Summary
A Joint inspection from HM Inspectorate of Probation and HM Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS) has found that the current system for children receiving out of court resolutions is fragmented and inconsistent, creating a ‘post code lottery’ for children.
Details
Eight Youth Justice Services across six police force areas were visited and HM Inspectorate of Probation inspected a total of 98 cases. In 88 cases, the children had received community resolutions or deferred prosecutions and the remaining 10 involved other types of resolutions. A further 66 cases in which children had received Youth Cautions or Youth Conditional cautions were also assessed for the quality of decision making. HMICFRS inspected the quality of decisions made by police officers.
It was found that not only had the use of out of court resolutions increased significantly since the last inspection in 2018, there had been a shift in the types of resolutions being issued and the profiles of the children receiving them had also changed. There was a broad consensus on the importance of avoiding the unnecessary criminalisation of children and national and local commitments to child-centred justice. However, it was concluded that the overall approach was fragmented and hindered by inadequate data and strategic direction.
The quality of youth justice casework
The inspection highlighted the strong skills of the YJS in engaging children and how the support of the YJS was valued by children and their caregivers. However, it was found that interventions tended to focus on the offence, rather than addressing underlying risks and safeguarding concerns which were closely linked to reoffending. It was concluded that there needed to be a greater emphasis on safety and a more tailored and intensive ‘needs-led’ approach than is currently being delivered.
Police decision making
A significant number of children, including those involved in serious offences, were being dealt with informally, often by police alone and without YJS involvement. Worringly, inspectors found cases where children were incorrectly told they had to complete interventions or face prosecution, which was both inaccurate and potentially coercive.
The NPCC child gravity matrix was not routinely being used by the police. In 179 police-only decision cases, there was evidence that the NPCC child gravity matrix had only been used in 35. Occasionally, tensions were found between the police and partner agencies over final disposal decisions, particularly in cases involving knives.
In some instances, Outcome 20 and Outcome 21 were used inappropriately for serious offences, which undermined the concerning nature of the crimes and the need for appropriate responses. The inspection found that there was a ‘widespread and largely unmonitored use of Outcome 20’ which raised concerns about whether children and communities were kept safe and victims supported.
Partnerships and services
Access to education and interventions for emotional health and wellbeing often remained unmet at the end of an out of court resolution. Support either arrived too late, ended too early or lacked proper exit and onward planning. Children on the edge of the justice system remained at significant risk of further escalation.
Victims’ services needed to improve to ensure effective engagement processes to uphold the Victims’ Code and amplify victims’ voices. This is particularly needed for child victims whose age and maturity must be carefully considered.
Interventions were not always jointly planned, delivered, reviewed or sustained. When services were available, referrals were not always made or were declined for unclear reasons. There was limited analysis of engagement and referral patterns.
Recommendations
Both inspectorates called for a more consistent approach with clearer guidance and stronger governance and a total of 18 recommendations have been made. Many of the recommendations focus on improved data collection and evaluation, however, it has also been recommended that:
- The Home Office and Ministry of Justice remove youth cautions from the out-of-court disposal framework, and explore the feasibility of introducing statutory deferred prosecution schemes and statutory provision for community resolutions.
- The NPCC amends the child gravity matrix guidance so that any divergence of more than one score must be authorised by an officer of at least the rank of police inspector.
- The NPCC Community Resolutions Guidance is amended to include standardised wording for community resolution forms, to ensure consistency and to prohibit the use of coercive wording.
- The NPCC work with the Youth Justice Board and Home Office to develop new guidance in relation to the use of Outcome 20 and 21. This should include referral to youth justice services when appropriate (in accordance with the NPCC child gravity matrix guidance)
- The police always use the NPCC child gravity matrix when making decisions and ensure that children’s rights are met before issuing a community resolution.
- Youth Justice Managers improve the quality of assessment, planning and service devlivery so that they focus on supporting the child and keeping them and other people safe and consider the nature of risk and safety concerns for each child, and match this with the skillset and experience of staff when allocating work.
Commentary
It is positive that there is a broad consensus on the importance of avoiding the unnecessary criminalisation of children and that not only has the use of out of court resolutions increased significantly, but the profiles of the children receiving them has also changed. The YJS positively impacts the lives of children across the country on a daily basis, and it is encouraging to see that their excellent work in engaging children has been recognised in this report.
Those representing children in contact with the Youth Justice System are unlikely to be surprised that the police are not routinely using the NPCC child gravity matrix when making decisions on out of court resolutions, however, it is very worrying to learn that there have been instances where children have been given inaccurate and potentially coercive information. The recommendations on clearer guidance and standardised forms will hopefully prevent this from reoccuring. However, it remains to be seen how amending the child gravity matrix so that any divergence of more than one score must be authorised by an officer of at least the rank of police inspector will improve outcomes for children. The success of the recommendations will depend partly on whether police decision makers receive good training on how to use the matrix, the core legal principles of the youth justice system and the key tenets of “child centred policing”.
Written by
Sabrina Neves, Supervising Solicitor, GT Stewart Solicitors & Advocates