Re-offending & Desistance

1. September 2008 Presentation Re-offending & Desistance Troy Hutchinson Information Manager Luton Youth Offending Service

2. The brief/project: • Project: Narrative based research project analysing the patterns of desistance from offending in Luton • Super Goal: The reduction of re-offending in Luton and achievement of national indicator • The study aims to produce a coherent performance management framework to research the desistance of offending behaviour, reflecting research & practice management of LYOS around the principles of ‘What works’

3. Background

4. Forward • One of the principal ‘outcome’ measures on the effectiveness of YOS • Measure is linked to public confidence in the ability of Youth Justice agencies. • Local Priority indicator under the LAA • Measure tracks Re-offenders and frequency of their behaviour across 4 Youth Justice tiers • 2008/09 ahead of CAA; streamlined Performance framework culture, therefore of more significance

5. (Background cont…) • Traditionally high rates of Recidivism in Borough • Actual re-offending levels are focused on YJB scored methodology • Luton is consistently marked a ‘Red’ indicator • Re-offending outcomes has therefore taken on greater significance.

6. Governance/Accountability • 1998 Crime and Disorder act; introduced the current multi-agency Youth Offending Teams • Enshrining the principle to “prevent offending and to Reduce Re-offending” • 2004 Children's Act; Every Child Matters • Youth Justice Board • Children’s Trust YOS standing partner • Local authority Children Services

7. Scrutiny & Interests

8. The Measure: National Indicator 19 • Random identification • Based on receipt of substantive outcome • Cohort based on 10-17 year olds • 1-year tracking period • 2008/09 introduction of quarterly reporting • Outcomes measured against 2005 Baseline • 5% Reduction target* (upto 2007/08)

9. Method Outcomes based Quarterly Performance Reporting YJB League Tables Scored outcomes Traffic Lights Commentary Outcome justification agenda Context/Comparison: Luton Baseline Reduction Target Statistical Neighbours Region National outcomes Outcomes/How monitored:

10. Published Re-offending (2007 Figures) Luton =32.8% National= 37.4% Luton was unable to achieve its reduction target of 30.4% Breakdown Re-offending outcomes against 4 tiers Pre-Court= 20% First Tier=52% Community Penalties=56% Custodial Licences= 50% Current Outcomes

11. Planning& Context

12. Signposts • Theory • Indicator-related/National policy • Desistance • Performance Management Culture • Consultation: • Focus Group • Strategic Management • Practitioners • Emerging Agenda • Priorities

13. The Traditional Debate • Numbers based (The Beast!) • YJB methodology • YOS specialism/Autonomy • Annual scrutiny • Its Luton it’s an industrial town • Blame: • “the reason is… • “it was a bad year” • “Difficult cohort” • “Staffing gaps”, “poor retention” • “We don’t really know” • The weather!

14. Performance Management Culture • Division between Strategic Management & Operational Staff • KPI’s,League Tables &Traffic Lights • External commissioning (LBC trend) • Practice focused • Reactive fire-fighting • Competing Interests: OBTJ/Compliance/Child Welfare (Tensions!) • “With time we would….” • Recognition towards planning process

15. Practitioner:

16. Management Team:

17. Consultation Process • Internal Focus Group • Informal Interviews • Service Questionnaires aimed at: • Operational Management team • Practitioners; • Strategic Management • Information/Performance Officers

18. Emerging Environment: • Post-Inspection improvement agenda • Integration of Local authority partnership • 2008 Youth Crime Action Plan & Strengthening of Children's Trust • YJB handing power back to Local authority; (YJPF sign-off, budgetary control) • Children’s Services: PIP Agenda • YOS Management board composition; New Chair= Luton DCS • Evidence based outcomes • Diversity & Access to services

19. Emerging lines of enquiry: • Re: The outcomes: • “Why are you not achieving your targets? “Tell me what you’re going to do about this”? • “What are these outcomes against the BME communities of the town”? • Re: The young people: • “Who are these young people and what are you doing about them” • How are we fulfilling Every Child Matters? • “Who else is working with these young people and their families, tell me what they are doing to help” • “Tell me what is working”

20. What do we need to know? • Effective practice • Programme Delivery (Scrutiny of Intervention plan) • Use of Resources & Programme development • Quality of Assessments & Risk Management • Cross-cutting cohorts: • Looked After Children • BME representation; Which groups? What are their needs? What are their profiles • Service improvement? • Evaluation feeding service planning

21. Analysing the Young person:

22. The Research

23. “For all information’s independence and extent, it is people in their communities, organisations and institutions, who ultimately decide what it all means and why it matters” Brown & Duguid (2000) “The question is not simply “what works for offenders as a whole?”, but “which methods work for which type of offenders and under what conditions or in what type of settings?” Palmer (1975)‘Martinson revisited’

24. *The Research & Analysis* • Action Research Cohort 1: “How important was the intervention to desistance” Jon Emanuel, YOS Case worker • Based on National Indicator Referral order cohort; • Cohort grouped by Asset Score • Pre-convictions • Gravity and Frequency of previous offending • Further Offending? • Practitioner judgement • Cohort2: Pre-Court subsets; comparing those with no intervention to those with Final Warning programmes • Cohort 3: PPO Deter Cohort; group of High risk Offenders • Cohort 4: YOS Girls Group/CIC/ Cohort; targetted for commissioned Group work

25. Delivery What form? • YOS Action Planning of Resources • Programme of targeted Data analysis • GIS • Statistical analysis • Identification of future need/pressures • Formulation of internal targets against specific cohorts

26. Model/Scorecard • Young persons/Intervention • Capture the full picture of desistance • Programme journey • Offending behaviour, pre/during/post intervention • Review

27. Planning & Evaluation Model Lewin’s Action Research Model

28. Outcomes

29. Results • Role of the Pig (Genetic engineering) • Servicing the machine; LBC, LAA structures • Research & Indicators ‘fit for our purpose’ • Enhanced knowledge and information • Evidence based research (incorporating ECM) • Youth Justice Planning Framework • Internal Framework & Evaluation • Improved profile of young offenders

30. Initial Conclusions • Focused idealism (that seeks lofty goals but also will inform & innovate but will be serviceable) • Wealth of knowledge • Awareness of limitations; danger of over- emphasising initial outcomes • Over-empathy with workers (my own Stockholm syndrome!) • Where do I now stand on What works? Nothing Works?

31. Next Steps • Research & Synthesis • Supervision Order Cohort/YRO Implementation • Research to be tabled for Service Management team • 2009/10 Supporting evidence on YOS research • Lewin’s Model