Agenda item

This report sets out the work of H&F Youth Offending Service and The Youth Crime Prevention Partnership (YCPP).  It also seeks to highlight measures that might address the disproportionate representation of black and Asian minority ethnic communities within the criminal justice system, and those in the ‘not in education or employment’ cohort.

Councillor Coleman welcomed Alison Sabaroche from the Youth Offending Service (YOS) and Children’s Services colleagues who led a presentation about the service. The aims, objectives and outcomes were framed by four key performance indicators (KPIs) which were: to reduce first time entrants to the youth justice system; reduce reoffending; minimise the use of custody suites in H&F; and a fourth key focus was to reduce the disproportionate and over representation of black and Asian minority groups within the youth justice system.  

Headline figures setting out the overall health outcomes for such groups indicated that they were likely to have experienced either one or a combination of factors including low income, hidden disabilities, and poor housing. Approximately 19% of the YOT cohort were identified as having special educational needs or disabilities, and 37% had speech and language concerns.   47% of young people had some form of contact with children and adolescent mental health services.  YOS worked with partners to achieve better outcomes focusing on KPIs to deliver initiatives such as Street Doctors training and working with a 7-borough disproportionality group.

Mandy Lawson continued that there was a broad, partnership approach to prevent H&F young people from entering the YOS.  The council was working with H&F clinical commissioning group (CCG) in undertaking a whole system review of mental health children’s services, with funding from NHS England and input from the West London NHS Trust.  This was a significant area of work with a key focus on ensuring the mental health needs of young people were fully met.  It was reported that fifteen H&F schools had access to the mental health trailblazer program.  The council was currently investing in and recruiting for a speech and language support service for school aged children without educational healthcare plans and a brief outline was provided about the diagnostic pathway for early ASD (autistic spectrum disorder) intervention.  The partnership approach included work with colleagues across the council to ensure that post-school provision and pathways were in place and signposted to help meet the aspirations of young people. 

Sue spiller commented that fear from within black and Asian minority ethnic communities indicated a huge reluctance to engage with statutory services and sought details about engagement. Alison Sabaroche responded that most staff YOS chose to work with adolescents and naturally had a skillset that allowed them to work well with families that struggled to engage.  YOS also worked with community organisations so there was a focused and hyperlocal approach to support children, who benefitted from feeling rooted within their communities.  Lisa Redfern provided an ICP perspective and how this could help support a mental health pathway which was currently underdeveloped. Jacqui McShannon concurred and stated that this had been recognised by the whole system review, including low level access to mental health support out of hours and at weekends, and the referenced trailblazer programme. Increasingly, children and young people preferred the term “emotional health and wellbeing”, rather than ‘mental health’ due to the associated stigma. It was noted that funding for mental health pathways ensured clarity and greater accountability, with both in and out of borough placements and that the review was a comprehensive piece of work.

DI Luxan Thurairatnasingam commented that the police were regarded as a reactionary service but there was an increased understanding of how to effectively address youth offending through a focus on prevention and partnership working. A RAG (red, amber, green) rating process was in place to share concerns about children who had been identified as at risk, across the MASH, safeguarding hub and multiagency partnerships, and to devise robust support interventions for families.  Kim Smith observed that Covid-19 experiences had generated significant opportunities for hybrid working.  Bereavement and trauma arising from Covid-19 or knife crime could inform out of hours and weekend services.  A wider role for the Board could be to explore and understand community resilience, a required and collective responsibility.  She continued that there had been partnership working with voluntary organisations funded to support black and minority ethnic families and communities.

An early interventionist approach to support families and prevent children entering the criminal justice system (CJS) was advocated, recognising the importance of close partnership working between schools and health partners with young people and their families. Sue Spiller suggested a checklist approach was suggested to clearly signpost triggers for referral.  DI Luxan Thurairatnasingam cautioned that it was important to distinguish between children under 16 within system and those over 16, or school leavers and those regarded as ‘not in education, employment or training’ (NEET) and that often access to support systems was hindered by a lack of information.

Philippa Johnson welcomed the points articulated to address a multifaceted problem which required a range of resources. Councillor Coleman recognised that there was a correlation between special educational need and entering the CJS.  Many children will have experienced difficulties by the time they reached 16 and Councillor Coleman asked what support schools required to identify children earlier.  Jacqui McShannon responded that there was a link between excluded pupils and those entering YOS.  They worked closely with schools to try to prevent this but recognised that a lack of resources made this challenging.  A significant reduction in youth resources in the past ten years also correlated to an increased risk of criminal exploitation of children.  Philippa Johnson emphasised that it was important to identify risk factors to tailor prevention measures accurately. Alison Sabaroche agreed that the aim was to achieve early intervention. The family support offer also considered disproportionality within it and actively aimed to seek out families that don’t normally access YOS services.

In terms of what was needed, Alison Sabaroche sought a shared commitment to look at provision and implement a workstream gap analysis to consider early intervention. Councillor Coleman and Board members welcomed Philippa Johnson’s suggestion that the issue be further explored by the ICP group within a development workshop and the findings reported back to the Board.

RESOLVED

1.    That the ICP further explores the suggestion of a multi-agency partnership approach to provide early intervention measures to enhance the family offer and look at what resources can be identified to support this; and

2.    That the report be noted.