Issue - meetings

This report seeks approval to the Youth Justice Plan which has been developed following discussions and consultations with partner agencies via the Youth Offending Team (YOT) Management Board and the requirements by the Youth Justice Board to submit a costed plan in respect of the Effective Practice Grant to the Youth Offending Team.

Discussion:

This report provided details of the Youth Justice Plan which had been developed following discussions and consultations with partner agencies via the Youth Offending Team (YOT) Management Board and the requirements by the Youth Justice Board to submit a costed plan in respect of the Effective Practice Grant to the Youth Offending Team. This report had been considered by the Children and Young People Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 9 December 2014 and Cabinet on 16 December 2014 in accordance with the Council’s Policy Framework rules.

A copy of the executive summary and full version of the Diversity Impact Assessment for the YOT was attached at Appendix B to the report.

The Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services (Lead Member), Councillor O’Brien, supported by the Portfolio Holder for Community Safety and Customer Contact, Councillor Hicks, proposed the recommendation set out in the report.

Clarification was sought on page 23 of the Looked After Children Protocol in relation to the context of the term “foreign national” in relation to Looked After Children outside of England and Wales and the Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services (Lead Member) undertook for a written response to be provided to Councillor Cooper.

Decision:

The Council approved the Medway Youth Justice Plan as set out at Appendix A to the report.

Background:

This report provided details of the Medway Youth Justice Plan 2014-2016, which was attached at Appendix A to the report.

The Youth Justice Plan formed part of the Council’s policy framework and had been developed following discussions with partner agencies. It set out the aims and objectives for 2014/2016 in relation to working with young people who offend or who were at risk of offending.

The plan, which was updated annually, reflected the requirements by the Youth Justice Board to submit a costed plan in respect of their Effective Practice Grant to the Youth Offending Team.

The report explored a number of issues that could impact upon the service, this included potential changes to the funding from one or more partners and the transfer of the Junior Attendance Centre from the Ministry of Justice to local authority control. Actions to avoid or mitigate risks were also explored.

It was noted that the Children and Young People Overview and Scrutiny Committee had considered this report on 9 December 2014 and its views were set out in an addendum report.

It was noted that a Diversity Impact Assessment form had been undertaken on the draft plan and was attached at Appendix B to the report.

Reasons:

The Medway Strategic Youth Justice Plan has been refreshed and needed to be reviewed by the Children and Young People Overview and Scrutiny Committee and Cabinet.  There had been consultations with key partners and the adoption of a refreshed plan sought to address the underlying local causes of youth crime. 

This report outlines the Medway Youth Justice Plan Re-draft 2014-2016, which has been developed following discussions and consultations with partner agencies via the Youth Offending Team (YOT) Management Board and the requirements by the Youth Justice Board to submit a costed plan in respect of the Effective Practice Grant to the Youth Offending Team.

Discussion:

The Youth Offending Team (YOT) Manager introduced the report to the committee, which set out the Youth Justice Plan re-draft for 2014-16.  It had been developed following discussions with partner agencies via the YOT Management Board and a provisional version had been submitted to the Youth Justice Board which had responded favourably.

Members then asked officers questions, which included: -

• Transition from youth offending to adult services and how this was working.  The YOT Manager explained that Medway had been leading on some work around transition via a working party of the Kent and Medway Reducing Reoffending Board, which had recently been re-established to look at how transition can best be managed.  The working party was currently looking at a 6 month tapering of support so that Adult Services could work with children services three months before and three months after the young person becomes 18 years old.

• An update on the mindfulness training.  The YOT Manager explained that staff were continuing their mindfulness training and that the Medway YOT was the first YOT to adopt this approach and were working with schools, such as Silverbank Pupil Referral Unit, to deliver mindfulness workshops to pupils there.

• Work with Medway Action for Families (MAfF) helped with transition. In response to a question on how working with the MAfF Team had helped the work of the YOT, the YOT Manager explained that the teams had been working closely, with two YOT staff Members being dedicated to working on this project.  Furthermore, he added that YOT had invested half a full time equivalent post to provide functional family therapy (FFT).  Early evidence had demonstrated that reoffending of young people from families who received support under MAfF had reduced by 50% and where FFT had also been provided, reoffending had reduced by 60%.

• Review of the move to Strood.  The YOT Manager explained that the move itself had been very efficient, being completed two days before deadline and service downtime had been less than two working days.  The move had enabled a much more integrated approach with the Youth Service and owing to the premises being smaller the YOT were now holding appointments in hubs within neighbourhoods making the service more local to the user, which had proved successful.

• Representation on the YOT Management Board.  In response to a question as to whether a representative from private sector housing should be included, the YOT Manager explained that because private sector housing was so large and diverse it would be difficult to be representational and as the majority of youth offenders were placed via the Council’s Housing Services, who were represented on the Board, it was not considered necessary to include a private sector housing representative at this point.

• Preventing looked after children from becoming criminalised. Following a request for an update on this issue, the YOT Manager confirmed that this was an area of concern with around one third of young people involved with the YOT being looked after.  The YOT was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 578