Agenda item
National protocol on reducing the criminalisation of looked after children
This report provides details of the National protocol on reducing the criminalisation of looked after children for the committee’s consideration and information.
Minutes:
Onder Beter (Head of LAC and Permanency) introduced the report on the National Protocol on Reducing Unnecessary Criminalisation of Looked After Children (LAC) and Care Leavers. The report summarised the Protocol, outlined current practice in Brent and detailed activities underway to further sharpen Brent’s response to this issue. Members were reminded that the committee had previously received a report on ‘Brent Looked After Children and Offending Behaviour’ in October 2017, which had highlighted many of the same themes and considerations.
The Committee heard that the Protocol was jointly published by the Department for Education (DfE), Home Office and Ministry of Justice (MoJ) in November 2018. It was aimed at local authority children’s services, local care providers, youth offending services, the crown prosecution service, police, HM Courts and Tribunal Services, and local health services. The objectives and key principles of the Protocol focussed on a practice model that aimed to introduce preventative measures, reduce re-offending behaviour and rehabilitate young people who had offended via joint working between relevant agencies. The protocol drew attention to the impact of previous trauma, attachment issues and specific vulnerabilities of looked after children and care leavers and recommended the use of child centred, restorative approaches to address challenging offending behaviour.
Onder Beter advised that Brent was already proactive at ensuring LAC were not unnecessarily criminalised and the principles of the protocol were already embedded in much of the work of the council at both a strategic and operational level. Members heard that Brent’s Practice Framework included a restorative approach, which was used as appropriate by the Brent Youth Offending Service (YOS). The council had also embedded the Signs of Safety model across its social work practice and provided interventions in line with the suggested practice model. Whilst LAC young people continued to be over represented in the youth justice system, it was encouraging that the overall number of LAC young people supported by the YOS in Brent had reduced from 32 to 24 between June 2017 and January 2019. Onder Beter advised that further work was still required, particularly with regard to Care Leavers. The LAC and Permanency Service had developed strong relationships with the YOS and other partners but further work was needed to continue to sharpen practice and to improve the connection with the Probation Service.
The Chair thanked Onder Beter for the introduction to the report and invited questions and contributions from the committee.
Members sought further information about the preventative interventions provided by the council and its partners, and how young people were supported to cease offending behaviour, including exiting gang activity. Members noted that living in areas of high crime and deprivation was a commonly observed theme for the cohort of LAC and care leavers who had come into contact with offending, alongside difficulties relating to custody and resettlement in the community. It was subsequently questioned what actions were taken to address these issues, what further work was required in this area and to what degree these issues were prioritised when identifying an appropriate placement for a child. Comment was sought with regard to another theme highlighted in the report relating to inconsistent outcomes for children placed in residential homes. A member noted that 58 per cent of the 24 Brent LAC young people supervised by YOS in January 2019 had committed drugs offences and questioned whether these were serious drug offences, noting that it would be concerning if a young person were to receive a Referral Order for a minor possession offence. Questions were also raised regarding the support provided to Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking Children (UASC).
In response to the committee’s queries, Nigel Chapman (Operational Director, Integration and Improved Outcomes) explained that there were a variety of Brent specific programmes provided via the YOS to support young people’s exit from gang and knife crime activity. It was noted that the numbers of young people classed as first time entrants to the criminal justice system were small and the focus for this cohort was to divert them to programmes aimed at preventing further criminalisation. It was clarified that the YOS supported young people under the age of 18. Those aged 18 years old and over would fall under the remit of the Probation Service. It was further highlighted that in response to a recommendation from the council’s outcome based review of gangs, an Accelerated Support Team had been established to quickly provide a greater presence where needed and offer a combination of support. It was noted that being excluded from school was a contributing factor to vulnerability. There was a positive direction of travel in Brent in this regard with smaller numbers of permanent and fixed exclusions than previous years, and Brent’s schools working with the council to help these children and young people remain in the school system.
Onder Beter addressed members’ queries regarding housing difficulties and priorities for placement of LAC young people leaving secure accommodation/prison. It was explained that for those under 18, a resettlement meeting was held to plan and co-ordinate the wrap around support for a young person – this included placement options. Some young people would be placed outside of Brent for their safety. It was emphasised that the greater challenge lay in supporting Care Leavers, particularly where there were license conditions in place which prevented their returning to certain areas. It was clarified that the Probation Service was responsible for identifying suitable accommodation for those aged 18 and over leaving prison but a care leaver’s Personal Advisor would advocate for the young person in such circumstances. There had been examples of where the council and the Probation Service had worked together to deliver a really good rehabilitation package but work was required to further develop this relationship. There were Probation officers located within the YOS and the Brent Family Front Door service. The key issue for the council was to ensure that recommendations made in partnership with the YOS via the YOS Management Board were also driven through for care leavers. It was explained that the Board reported to the Safer Brent Partnership which included Probation Service representation.
Gail Tolley (Strategic Director, Children and Young People) informed the committee that there were 6 privately run residential children’s homes in Brent; however, the council would only place children in residential homes outside of the borough due to the associated risks of these placements. It was acknowledged that some children’s homes did not manage challenging behaviours very well and had been found for instance, to escalate matters to the police when situations could have been dealt with in a more positive way. Nigel Chapman advised that there had been progress in addressing some of the issues with residential children’s homes. Ofsted had recently closed a number of residential homes across the country in response to a range of issues. There were now more residential children’s homes rated Good or Outstanding by Ofsted but there was also a reduction in capacity across the system. Whilst this type of provision was not specifically rated against compliance with the Protocol, Ofsted inspections would identify if there were issues with disproportionate responses to children’s behaviours. The council had also improved the quality assessment framework for residential children’s homes and additional work in this area was underway at a sub-regional level via the West London Alliance.
Onder Beter confirmed that the drugs offences recorded for the Brent LAC young people being supported by the YOS in January 2019 varied in degree and this was reflected in the package of support offered to them. The LAC and Permanency service had a good partnership with the YOS and the joint protocol with the YOS had been recognised as an example of good practice.
With regard to UASC, the council undertook a needs analysis which included a risk assessment of vulnerabilities. The concerns raised in the report related more to the national issue of a young person’s UASC status not being explicit when they came into contact with the criminal justice system. This was not deemed a particular issue for Brent’s LAC young people.
The Chair thanked everyone for their contribution to the meeting.
RESOLVED:
i) That a report on how the council was supporting the strengthening of residential children’s homes and semi-independent provision be submitted to a future meeting of the committee.
ii) That the Annual Report on LAC include statistics on the number of LAC and Care Leavers known to the criminal justice system.
Supporting documents: