. 1-ý-ý ý1ý ..jý Youth Justice at the Interface: The Development of a Multi-professional Team in a Multi-agency Partnership Paul Rigby Thesissubmitted for the degreeof Doctor of Philosophy Departmentof Applied Social Science University of Stirling 2005 i ý, I declarethat none of the work contained in this thesis has been submitted for any other degreeat any university. The contents of this thesis have been composed by Paul Rigby. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express my thanks to my supervisors, Professor Gill McIvor and Dr Margaret Malloch, for the support, guidance and advice they provided during the course of this thesis. Their expertise proved invaluable on numerous occasions. Thanks to the ESRC who provided the funding that enabled me to make the decision to undertake the research in the first place. Thanks also to Falkirk Council for additional support. Finally, I am grateful to all those individuals, and organisations, who agreedto participate in the researchby sharing their experienceswith me. CONTENTS ABSTRACT 5 Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION 7 Chapter 2 YOUTH JUSTICE POLICY 15 Incidence of youth crime in Scotland 16 Conceptual frameworks for youth justice 22 (The welfare justice debate) Historical and internationalpolicy developments 29 Youth justice in Scotland 46 Conclusion 57 Chapter 3 THE POLICY OF PARTNERSHIP IN A MANAGERIALIST, EVIDENCE-BASED FRAMEWORK 59 Governance and corporatism in New Labour's `Third Way' 60 Evidence-based policy and practice 67 Working together in multi-agency partnerships 81 Partnership policy in Scotland 98 Conclusion 107 Chapter 4 YOUTH JUSTICE IN FALKIRK 110 Strategicmanagement 111 Connect 114 FreagarrachFalkirk 118 Connectand Freagarrach inter-agency partnership 120 Developmentsin 2005 124 2 Chapter 5 METHODS 125 Ethical research 130 Changingfocus - developmentsin policy andresearch design 132 Researchin context- the casestudy 135 Methods- implementationfrom theory to practice 138 Conclusion 167 Chapter 6 PERCEPTIONS OF POLICY 169 (Consensus or disagreement with policy directions) Integration of national and local policy 170 Policy at the interface of the child and adult systems 175 The role of Connect in local youth justice policy 192 Conclusion 195 Chapter 7 DELIVERY OF SERVICES AND NATURE OF INTERVENTIONS 199 Referral andassessment 200 Structuredintervention or `programmes'- the contentof services 221 Effectivenessof services 228 Conclusion 237 Chapter 8 A MULTI-PROFESSIONAL TEAM IN A MULTI-AGENCY PARTNERSHIP 243 Connect- the multi-professionalteam 243 Falkirk - the multi-agencypartnership 259 Casemanagement 264 Communicationand information sharing 275 Conclusion 281 3 Chapter 9 CONCLUSIONS 287 Multi-professional team 288 Multi-agency working 291 National implications 296 Futureresearch 302 Concludingcomments 303 REFERENCES 307 APPENDICES 1. Youth Crime Review recommendations 335 2. Ten Point Action Plan 336 3. Definitions of partnership and Falkirk arrangements 337 4. Chronology of research, policy and practice 339 5. Composite interview schedule 341 6. Sourceof referralsto the Youth JusticeReferral Group 346 7. Communityjustice accreditationpanel - programmedefinition 347 7. Connectprogramme `menu' 348 4 ABSTRACT This thesisinvestigates the developmentof a multi-professionalyouth justice team in Falkirk, Central Scotland,established following the Scottish Executive(2000) Youth Crime Review. The contribution of the multi-professionalteam was examined in relation to the potential benefits of having a range of professionals in one team operating in broader partnership arrangements. The extent that these arrangements facilitated implementation of evidence- based practice was also explored. Local strategy was analysed as a constituent of national policy, as Scotland began to develop a youth justice system containing aspects of the `Third Way' corporatist, managerial model evident in England and Wales. The multi-professionalyouth justice project of Connectwas the focus of the thesis, although close multi-agency networks necessitated analysis of wider partnership arrangements. Employing a multi-methodscase study approachmaximised the availabledata andprovided a rich understandingof the context and processesof local policy development.Interviews with a range of stakeholdersin the Falkirk areaconstituted the primary data source,supported by observationof the working arrangements,document analysis and secondarystatistical data. Elementsof action researchallowed ongoing data to be utilised by Falkirk Council to develop serviceprovision while the researchprogressed. Findings are examinedin relation to the wider theoretical implications of adopting a `what works' agendain a youth justice systemthat has, for over thirty years,been predicatedon a diversionary welfare principle. The arrangementsin Falkirk may provide a model for multi- professionalyouth justice work that doesnot embracea centralised,punitive agenda. 5 The research indicated that a multi-professional project could make a positive contribution to wider multi-agency arrangements, supporting the government aims of increased partnership working. It also suggestedthat operational developments,facilitated by practitioners in a bottom-up approach,could implement change capable of delivering services utilised and appreciatedby serviceusers, and meetingthe standardsset by the Scottish Executive.Further research will be necessaryto provide evidence regarding the effectivenessof specific partnershiparrangements in reducing offending and improving the circumstancesof young people. While the individual natureof local authority responsesto the Youth Crime Review indicates that a national solution may not be desirable,the findings from Falkirk provide data about thosefactors that may facilitate or inhibit developmentsin partnershipworking, which is now part of the framework of youth justice provision in Scotland. Individual case studies can provide evidencethat youth justice practicein Scotlandcan retain a local, child centredfocus. Such evidencemay halt further moves towards a `one size fits all' justice model, which predominatesin Englandand Wales. 6 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION Contemporary international public concern about youth offending is widespread, with a particular public perception that juvenile violence is increasing (UNICEF 1998; de Boer- Buqhicchio 2003). In the UK there is an intense political and media spotlight on all aspects of criminal and anti-social behaviour by young people, with frequent reference in the Scottish 1 media and Parliament to `neds' (Barnes 2004; BBC 2003). Despite these concerns, evidence about the extent to which young people are involved in offending behaviour, and the efficacy of responses, remains difficult to ascertain at both national and international level (Buckland in and Stevens 2001). Where there is some consensus is the departure, since the 1970s most jurisdictions, from responses based on welfare and needs to a justice based response Care concerned with just deserts and proportionality (Bala and Bromwich 2002). and protection and offending issues are increasingly separated and, particularly in the USA and England and Wales, justice for young people is now seen as being based primarily on a punitive model (Muncie 2004; Smith R 2003). Since 1997 in the UK, modernisedpolicy making (Nutley et al 2003) predicated on the corporatistgovernance of youth justice (Pratt 1989; Pitts 2003) has increasinglyfocussed on an evidence-based,`what works' framework (see Whyte 2004a; Vennard et al 1997) underpinnedby a managerialist agenda(Muncie and Hughes 2002). Some commentators view this responseto young peoplewho offend as an abdication of responsibility by the state to address some of the underlying causesof offending behaviour by focussing on the ' 'Nods' is a derogatoryterm applied to young peopleinvolved in offending or anti-socialbehaviour. Thought to have originatedin Glasgow it is often believed to be an acronym of 'non-educateddelinquents' or the abridged version of Edward attached to 'teddy-boys' (see www.chavscum. co. uk and www. urbandictionary.com/define). 7 `responsibilisation' of young people (Goldson 2002; Muncie 2004; Smith R 2003). Others view it as an opportunity to finally overcome the idea that `nothing works' and provide servicesto young people that can meet their needsthrough a much welcomed injection of funds and systematicworking practices,underpinned by a strong evidencebase (Newburn 2002; Burnett and Appleton 2004). Smith D (2003) believesthere is not enoughevidence at the moment to support any definitive commentsabout the operation and efficacy of youth justice service provision in the UK. While the development of the youth justice system in Scotland has been influenced by these broader UK political and theoretical discourses, like the adult criminal justice system (McIvor 2004; McNeill 2004), youth justice has largely remained free of the more punishmentbased approachesevident in England and Wales (Smith 2000a). Despite a few modifications, the Children's Hearings System set up in the early 1970s following the Kilbrandon report (SHHD 1964) andthe 1968 Social Work (Scotland)Act, has remainedthe primary system for dealing with young people in need of care and protection and / or involved in offending behaviour. The Hearings Systemdiverts young people from formal court processingand ensuresthe best interest of the child is the foremost consideration. However, it is in the processof undergoinga major review to ascertainif it still meets the needs of young people and the community in the