Agenda item

The Youth Offender Team (YOT) had remained largely unchanged since the service reported to the Panel on 26^th October 2016. The main forms of criminality within their clientele were violence, theft and robbery.

The service was performing relatively well, and all 3 national key performance indicators (KPIs) were on track to be rated ‘green’ by the end of the year. However, it was likely that local KPIs would not fare so well, with education and employment in particular a cause for concern.

The Charlie Taylor Report (and the ensuing Government response) had been issued since October 2016. Nationally, YOTs were seen as performing well and making visible progress. As a result, radical change to the system was not being advocated. Nevertheless, greater flexibility was being encouraged, and YOT would be consulting with the Youth Justice Board and SBC officers to evaluate its actions. An action plan would be circulated in March 2017, which would be used to commence further engagement and consultation.

(At this point, Cllr Chohan entered the meeting at 6.58pm)

YOT had shrunk; instead partnership working with external agencies and the use of other available resources such as health, speech and language was being developed. Statutory partners (e.g. police) and voluntary organisations (e.g. youth centres) were involved in this; all aspects of the service (from preventive work to interventions for high risk individuals) were included within the service.

YOT’s main concerns regarding recent activity was the rise in sexual offences and the increasingly young profile of violent offenders. These matters were the subject of organised activity. As part of this, YOT had moved from remedial work to preventative action; 40% of its work was now preventative, when previously this would have been nearer 10%.

The Panel raised the following points in discussion:

·  YOT were aware of reports regarding drug use and resulting anti-social behaviour. An event offering a presentation on young people and group behaviour was due to be presented at the Curve in February 2017. In particular, YOT were aware of the influence exerted by older brothers or other family members and how that could affect behaviour. As a result, work was targeting youngsters and their families in a systematic fashion; schools would also be involved as appropriate. The challenge would be to change the environment when those around the child in question did not want there to be a change.

·  With the exception of most clients being young boys (although some girls were also amongst cases being received), no particular demographic was either dominating the caseload or absent from it. In addition, whilst some cases involved people arriving from London, this was not the root cause of any rising forms of criminal activity. It was to be welcomed that extreme cases such as murders had been avoided in Slough.

·  Young people who were not in education, employment or training (NEET) may find themselves in this situation for a variety of reasons. Some were not sufficiently engaged with the service, others’ behaviour may mean that establishments were unwilling to take them on. Employers could also be reluctant to become involved with any young people with a history of offending. Cases were discussed and possible routes out of their situations were investigated. YOT were also due to meet with Wellbeing and Community Services to pin down actions for specific cases which were proving hard to resolve; the impact of all these actions on overall statistics would be monitored.

·  The performance indicator for NEETs had been red in 2015 – 16 and looked very likely to remain so in 2016 – 17. The target for young people to be in employment, education or training was 60%; at present, it was 32.3% for 2016 – 17. As a result, the Panel requested that the Panel receive an update on this once the current year was complete. This would then be an agenda item in 2017 – 18. It was also requested that this would include the priorities in the Justice Plan which were currently red:

-  Action 3: Develop qualitative practice / work with troubled families / families first.

-  Action 17: Consider how GP representation will benefit the work of YOT.

-  Action 18: Work with CACI to improve database.

·  Given the changing demographics of Slough, it was anticipated that the number of young men in the area would increase. Early help work was being set up for this, and relevant organisations were being approached. YOT would not wait for people to offend, but rather identify those at risk and prevention or early intervention was being stressed.

·  An increased number of clients were being identified as having special educational needs. However, it was unclear as to whether this was due to improved diagnosis or a reflection of the reality of the cohort itself. The team also had a dedicated mental health worker, who would receive references in cases where this was identified as a contributing factor.

·  YOT had a mandatory duty to report to the Out Of Court Disposal Panel. There was also a YOT Management Board and presented an Annual Report to SCST’s Board. However, at present it reported to no other SBC committees; the Panel may wish to consider which bodies may wish to hear from it.

Resolved:

1.  That the Panel receive an information sheet updating on progress regarding NEETs and actions 3, 17 and 18 when available.

2.  That the Panel take an agenda item regarding these matters in 2017 – 18.