Effective Practice in Out-of-Court Disposals (HMIP and HMICFRS guide)

15th November 2025

Background

The HM Inspectorate of Probation (HMIP) published an Effective Practice Guide for Out-of-Court-Disposals (OOCDs)[1] in October 2025 (the Effective Practice Guide), drawing on findings regarding the effectiveness of delivery of out-of-court disposals from a joint inspection thematic inspection (‘the effectiveness of diverting children from the criminal justice system: meeting needs, ensuring safety, and preventing reoffending`) between HMIP and His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services. 

Details

The Effective Practice Guide sets out various examples of good practice, which are thematically summarised below:

  1. Multi-agency partnership: Effective delivery of OOCDs depends upon strong, collaborative partnership arrangements across criminal justice, health, social care and community services, which enable early intervention, shared intelligence, and continuity of care. Examples include the Youth Justice Service’s (YJS) collaboration with the police to evaluate OOCDs using conviction data and reoffending data, implementing a process where community resolutions are only issued after the NPCC Child Gravity Matrix is consulted, and a prevention, prosecution, intervention, education, divert (PPIED) panel which identifies children at risk and provides targeted mental health support.
  2. Buildingrelationships through OOCD intervention activities: Trusting relationships in achieving positive outcomes for children subject to OOCDs. Examples include project workers motivating children to engage in projects and activities in the community, organisations such as Remedi delivering a 12-week trauma-informed, restorative mentoring programme and Turnaround funding youth engagement workers to connect children with community-based activities (e.g. football clubs, creative projects).
  3. Addressing diversity and disadvantage: A fair and effective OOCD system must be responsive to the issue of diversity and disadvantage that children face. Examples include St Giles having dedicated mentor specifically for children from Black and ethnic minority backgrounds to provide culturally responsive, identity-affirming experience, Open Lens Media providing personal development and career consultancy services to disenfranchised youth from low socio-economic backgrounds, REACH Safeguarding Adolescence Services supporting female youth with youth justice involvement via a 12-week programme featuring sessions on mental health, domestic abuse and sexual health, and InPower coaching youth who struggled with traditional interventions through mixed martial arts training.
  4. Engaging with victims: Under the Code of Practice for Victims of Crime victims should be involved in the decision-making and their views accounted for when exploring restorative justice options. Effective practice examples include the officer in charge connecting with YJS restorative justice practitioners to ensure the victim’s views are considered in the joint decision-making panels, “repairing harm meetings” to co-design meaningful interventions and referrals to victim support groups.
  5. Effective case supervision with children and exit planning: Case supervision with children on OOCDs ensure the child’s voice and experiences are central to planning and delivery, while effective exit planning involves engaging children and families for longer term support from community services.

Commentary

The Effective Practice Guide provides real-world examples to inform youth justice officers and legal representatives of how a well-designed, multi-agency, child-centred OOCD schemes can effectively achieve the principal aim of the youth justice system. It is a valuable resource for challenging inconsistent practice, improving local decision-making structures, and ensuring that diversion opportunities are available equitably to all children. 


 

[1] From 3 November 2025, the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) officially adopted the term “out-of-court resolutions” in place of “out-of-court disposals”. This change, announced by the Youth Justice Board (YJB), reflects the Child First commitment and recognises that previous terminology may have carried stigma for children