrated sentence planning and sentence management system involving staff in YOTs and the secure estate working closely together to ensure that the sentence plan and resettlement arrangements tackle the risks and meet the support needs of the young person. In the last few years we have invested heavily in improving the transition arrangements for young offenders who reach the age of 18 and are still in the criminal justice system. We fear that this investment will be lost if young adults are placed in large, adult-orientated institutions. Instead of treating young adults the same as older prisoners, we believe there are strong arguments for retaining and enhancing the current system of separation so that there is a proper, multi-agency investment in this group of offenders”.

High profile speakers

attend AYM NE event

The AYM held a successful regional event in South Shields at the end of January. Jacqui Cheer, Chief Constable of Cleveland and ACPO lead for children & young people was present for the whole day and in her speech made it clear that ‘the police don’t want to hold young people in custody’ and that ‘young offenders are often victims’.



Later in the day Dan Jarvis MP the shadow Youth Justice spokesman, accompanied by Lord Jeremy Beecham said ‘Yots were integral to the success of the youth justice system’ and that ’18-21 year olds may benefit from a similar approach’.



The event also featured valuable contributions from Ben Estep of the New Economics Foundation about the value of YOT prevention work. Jonathan Carver from the CPS Inspectorate spoke about how CPS liaison with Yots could be improved and Thiza Smith and Dave Clarke from the Secure Accommodation Network spoke about the value of secure Children’s Homes and concerns about future funding.

AYM gives evidence to All Party Parliamentary Group for Children

on: The prosecution and over-representation of looked after children’

Nick Wilkinson (Head of Kent Yot & AYM Exec member), told the APPG that prior to his current role he had been a police officer for 30 years. He felt that unless officers were in a specialist unit, they did not understand the needs of children and young people.

Risk factors for looked after children

It is important to remember why children become looked after:

o Family breakdown

o Homelessness

o Abuse and neglect

o Absent parenting, including unaccompanied asylum seeking and migrant children

Childhood trauma is therefore highly prevalent.



Looked after children have a range of needs:

o Health needs, for example dealing with substance abuse

o Behavioural needs

o Accommodation needs and the problem of being moved around a lot

o Education and future opportunities: figures show that amongst looked after children a high number have educational statements or a history of exclusion, and a high number go on to be NEET.



As a result, looked after children are more like to come into contact with the police. There are also risks around children going missing from care, which can lead to further problems like gangs and child sexual exploitation.



Areas for improvement

College of Policing has a key role in implementing evidence-based strategy.

A strategic approach is needed at force level. For example, the Police and Crime Commissioner can play an important role in prevention.

At an operational level, officers need to understand local children’s homes and what they do.

Corporate Parenting Boards also have an important role to play. For example, it is worth questioning how many CPBs have local police officers sitting on them. Police could support CPB with their aim of reducing the criminalisation of looked after children.



Examples of good practice

A working group for developing protocol was set up in Sussex and there are examples of restorative justice being used here very successfully.

In 2012, Surrey set up a protocol for the South East which involves four-steps:

1. There is an expectation that behaviour is resolved internally without calling the police.

2. If this is not appropriate, then the police are called, but the police should then consider discretionary powers and implement a community resolution or restorative justice.

3. If this is not appropriate, then a Youth Restorative Intervention is used. A multi-agency panel will consider the options for restorative justice instead of going to court.

4. If this is still not appropriate, the incident will be dealt with in court.

There is work going on to put this protocol in place in the South East.

South West sucess

Presentations

YOT managers from across the South West and further afield enjoyed an interesting and challenging set of presentations when they met at Taunton earlier this month. This was the last in a series of regional events that the AYM has run in 2013/4, and attracted the highest attendance. In view of their popularity, a further series of events is already being planned for 2014/5.

Two managers of secure children’s homes, representing the Secure Accommodation Network (SAN) kicked off the day. They emphasised the quality of education provided in children’s homes and made the point that if they were funded as education providers including being given the ‘pupil premium’, their costs would be almost at the level expected of the proposed new secure college.

Ben Estep of the New Economic Foundation reported on his analysis of the work of YOTs to prevent first time offending, and the potential cost savings further ‘downstream’ in the criminal justice system.

Colleagues from Swindon YOT gave an uplifting presentation, including a new DvD, of the work of their young volunteers who go into primary schools to inform their peers about youth justice. This project won our John Hawkins Award last year.

After a short break, we heard from Lucy Russell, Senior Campaigns Coordinator with the Howard League. Lucy left us with plenty of printed material for young people and encouraged us to support and promote their “U R Boss” campaign to inform and empower young people in the YJS.

Lastly, Sally Lewis, Chief Officer for Avon and Somerset Probation and Probation’s lead officer for IOM, provided a briefing on ‘Transforming Rehabilitation (TR)’. The ‘Rehabilitation Revolution’ is apparently now an ‘evolution’; TR is entirely based on an ideology- hence the refusal to seek evidence through pilots; TR’s rapid timetable is dictated by the need for legislation to be passed in the lifetime of the current parliament. Lastly, Sally showed a couple of graphs to illustrate year-on-year reductions in serious acquisitive crime, de-bunking the myth that TR is needed because current systems are failing to deliver.

Presentations from the event are available in the members’ section of the website

AYM responds to DoH consultation

Department of Health's consultation

The AYM has today responded to the Department of Health's consultation on proposed "wilful neglect" legislation, following the Government's announcement that they are considering creating a new offence of ill-treatment or wilful neglect of users of health and social care. These proposals largely concern adult service users, but there was an opportunity to help ensure that children and young people receive an equal or better level of protection under the proposed new arrangements. To view our response, click on the following link:

http://consultations.dh.gov.uk/quality-regulation/wilfulneglect/consultation/my_response?user_id=ANON-27M2-EJ7A-F&key=6223808f0832fd45487f89979ca62854d80a544e

Adrian Quinn's Reflections

adrianquinn2@aol.co.uk

Everything Changes But Nothing Changes - Or Perhaps It Does?

Reflections of a retiring YOT manager and former Head of Service in Bristol

Upon my departure from Bristol YOT, and from youth justice, and, in May, from the AYM Board, a couple of AYM colleagues suggested I might reflect on my 40 years working in the criminal justice system, many of those years in youth justice. I hope at least some of these reflections resonate for all of you.

It is instructive, and if nothing else, gives a chronological perspective to these reflections, to note the first young person I reported on to the juvenile court would now be 53, if, as I can only hope, he is still alive. One of the lessons from not knowing whether he is or he isn’t alive of course, is that rarely do we know whatever happened to ‘so an so’, in this case as he grew from the 13 year old I knew, into the adult he hopefully became. In those days, in the mid 70’s, it was common practice to more often charge to Court and then intervene at quite a high level in the tariff, even with a first offence, as this was - burglary of the ‘tuck shop’ at his school. He was given a supervision order and when last seen in June 1974 was still compliant, but who knows what that level of intervention might have meant for his later progress through the criminal justice system. I can only hope that having to see me on a weekly basis was a sufficient deterrent to further involvement.

My first experience of the juvenile custodial system was an open Borstal called Gaynes Hall set in an idyllic spot on the edge of Grafham Water, a lake on the Cambridgeshire/ Bedfordshire borders. A wonderful place, or so it seemed on a sunny August day in 1973, with a Governor who seemed to be the epitome of the best head teacher you could possibly hope for, evoking all the positives and great hopes for the future for the boys who were there. Whether Gaynes Hall was as good as it seemed or not, the reality, from the tales told by the young men who I supervised, was that many of the Borstals and Detention Centres of that era were brutalising institutions where occasional arbitrary terror was the order of the day, particularly if you were vulnerable, whether that brutality came from other inmates or from staff. The juvenile custody system reflected the era in which it was located.

By the late 70’s and in to the 80’s my 13 year old above would have been dealt quite differently by the YJ system. A caution would have been more likely, and even if he had gone to Court the outcome would probably have been a conditional discharge. The era of ‘non-intervention’ (radical or not) had begun. Police and social workers working together in what were often called juvenile bureaux introduced a new approach in many areas of the country. The police officer and the social worker walking hand in hand in to the future started a long time before 1999 and YOTs. In its approach that way of working, using prevention and early intervention without recourse to the Courts, is echoed in the current out of court disposals arrangements. But the political impact of repeat cautions, and some high profile cases where young offenders were seen as being ‘let off’ again and again, put paid to that approach by the early 90’s, and in due course led to the automatic escalator of reprimands, final warnings, and charge to Court.

In the meantime, by the early 80’s, the juvenile custody system had also re-invented itself. Borstals became Youth Custody Centres, and eventually, in yet another cosmetic change, became young offender institutions. On the positive side, this at least brought to an end the totally arbitrary system of being sentenced to Borstal Training which generally meant between 6 months and 3 years in custody, largely regardless of the offence, and primarily determined by the young person’s behaviour and progress in custody. A sentence, where getting your bed pack right for inspection on Saturday morning, was more important in determining the date of your release, than your attitude to your offending or your risk to the public. Determinate sentences reflecting the current offence and previous convictions came in to being. Of course indeterminate sentences made a bit of a comeback as we moved in to this century, but at least were based on somewhat more comprehensible criteria.


Youth justice has always been subject to changing fashions, eras of non-intervention, of early and later intervention have all occurred at least twice in my working lifetime. Youth justice like the fashion industry itself, reinvents itself from time to time often repeating itself but in slightly different forms. Reason and rational thinking, learning the lessons of history, basing policy on what an empirical perspective tells us about the best long term way to deal with juvenile crime and what’s actually needed to make those policies work, rarely enters the political calculation. Belief tends to trump reason every time.

The belief that custody that for those who have to go there, should have better have outcomes is one of those beliefs amongst politicians, and on the face it sounds like reasonable proposition. And we are now witnessing the latest crop of government ministers, the new fashionistas of the youth justice system, a little like the tailors in the Grimm’s fairy tale, convincing themselves, and trying to convince us, that the new cloth of the so called ‘secure colleges’ will make a fine coat in to which will be weaved improved re-offending outcomes in the secure estate. Transferring the best of educational and training provision to the custodial setting can only be good can it not? Yet you only have to look at contemporary accounts of the Borstal system in it’s first 50 years and the public school ethos that abounded there, if you want to decide how confident you are in the latest version. You can take the boy or girl out of…and so on. Secure colleges will become a deceptive, and expensive fallacy, and policy failure, unless the politicians give equal attention, drive, statutory guidance, and resources from the centre, to ensure that improved education and training in custody, and employment opportunities are followed through on release. Sadly I see no sign of that.

At the beginning of the 21st century something new did happen in youth justice that was about as significant for youth justice as the 60’s were for fashion and music. And in youth justice, unlike the 60’s, if you were there, you will remember it. The changes in the secure estate in 1999, promised much, but, harnessed to the bureaucratic dragline of the prison service, never amounted to much. Secure colleges are doomed to failure for the same reason. In contrast, the new youth justice system in the community, as set out in the 1998 Act, promised much and has delivered most of it.

The development of youth offending partnerships was localism before localism was thought of, with 157 YOTs, and 157 varieties, supported relatively benignly, but firmly, by the YJB at the centre. YOTs were the centre of the new youth justice system but not the only part of it, as the tentacles of the multi agency partnerships spread to all parts of the overall YJ system in local areas, forging a sea change in the way youth crime is managed. The success of the changes in the community are system wide, and not for YOTs alone to claim.

Two of the main outcomes required of the YJ system have been achieved over the past decade, quite spectacularly in fact, with the use of custody and the number of entrants in to the formal YJ system halving across that period. That reduction in first time entrants started to be achieved once the police (in their role as part of the wider YJ partnership) dropped the sanctioned detection targets, started to focus on prolific offenders, and introduced ‘informal’ RJ approaches for lower level offences, as a more effective way of bringing offenders to justice. These reductions are positive in and of themselves. As important, there have been significant reductions in costs to the public purse, both in the short term costs of youth crime, and in the longer term impact on costs as young offenders avoid going on in to the adult system. These cost benefits have rarely been given the publicity they deserve.

So why are these successes spoken of in relatively muted terms, and not trumpeted anywhere near as loudly as the political fashionista’s current obsession with re-offending rates ‘remaining stubbornly high’? Maybe because reducing the numbers of young people going to Court and reducing the numbers of young offenders ending up in custody is not a media vote winner? Maybe because the drive to success came from the previous government? Maybe because one of the real success stories in youth justice in recent years is just a bit too complicated to understand and to explain? This is the story of reduction in the numbers of re-offences committed by those supervised by YOTs. Across the country, particularly in city YOT areas, the numbers of re-offences committed by young offenders have been reducing annually. The proportion re-offending has not changed but the numbers of offences committed by those re-offending has reduced, reflecting a different, more productive focus, on those most likely re-offend, and on reducing the numbers of victims of crime.

Everyone working in youth justice should be proud of that. Just as they should be proud that this approach, re-modelled as ‘tough choices rehabilitation’ has been replicated with adult offenders in the burgeoning, and generally very successful integrated offender management schemes that are now a feature in most police and probation areas.

However, the underpinning success of the ‘new’ youth justice system is not just about outcomes, important though they are, but is also about outputs. It is about the delivery of youth justice services, and, most importantly, it is about the multi agency partnerships that deliver those services.

As a concrete example of how things have changed and how the partnership approach in youth justice has delivered far more than just the YJ outcomes required, there was a recent story about an 18 year old young woman in a Sunday newspaper as part of a piece on the housing situation in the UK. As a younger teenager, this girl had found herself unable to live with her mother because of her mother’s mental health problems, and having moved in with her Dad, had ‘difficulties’ there too. She had got in to some minor offending and ASB, and as it was described in the paper, the ‘youth offending nurse’, as well as dealing with her self worth issues, facilitated her getting accommodated by the local authority. By the time the story appeared she had now moved in to supported accommodation, having been in a children's home until her 18th birthday. Short of her parents being able to provide the care she needed, this seemed the best outcome for her in the circumstances, and one that probably prevented her getting in to further trouble with the law. All initiated by the YOT health worker.

That would never have happened before YOTs came in to being, and the involvement of health, as well as the other partners, in the YOT partnership. In contrast in the pre YOT system, that girl would possibly have been referred to CAMHS, would possibly have been offered an appointment, probably several weeks away, would probably not have attended, and if she did attend, would have probably have shown ‘a lack of readiness for treatment’ or ‘a lack of cooperation with therapy’, and her case would probably have been dropped. What is certain is that this girl would not have got the care and attention for her emotional needs, and the stability of being accommodated, all in one place.

The story is a parable of how far the youth justice system has moved on, and is an exemplar of what can be achieved by delivering a holistic service to the ‘troubled and troublesome’, by putting the right professionals in a room together, with a unified mission. Everybody now favours multi agency approaches to deliver shared goals and they feature increasingly across a range of children’s and adult’s services, but the partnerships that support this form of organisation are delicate organisms, that need constant attention to bloom and give of their best. It would be unwise to be blasé about the permanence of those partnerships, since it would be very easy at a time of pressure and challenge, for the statutory agencies involved, and for other linked external organisations, to focus on their own internal organisational challenges, and put YOT partnerships, and the improvement in outcomes made over the past few years, at real risk in the future.

‘Modern YOT Partnerships’, the new guidance issued by the YJB, is a welcome support to maintaining YOT Boards and YOTS as they have entered the choppy waters of the sea of austerity. It is also true that many local YOT partnerships are held together not just by guidance, and the legislative framework, but as much, if not more, by the strong and sustained relationships, and commitment to the mission, of the YOT Board members, and the influence they have in their own agencies. However, neither guidance or local commitment may be entirely sufficient at a time of such threats to YOTs as exist now. On the other hand history would suggest that in retaining local commitment in providing resources, in particular the local authority, there was nothing quite like the YJB’s ‘£ for £ rule’ to concentrate local minds and local pocket books in supporting adherence to the guidance and the commitment to YOTs at strategic level.

For those of you who might have forgotten it, the ‘£ for £’ rule stated that for every £ the local partnership reduced the YOT budget by, the YJB would reduce their contribution by the same amount. Rarely, if ever, used by the YJB, it was nonetheless a powerful inhibition to reducing the local core budget. Under this current government and the modern YJB, the ‘£ for £’ rule” seems to have slipped off the radar. It’s apparent absence has not been unnoticed by local partnerships, and is leading a more cavalier attitude to resourcing YOTs. The rule is well overdue for a comeback. The YJB is now generally contributing at least 30% of the resources of YOTs, in some cases considerably more, albeit, reframed, under MoJ pressure, as a grant to improve effective practice. In reality without the YJB resources the vast majority of YOTs would be ‘bankrupt’ overnight, and be unable to deliver the minimum statutory requirements of the YJ system.

As the ‘sleeping partner’ in local YOTs, if it is serious about supporting modern YOT partnerships, the YJB needs to revive the ‘£ for £ rule’ with some urgency.That indirect, but nonetheless key executive influence, over the resourcing of local YOT partnerships, and its reintroduction, would be an important element as a forerunner to a more mature and grown-up discussion that needs to take place between the Government, the YJB, the LGA, ADCS and AYM about the future resourcing of YOTS. This debate is critically important, in order to mitigate the risks to sustaining the success of community youth justice, and to avoid an inadvertent return to a postcode lottery of service provision, and the costs that such a deterioration in services will bring to communities and the public purse further down the road.

This piece started with recollections of my early experience of the youth justice system. I have been privileged to work with some inspiring and talented colleagues from all professional backgrounds over the past 40 years. The first person in the CJ system who inspired me was a rather eccentric assistant chief probation officer, who single-handedly (those were the days!) ran the local training course for probation volunteers I attended in 1972. At the start of the course, he said that, ‘you can measure the civilisation of any society by the way it treats it’s children, it’s criminals, and it’s mentally ill.’

Whatever else has changed in the intervening years, the essential truth of that quote is timeless. For those of you who will be ensuring that the ‘troubled and troublesome’ young people we have the privilege of serving, continue to receive that compassion, that care, and that commitment to their best interests, as represented in the best practice you help to deliver, you have my continued admiration and good wishes for the future.

New Vice Chair elected at sucessful AGM

23/5/14 in Rugby

At the AYM's AGM on the 23/5/14 in Rugby, Lesley Tregear (Warwickshire) was elected as Vice Chair replacing Pat Jennings (Tameside) who has stood down. Gareth Jones (Cheshire West, Halton & Warrington) was relected unopposed as chair.

Prior to the AGM members heard from several high profile speakers, including Paul McDowell, the new Chief Inspector of Probation who hinted that the grade descriptions for Yot Inspections may change to allow outstanding work to be recognised.

Frances Crook, Chief Executive of the Howard League challenged members to think about the use of electronic monitoring as part of Intensive Supervision and Support licence conditions for young people leaving custody which then result in breach and a return to custody.

Members also heard from Ali Wigzell, Lead Researcher from the Carlile inquiry into Youth Courts about its findings that are due to be published in the next month and from Kate Jones, Director at the Youth Justice Board.

AYM academic focus

at University of Bedfordshire

The latest AYM event on 24/9/14 had an academic focus hearing from Prof John Pitts & Dr Paul Olitain (Univ of Bedfordshire) abut their research on gangs and how all young people living in areas where gangs are present are vulnerable and that professional elitism is a barrier to talking gangs. Dr Tom Ellis ([Portsmouth Univ) spoke about the evidence that community payback/reparation works best when combined with community supervision and a meaningful activity of clear benefit to community. The Youth Justice Board’s head of research Dr Louise Moore gave an update on YJB research activity in particular the use of restraint on young people in secure settings.

Delegates were also addressed by Kathy Harrison, Chair of the Youth panel at the Magistrates Association about their response to the Carlile report on Youth courts and in particular their proposal for pre court problem solving panels for young people involving JP’s and Yots.

The Skill Mill scoops AYM’s John Hawkins Award

Yesterday (19/11/14)

at the Youth Justice Board Convention in Telford it was announced that the Skill Mill project run by Newcastle Youth Offending Team had won this years John Hawkins Award for innovative practice. The Skill Mill is a not for profit social enterprise set up in 2011 which provides training and employment for young offenders in flood risk prevention through the management of watercourses in local parks, nature reserves etc and now provides paid employment and qualifications for 10 young people.

The judging was undertaken by staff and young people from Swindon Youth Offending Team whose Young Volunteers project won the Award last year. The judges said;
‘The Skill Mill project appeals to young people, is innovative in delivery, and demonstrated success for all those who took part. The entry was also strong in terms of its partnership working and potential for sustainability to inspire and engage other young offenders.’ Davie Parks, Team, Manager at Newcastle YOT said ‘It is amazing news and we are chuffed to bits and will help the project on a number of fronts’.

John Hawkins was one of the AYM’s founding members and treasurer for many years whilst Head of East Sussex YOT. John died within a few months of retiring in 2010 and with the support of his family the AYM instigated an annual award in his name in 2012. AYM Secretary Ian Langley said ‘Yesterday would have been John’s 63rd birthday so it was fitting that the award was made to the Skill Mill on the same day as it is exactly the sort of innovative practice John would have thoroughly approved of.’

AYM award winners celebrate 1st birthday

On the 12th of February

On the 12th of February the Skill Mill Limited a social enterprise set up by Newcastle YOT and the Environment Agency and winners of the AYM’s John Hawkins Award last November held an event in Newcastle to celebrate its first birthday. The event was attended by John Hawkins son, Roddy who said ‘I think the whole enterprise is truly inspirational’.

The Skill Mill provides a reparation system for young people to serve their court orders by working on flood and other water management tasks, and horticultural projects. Young people who successfully complete their “paybacks” are given the opportunity of another six months of work on similar tasks, with pay, leading to a qualification.

Further details about the work of the Skill Mill can be found on their website http://theskillmill.org/

AYM to be part of new Laming enquiry

Prison Reform Trust’s independent inquiry

The AYM will be part of the expert group informing Prison Reform Trust’s independent inquiry into Looked After Children and Offending in England and Wales that will be chaired by Lord Laming. Looked After Children and Care Leavers are sadly over represented in the youth justice system (estimated to be 25 to 40%) and it is shocking that Children in Care today are as likely to be sent to prison as they are to go to University.

AYM member, Ben Byrne Head of Surrey Youth Support Service will represent the AYM on the expert group, which meets for the first time on 13/5/15. Ben will be supported by AYM Secretary, Ian Langley.

YJB Chair addresses

sucessful AYM AGM

Lord Tom McNally, Chair of the YJB addressed AYM members at their AGM in Rugby on the 19th of May saying he wanted to forge close links with the AYM. He also thanked Youth Offending Teams for the warm welcome that they had given him and other Board members on their recent visits to Yots. He added he had been inspired by the creativity and dedication of Yots staff and that it had really helped to inform the YJB's report that has gone alongside the Ministry of Justice's 'stocktake' report undetaken by Deloittes. Lord McNally said both reports had drawn similar conclusions about the value of Yots and in particular the preventative work they do.



AYM members were also adressed by Penelope Gibbs, chair of the Standing Committee for Youth Justice who gave an overview of the work of the SCYJ and urged Yots to forge closer links with the Local Goverment Association who could further increase the voice of Yots in what was likely to be challenging times. Members also heard from Dr Louise Moore Head of Research at the YJB about the new Learning and Resource hub and Trudy Birtwell of Solace, who along with Tony Begley and Jeanette Staly of Warwickshire Yot spoke about their positive experience of the first 'Aspiring Yot Managers Leadership' course run by Solace in conjunction with the AYM.



At the AGM, the following were re-elected;

Chair Gareth Jones (Cheshire West, Halton & Warrington)

Vice Chair Lesley Tregear (Warwickshire)

Treasurer Terry Gibson (Devon)

Secretary Ian Langley (Hampshire)

Assistant Secretary Joel Hanna (Sheffield)

Additional Executive members Amrik Panaser (Oxfordshire)

Charlie Spencer (Sandwell)



Davie Parks (Newcastle) was elected as an Additional Executive Member replacing Louise Hill (Sunderland) who has stepped down.

Joint AYM/NAYJ event 14th October 2015

in Liverpool

The AYM and the National Association of Youth Justice (NAYJ) are delighted to be working together to offer an event covering contemporary youth justice issue. The event ‘The costs of youth justice?’ will be held at John Moores University in Liverpool. The confirmed keynote speakers are Anne Longfield, Children’s Commissioner for England and Ian Pilling, Assistant Chief Constable, Merseyside Police (representing the National Police Chief’s Council).

The reduced cost to AYM members is £20 and you can book your place via http://thenayj.org.uk/

There will also be the opportunity for delegates to participate in practice based workshops. If you believe your work (practice, policy or research) would be of interest and would like to run a workshop, please contact the NAYJ on info@thenayj.org.uk

save the date

NAYJ

AYM is working in partnership with NAYJ on an important joint event to be held at Liverpool John Moore University on 14 October. The theme is “The Cost of Youth Justice”. AYM members should register via phil.sutton@aym.org.uk. Non-members may register via NAYJ’s website. More details will be in our September members’ bulletin.

AYM opposes in year budget cuts

YJB

The Youth Justice Board (YJB) is currently consulting with youth offending teams (YOTs) as it seeks to make its contribution to the Ministry of Justice’s (MOJ’s) efforts to model the impact of the significant budget reductions that are likely to be imposed on it by the Treasury.



While we expected a difficult financial settlement for the 2016-7 financial year, it came as a huge surprise to YOTs to be asked to provide an assessment the impact of an in-year (i.e. 2015-16) reduction of 14% in its funding from YJB.



We recognise that since 2010 YJB has prioritised its commitment to giving grant aid to YOTs and has reduced its expenditure on the secure estate and its own operating costs. YJB grants to YOTs support effective practice in the community and currently amount to £ 91m . In spite of all YJB’s attempts to safeguard YOT grants over the last 5 years they have still reduced by 18%. This reduction is already having a significant impact on services.



The Association of YOT Managers (AYM) wants to ensure that MOJ fully recognises how YOTs are funded. By far the largest part of our funding comes from local authorities, with local police and health services, and the National Probation Service making contributions as part of their statutory duties. Contributions to YOTs from all of these partners has been reducing during the recession. However, despite the pressures they all face, local partners in the main, stick to the commitments that they have given for each financial year. They recognise that it is totally unacceptable to reduce their contributions midway through the year. We are concerned that if the YJB is forced to take such unusual action it will give licence to our local partners to follow suit.



YOT funding for each year is fully committed to staff costs and to contracts for specialist services and facilities. YOTs are local partnerships and not independent, permanent organisations with monies held in capital reserves, such as buildings which could be sold off. There are no capital reserves. There is a significant cost to breaking contracts or to laying of staff midway through the year. These costs would outweigh any potential savings.



AYM Chair, Gareth Jones, said: “AYM fully supports the YJB’s efforts to resist further reductions in the grants it make to YOTs. The success of the youth justice system in the last fifteen years has been due in large part to the investment in preventing youth crime at an early stage, and in ensuring young people face up to the consequences of their offending for their victims through restorative justice. These innovations are likely to be the first to be cut if YOTs only have sufficient funds to carry out their statutory work for the courts.”

AYM joins forces with ACDS

against YJB proposed in year cuts to Yot budgets

The Association of Directors of Children’s Services (ADCS) and the Association of Youth Offending Team Managers (AYM) have today, Wednesday 16 September, submitted a formal response to the consultation issued by the Youth Justice Board (YJB) on an in-year reduction to the Youth Justice Grant (YJG).

Both Association’s fundamentally disagree with the proposals put forward to reduce the Youth Justice Grant (YJG) by an additional £9million and warn that cuts will have a direct impact on youth offending services.

Alison O’Sullivan, President of ADCS, said: “Early intervention and preventive work underpins the success of Youth Offending Teams (YOTS) and is a crucial part of keeping our children, young people and communities safe before problems escalate. Some YOT’s have already seen a 40% reduction to their budgets and have responded by pooling their resources in an effort to protect outcomes. To propose further in-year reductions is unreasonable and will directly impact the delivery and effectiveness of services leading to poorer outcomes for vulnerable young adults. Savings of this scale cannot be made particularly when these haven’t already been budgeted for. Government must recognise that further reductions to funding will have a clear impact on the local preventative offer and on what we may or may not be able to do in the future.”

Gareth Jones, Chair of AYM, said: “It is a supreme irony that a model for effective and efficient public service such as youth offending services which has been successful in cutting youth crime and thereby reducing numbers of victims as well as saving the public purse many millions of pounds is being starved of the necessary investments to continue to deliver high quality high value services. The cuts will mean increased costs to the public in the medium to longer term in both financial and emotional and physical harm. We think the scale and thoughtless nature of these considerable cuts are doomed to backfire with ordinary people ultimately paying the costs. This is a strange way to incentivise success.’’

Read the full consultation submission from ADCS and AYM
http://www.adcs.org.uk/download/consultation-responses/2015/ADCS_YOT_response_YJB_YOT_funding_consultation.pdf

Sucessful joint AYM/NAYJ event

in Liverpool

On the 14th of October the AYM jointly hosted 'the costs of youth justice' event with the National Association of Youth Justice (NAYJ) at Liverpool John Moores University. The event was a sell out with 120 delegates attending including a sizeable AYM contingent.

The event was opened by NAYJ Chair Pam Hibbert OBE who reminded the audience that the ultimate cost had recently been paid by Merseyside Police Officer Dave Phillips which meant keynote speaker Asst Chief Constable Ian Pilling could no longer address delegates so Temporary Asst Chief Constable Rob Carden had stepped in at short notice.



Temp ACC Carden told the audience that it is estimated that the costs to the Police of late intervention with young people was 1.8billion per annum and went onto say that the 36% of young people in the secure estate being Looked After Children was 'deeply disturbing'.



Anne Longfield the Children's Commissioner for England was the other keynote speaker. In a wide ranging speech she urged Yots to fully engage with the review of Youth Justice led by Charlie Taylor to put forward evidence of 'what works' to reinforce the point that the social costs of young people offending are paramount and prevention will produce cash savings in the long term.



In the afternoon delegates were able to choose from 12 workshops covering a wide range of topics before the event was closed by AYM Chair Gareth Jones.