Produced by the Community Safety Research team: Sam Graves, Jan 2015 Please contact csresearchers@portsmouthcc.gov.uk for further information
Briefing Note: Summary of findings from the Evaluation of Youth Restorative Disposal Interventions by the Youth Offending Team in Portsmouth conducted by CGL Bosham Ltd, 2014 (Ellis, T., Lewis, C., Nee, C. & Jenkins, C.) Introduction Youth Restorative Disposals (YRDs, also known as triage in Portsmouth1), provided a quick and proportionate response to low-level offending and diverted some young offenders from entering the youth justice system (YJS). They were designed to be an effective disposal, supported by the victim that provided a learning opportunity for young people to appreciate the impact of their behaviour. As indicated in the name 'Youth Restorative Disposals', there is an expectation that there would be some element of restorative justice. The triage program in Portsmouth began in December 2009, originally focusing on the city centre, but soon expanding city-wide. Young people referred for triage in Portsmouth attended an assessment and a minimum of two further sessions where they were encouraged to think about the consequences of their actions, both for the victim (and victim’s family), and for their own future (this is tailored to the individual’s needs). A short report2 was prepared in March 2012 which found that young people who were suitable for a YOT triage intervention were much less likely to re-offend in the following 12 months than those who were not, although it was not possible to say whether this was due to their existing low risk of re-offending or the actual intervention. Further research was commissioned to evaluate Portsmouth Youth YRD) interventions by exploring:
Whether differences in reoffending rates between those who received Triage and those who did not related to the differing levels of risk of reoffending or the Triage intervention itself. Which interventions were most effective
There were three parts to this evaluation: a literature review, data collected from the Youth Offending Information System (YOIS) and interviews with Youth Offending Team Staff, young people and their supporters. While Triage interventions have recently been subsumed into the new out of court disposals (OOCD) The Legal Aid, Punishment and Offenders Act 2012, the interventions themselves remain very similar so this research still has currency. The new OOCDs are community resolutions, youth cautions and youth conditional cautions.
1
2
YRDs differ from triage in some areas of the country
Graves (2012) Briefing Note: Evaluating Triage Interventions by the Youth Offending Team in Portsmouth. Safer Portsmouth Partnership - available from the CS Research Team.
1
Produced by the Community Safety Research team: Sam Graves, Jan 2015 Please contact csresearchers@portsmouthcc.gov.uk for further information
Main Findings The literature review identified existing evaluations of Triage interventions3 and drew out the main recommendations, which were:
Good inter-agency working Integrated training of staff Good and accessible triage monitoring systems and full recording of outcomes Effective feedback about monitoring and evaluation results to stakeholders Good links with supporting services Proper acknowledgement of Triage as a police disposal and integration into custody practice.
This research compared a cohort in 2010 who received Triage interventions with a matched control group from 2009 before Triage was available. It was found that when subjects were matched by Asset scores4, offence types and gravity scores, the Triage group had significantly fewer reconvictions. This supports findings from the earlier 2012 research conducted by the Community Safety (CS) Research Team. Asset scores were not found to be a reliable measure of impact in comparison to changes in reconvictions. Summary of findings from Interviews: Staff Interviews (n6)
Triage arrangements up to the disaggregation from Wessex YOT had worked well. The police referral of cases to the Portsmouth YOT for community resolution (CR) has almost dried up since April 2013 when CRs superseded Triage. This is thought to be partly due to lack of confidence in the new disposal. At the time of the research police have had no training to boost knowledge which was felt to be contributing to the lack of confidence in CRS, though we were assured this was now in hand. There was a need to solve the problem of how police can get YOT advice and information for out of hours cases, in a similar way to CPS Direct provision in adult cases. Senior management is in full support of the new CR arrangements. Unit costs of Triage were very low, around £200 a case, which is in line with results from elsewhere. There appeared to be a lack of restorative justice in triage interventions
3
For full details please refer to the original report by CGL Bosham (2013) Evaluation of Youth Restorative (Triage) Disposal Interventions by the Youth Offending Team in Portsmouth available from CS Research Team. 4 Asset scores are the scores given as a result of an assessment of aspects of a young person's life and whether there is an association with their offending behaviour. A high Asset score would indicate a young person has a higher risk of reoffending.
2
Produced by the Community Safety Research team: Sam Graves, Jan 2015 Please contact csresearchers@portsmouthcc.gov.uk for further information
Interviews with Young People who had received Triage (n4)
As a group, the young people who were interviewed were equivocal on whether they felt Triage had been effective. None of those interviewed had gone on to commit further offences, which supports the findings of the secondary analysis. However, reasons for this lack of re-offending were associated by the young people as much with the fact they had been caught by the police, as to any action taken by the Triage team. This is in line with a body of previous research showing that deterrence is more dependent on the certainly of being caught, and the speed of any resulting action, than on the specific intervention. No detail regarding the content of the interventions was given so it was not possible to ascertain whether there was a variation between types of intervention.
Interviews with supporters5 of young people (n3)
Supporters accepted the Triage intervention, but would have preferred other action for their young person There was a variety of views about effectiveness of Triage: one parent said Triage was not effective at all; another claimed it was very effective; while the third thought it was moderately effective.
Summary and conclusions In summary, the results are broadly positive, suggesting that Triage does have an impact on reoffending. However, the interviews with parents and young people suggest that this may be because they got caught rather than the intervention. This research was conducted at a time when the YRDs were being replaced with new out of court disposals, which meant that staff tended to be focussed on the implementation of the new disposals and the current system. It was acknowledged that the number of community resolutions referred by the police was less than expected and the interviews with staff have identified the lack of confidence in the new disposals as a contributing factor. It was anticipated by staff that this would be addressed with training for police officers and monitoring of the numbers of CRs is recommended. The interviews with staff highlighted that restorative justice was not used very much within triage interventions and that there was a considerable delay before YOT involvement in a small number of cases. It was suggested that delivery of the interventions could be improved by providing a YOT out of hours service. Some staff felt that there was a need for simple accessible summary statistics to facilitate more informed practice and boost police confidence in the new CR arrangements. Finally, the interviews with supporters suggest that 5
Supporters in all cases were parents.
3
Produced by the Community Safety Research team: Sam Graves, Jan 2015 Please contact csresearchers@portsmouthcc.gov.uk for further information
incorporating the views of parents/guardians and victims could enhance the decision making around the type of intervention.
4