Statistical Return to the MAPPA Co-Ordinator

Statistical Return to the MAPPA Co-ordinator: (4.5)

The Responsible Authority is required to report the total number of MAPPA eligible offenders in the community and should be able to provide a monthly figure. This means that each of those with statutory supervision/care responsibilities must report a monthly figure to the relevant MAPPA Co-ordinator. These figures do not require identifiable data to be supplied, i.e. it is a statistical return only. Many offenders will be supervised by more that one agency. To avoid double counting, agencies should report as follows:

 Police – Category 1 offenders managed at level 1;  Probation – Category 2 offenders subject to Probation Service supervision at MAPPA level 1;  YOTs – Category 2 offenders subject to supervision by Youth Offending Teams at MAPPA level 1;

Disclosure to Offender of MAPPA status: (4.8)

It is good practice for offenders to know that they are being managed through MAPPA, what MAPPA is and what this means for them. The MAPPA leaflet, ‘Information for Offenders’, should be utilised for this purpose

Offenders (and their representatives) should therefore be excluded from MAPP meetings.

The offender should, however, be allowed the opportunity to present written information to the MAPP meeting through their offender/case manager or for this person to provide information on their behalf. Offenders (and, in the case of young people, their parents) should not become abstracted from the process of assessing and managing the risks they present. It is good practice for offenders to know that they are being managed through MAPPA, what MAPPA is and what this means for them.

The RA should ensure that there is a clearly stated mechanism for informing offenders, both before and after MAPP meetings, and that the information shared is fully recorded in minutes and case records. There are some cases where information about MAPPA should be withheld from the offender on the grounds that it may increase their risk. This decision must be agreed at a MAPP meeting and the reason(s) clearly recorded in the MAPP meeting minutes and case record(s). As the offender will not know they are being discussed at MAPP meetings, there is a greater onus on the agencies to ensure the accuracy and currency of the data they are sharing. Individual agencies should have in place procedures to cover this.

Disclosure (6.7 & 13.8)

In all Category 1 and 2 cases managed at level 1, the initial Risk Management Plan must address disclosure. This decision should be reviewed, as necessary, to take into account any change of circumstances or a significant event and, as a minimum, every four months. This four-monthly review will require a check of the agency’s case management system and/or ViSOR record to ascertain whether there has been any new information which affects the original risk assessment and the decision to disclose.

There is, however, an additional factor; that of harm to the child or young person, which could occur due to disclosure taking place. This type of issue will always need careful consideration and, after any initial disclosure to the education services and/or the Head teacher, a discussion should take place as to who additionally needs to know and how the risks can be effectively managed.

In order to ensure that the proper considerations have been taken into account, no decision regarding whether or not disclosure should take place can be made unless a senior representative of both the YOT and Children’s Services are present at the MAPP Meeting.

Information Sharing: (13.5)

Guidance from the Youth Justice Board requires YOTs to record the following on the case record:  When information was provided;  What the information was provided;  With whom the information was shared; and  The purpose of sharing it.

Formal and consistent protocols must be established between YOTs and MAPPA agencies which ensure that:

 Confidentiality and security are emphasised;  There is an agreement that information will be confidentially stored;  Those accountable for the flow of information are identified; and  It is clear how and under what circumstances that information may be used.

MAPPA Reviews: (10.5 & 11.14)

The RA must have arrangements in place to ensure that the management of all level 1 cases in Categories 1 and 2 in the community are reviewed at least once every four months and that performance against this standard is monitored and reported to the SMB. The level 1 review must:  Identify any new information relating to the case which has an effect upon the risk assessment and Risk Management Plan;  Review the Risk Management Plan and revise it, as necessary. This includes recording whether the case now requires a referral to MAPPA level 2 or 3; and  Set the date for the next review.

It is a MAPPA Co-ordination/Management function to monitor the timeliness of reviews.

Some level 1 (ordinary agency managed) cases may require a multi-agency meeting to share information to ensure that all the risk factors are identified and the risks are being effectively managed. The lead agency managing the case, generally the police, the Probation Service, the Youth Offending Team or Mental Health service, will identify when a meeting is necessary and will co-ordinate it, recording the decisions made on the relevant case management records.

 All level 3 cases are reviewed every 4 to 6 weeks;  All level 2 cases are reviewed every 8 to 12 weeks; and  All level 1 cases should be reviewed every 4 months.

Parole Reports: (11.19)

Offender Managers preparing reports for the Parole Board or a Pre-Sentence Report (PSR) for court must not quote a MAPP meeting as a source of information. Where the OM wishes to use a specific piece of information that has been shared at a level 2 or 3 MAPP meeting, they must first consult the agency that provided it to seek approval to use the information in a report. The information must be attributed to the agency and the content agreed with the agency representative who attended the MAPP meeting. MAPPA Guidance Section 11

Where an offender is being, or will be, actively managed at MAPPA level 2 or 3 in the community, the report writer may wish to explain this in the report. It is essential that where MAPPA management is referred to that this is properly explained and, that in doing this, it adds to the risk assessment provided in the report.

Identification: (13.2 & 10.3.1)

Youth Offending Teams will use a separate form to identify their MAPPA offenders (MAPPA Form F) but should use MAPPA Form A to make a referral to a level 2 or 3 MAPP meeting.

Whenever a child or young person is being discussed at a MAPP meeting, the meeting must ensure that it considers its responsibilities to safeguard and promote the welfare of children as well as the risk of harm the young offender presents to others. Children’s Services should always be represented at MAPP meetings.

The identification should take place within 3 days of sentence and the YOT must notify the MAPPA Co-ordinator using MAPPA Form F providing the following information:  Full name;  Address;  Date of birth;  Aliases;  Name of parent/guardian (responsible adult);  Their address if different from child/young person’s;  Offence – with brief summary of details of the offence;  Sentence – providing details of the sentencing court, date of sentence, the actual sentence and any conditions, date of release from custody where relevant and expiry date of sentence/supervision;  Risk assessment – what is the level of risk identified and which tools have been used;  Risk Management Plan – outline plan;  In the case of a looked after child, the name(s) of the Social Worker and any other professional involved;  Employment, education status and any issues;  Warning markers – risk to named person, to self, to children, to staff, to the public;  Links with organisations and religions;  Known associates;  Any other significant information, for example, drug or alcohol use. The YOT will undertake an internal review of all its MAPPA Category 1 and 2 cases and identify which of its cases will be managed at level 1, ordinary agency management; this is likely to be the majority of cases. In these cases, the YOT will work with the young person following YJB policy, procedures and standards.

A YOT cannot identify a case as requiring management at MAPPA level 2 or 3 and then decide that because they are a multi-agency team, they do not have to make a referral to the MAPPA Co-ordinator as they believe they can manage the case themselves as a MAPPA level 2 or 3 case.

All agencies who are responsible for the management of MAPPA offenders (police, the Probation Service, Youth Offending Teams (YOTs) and Mental Health services) must have in place a means for assessing all their MAPPA eligible offenders who they manage on community orders and those who are in custody or detained in hospital no later than six months prior to their release into the community, preferably earlier. This early assessment will allow cases to be referred to MAPPA level 2 or 3 meetings, as appropriate, in a timely way.

PPO and MAPPA cases: (4.10)

Where an offender has been convicted of a sexual or violent offence(s), they may also qualify as a MAPPA eligible offender. When this occurs, the area must make the decision whether to manage the offender under the PPO procedures or whether they will actively manage them at level 2 or 3 under the MAPP arrangements. The decision should take into account the following:  The level of risk involved;  The risk of serious harm they pose to others; and  The likelihood of re-offending.

Where the offender is assessed as requiring active multi-agency management at MAPPA level 2 or 3, the offender should be de-registered as a PPO and must be dealt with under MAPPA. Any MAPPA Risk Management Plan must take into account the additional factors that were being addressed with the offender under the PPO procedures.

LSCB: (13.9)

The YOT case worker will play a pivotal role in ensuring that there is no duplication of effort and that actions from one meeting do not conflict with actions from the other as this will undermine their effectiveness. Due to the evolving nature of third party disclosure of MAPPA offender details, it is advised that the LSCB is made aware of the cases where disclosure is made on an offender aged under 18 years and that local monitoring of such cases takes place.

Attendance at MAPPA meetings: (13.7)

The MAPP meeting should ensure that the YOT case worker attends to provide details of the case. Where the YOT case worker (or, in their absence, their line manager) fails to attend the meeting, then it must be postponed. A YOT manager, of sufficient seniority to be able to act as consultant to the MAPP meeting Chair, should also be present at all meetings to ensure that the additional factors (that it is a child or young person who is being discussed) are properly and fully addressed. This should also assist in identifying potential additional resources which are required. If, as part of the MAPPA RMP, licence conditions are discussed, it is essential that any additional licence conditions proposed are proportionate to the level of risk identified.

The YOT manager is not there to represent the Local Authority; this task should be undertaken by a different person. Whenever a child or young person is being discussed at a MAPP meeting, a representative of Children’s Services must also be present to ensure that decisions take into account the child or young person’s needs.

Duty to Co-operate: (2.1 & 24.6)

The memorandum each RA must draw up with the agencies in its area, should clearly describe the ways in which they agree to co-operate. The specific activities involved in co- operation will be determined by the circumstances of each case. The type of activities that co- operation will involve can be broken down into four areas:

 Providing single points of contact for other agencies: channels of communication will be supported by each agency providing MAPPA single points of contact, who should be people who have a basic understanding of how MAPPA works locally, know how their agency fits in, have ready access to agency data on individuals known to the agency and/or can direct others to the appropriate person or department within their agency;

 Providing general advice about an agency’s role and the type of services it provides. This includes advice about how services can be accessed;

 Providing specific advice about the assessment and/or the management of the risks a particular offender poses; and  Co-ordination: this key partnership function requires each agency to carry out its responsibilities in a way which at best complements the work of other agencies, or at the least does not undermine their work.

The YJB strongly recommends that YOTs ensure adequate representation on the SMB in all areas.

Responsible Authorities must ensure that the core functions of MAPPA are established across the agencies and procedures are in place to:

 Identify all MAPPA offenders (see Section 4 – Identification of MAPPA Offenders);  Share information safely and securely (see Section 5 – Information Sharing);  Risk assess offenders (see Section 7 – Risk Assessment); and  Risk manage offenders through the most