The inspection

The fieldwork for this inspection involved visiting eight youth justice services (YJS) within six police force areas. HM Inspectorate of Probation inspected a total of 98 cases: 88 involving children who had received a youth community resolution or Outcome 22, and 10 involving other types of disposals. HM Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services inspected the quality of disposal decisions made by police officers.

Findings

HMIP inspectors found that there has been a substantial and sustained increase in the use of OoCDs for children, alongside a notable shift in the types of disposals being issued. The profile of children receiving them has also changed. Inspectors observed committed staff using creative approaches to engage children and families, but children require a more tailored and intensive approach than is currently being delivered.

HMICFRS inspectors concluded that the criminal justice system has not kept pace with the changes to the use of OoCDs. Inspectors found policing practices to be inconsistent and in need of greater oversight. The absence of a clear and consistent national framework has created varied approaches in local areas which raises concerns about fairness and public confidence in the system.

Both inspectorates called for a more consistent approach with stronger governance and clearer guidance. They made a total of 18 recommendations with the major ones reproduced below.

Governance and leadership

• While there was a broad consensus on the importance of avoiding the unnecessary criminalisation of children and national and local commitments to child-centred justice, the overall approach was fragmented and hindered by inadequate data and strategic direction.
• A wide variation in the use of tools such as the National Police Chief’s Council (NPCC) gravity matrix and available disposal options has created a ‘post-code lottery’ in decision making and raises concerns about fairness.
• Local youth justice partnership boards did not have a clear understanding of the overall volume of OoCDs or the effectiveness of interventions involving youth justice services (YJS) and other partners.
• Turnaround funding [see notes to editor] was generally used effectively, but the short-term and uncertain nature of some funding streams made it difficult for services to develop long-term strategies.

Policing and decision making

• This inspection found a significant number of children, including those involved in serious offences were sometimes dealt with by police alone and without YJS involvement.
• Inspectors found cases where children were incorrectly told they had to complete interventions or face prosecution, which was inaccurate and potentially coercive.
• Police officers did not routinely use the NPCC child gravity matrix and associated guidance, even in serious offences such as violent and sexual crimes. Occasionally, tensions were found between the police and partner agencies over final disposal decisions.
• 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 use of Outcome 20 was “widespread and largely unmonitored” which raised concerns about whether children and communities were kept safe.

Partnerships and services

• Access to education and interventions for emotional health and wellbeing often remained unmet at the end of an OoCD. 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.

The quality of youth justice casework

• A greater emphasis on safety for both the child and others was needed in all aspects of practice. Interventions tended to focus on the offence, rather than addressing underlying risks and safeguarding concerns which were closely linked to reoffending.
• Youth justice service staff demonstrated strong skills in engagement and their support was highly valued by children, their parents or carers.