AGENDA ITEM 5
BOROUGH OF POOLE
CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE OVERVIEW & SCRUTINY COMMITTEE
11 SEPTEMBER 2012
YOUTH OFFENDING SERVICE RE-INSPECTION REPORT
PART OF THE PUBLISHED FORWARD PLAN YES/NO
STATUS (Strategic, Service Delivery Information)
1. PURPOSE
1.1 The purpose of the brief report is to inform members of the outcome of the re- inspection of the Bournemouth & Poole Youth Offending Service (B&P YOS) which took place in May 2012, the Report was published on 29th Aug 2012 by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Probation (HMIP).
2. DECISION(S) REQUIRED
2.1 This is to guide and give the opportunity to members to note and comment on the HMIP findings and recommendations.
3. BACKGROUND/INFORMATION
3.1 HMIP attended B&P YOS premises during May 2012. According to their criteria they identified a cross section of the caseload of young people referred to YOS to look at. The 38 cases selected were on a range of court ordered interventions from short 3mth Reparation Orders up to more lengthy custodial sentences, all of whom were supervised from Aug 2011 onwards.
3.2 The HMIP interviewed caseholders having had access to electronic and paper files so they could see what had been recorded about the nature and results of the interventions undertaken. Caseholders were interviewed for several hours at a time about their work with young people, their understanding of what is required, and the processes and systems required. This is a detailed process to establish a score for performance across key themes of work every YOS has to deliver. The HMIP also provides a headline comment by each score, to indicate whether they consider that this aspect of work requires either Minimum, Moderate, Substantial or Drastic improvement in the immediate future.
4. The areas and features are as follows
4.1 ‘Safeguarding’ work
1 Risk of Harm to Others
2 Likelihood of Re Offending
3 Safeguarding
4.2 ‘Risk of Harm to others’ work
1 Protecting the public by minimising Risk of Harm to others (RoH)
2 Reducing the Likelihood of Reoffending
3 Safeguarding the child or young person
4.3 ‘Likelihood of Reoffending’ work
1 Achievement of outcomes
2 Sustaining outcomes:
4.4 The 38 young persons’ files are read with the above focus. In addition to read files and interviews with staff the HMIP can chose to interview service users and send out questionnaires to get the views of service users.
4.5 The scores were constructed from a structured template to ensure each YOS inspected has a comparable experience. The proportions of risk and case complexity are also carefully profiled across all YOS to ensure the seriousness and nature of cases inspected are comparable.
5. The Progress from 2011 to 2012
5.1 The inspectors came to re-inspect B&P YOS in May 2012 having been inspected previously in February 2011 when the service was judged to be poor.
February2011 (Published June 2011)
5.2 On the basis of these results the B&P YOS was identified for re-inspection within 12 months as these scores indicated Safeguarding and Risk of harm to others required DRASTIC improvement and Likelihood of Reoffending Work required Substantial improvement.
5.3 The HMIP required an improvement plan addressing the recommendations in the 2011 report to be submitted to HMIP 4 weeks after the publication of the 2011 inspection report. The Youth Justice Board monitored the improvement plan’s progress.
5.4 Steps were also to be taken to strengthen the YOS Management Board with the DCS in Poole taking over the Chair and Vice Chair role being taken by the DCS in Bournemouth.
5.5 Very rigorous action was taken by the Board to improve the oversight of the action plan, requirements to address staffing issues and the need to secure improved outcomes. The table below sets out the considerable improvements achieved in just over 12 months.
May 2012 (Published Aug 2012)
5.6. Within each of the above 3 categories are a further 3 sub headings which are averaged for the overall scores seen above. The introduction of the latest report written by the inspectors acknowledges the improvement in scores which “speak for themselves”.
5.7 Safeguarding and Likelihood of Reoffending required MINIMUM improvements and Risk of harm to others required MODERATE Improvements. The Risk of Harm Judgement was very close to achieving the minimum improvement required judgement.
6. Areas Identified as contributing to Success
6.1 In their report the inspectors highlighted 3 examples of work they were particularly impressed by:
6.2 An example of an excellent and rigorous Risk assessment where a practitioners reflective practice had uncovered additional presenting risk by a young person to their victim which was then addressed.
6.3 The emergence of the use of the YOS’s own approach to supervision quality assurance and reflective practice - the Knowledge Development Tool (KDT). The tool is designed to support and record the supervisory process and promote reflective practice focussing on the YOS core outcomes and duties.
6.4 Finally they highlighted a case where a young person who had previous traumatic experiences whilst in care. He was effectively re engaged by the service and dealt with his anger issues during his order. This ultimately resulted in him getting regular contact with his own son again allowing him to build a positive relationship. The young person was able to deal with his own frustrations and anger resulting in him no longer resorting to violence to deal with problems.
7. Areas for development / improvement
7.1 Whilst the inspection report represents a marked improvement and departure from past culture and practices, there are 7 Recommendations for improvement explicitly listed within the report to be addressed by the YOS and its partners.
7.2 In addition to this list, the report is in the process of being “unpacked” to learn the detailed commentary across the themes scored as detailed above. The YOS Manager, has conducted the analysis of this document. The Management Team are drafting the Annual Youth Justice plan in response although HMIP do not require a further improvement Plan.
8. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
8.1 There are no immediate Financial Implications from the HMIP inspection report. However, as changing arrangements for funding of the Youth Offending Service nationally become clearer the Youth Offending Management Board will need to review the budget carefully with partner organisations.
9. LEGAL IMPLICATIONS
9.1 The service continues to meet its statutory requirements and there are no legal requirements arising from the report.
10. RISK MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS
10.1 Risk management will be built into the Action Plan and monitored by the Youth Offending Service Management Board. The YOS Plan going forward will integrate any continuing themes from the improvement plan together with comments from the latest inspection report.
11. EQUALITIES IMPLICATIONS
11.1 There are no equalities implications from the HMIP report. The involvement of the young person in all key decisions is an area we will continue to develop. Staff are also aware of the need to be vigilant for diversity issues that could impact on people’s ability to engage and to ensure we are aware of such issues in addressing young people’s offending behaviour.
12. CONCLUSIONS
12.1 The structural issues identified by the HMIP of not having a whole or permanent management team and not having suitable premises in early 2011 clearly put the service on the back foot. Other issues such as cultural and practice and personnel issues have been resolved in the interim by the current head of service and her staff team. The YOS Staff have embraced training and adopted good practices. They have worked hard and introduced more rigour into their work. A considerable number of new staff have arrived helping the change process, as well as bringing new experience. The Percentage Scores cannot and do not tell the whole story, they give a headline that is hugely encouraging. The fact the HMIP Chief Inspector came to speak to the Management Board and to the staff team to explain findings and congratulate the team members is a testament to the hard work of the service and the progress they felt had been made. There is commitment and pride in the team to maintain high standards and strive to make continuous improvements.
Report Author : Martin Reid
Contact officer: Martin Reid
Background Papers :
Re-inspection Report on Youth Offending Work in Bournemouth & Poole
Press Release
Echo press article
1