We are pleased to commend this 2006/2007 MAPPA Annual Report to you.

The report identifies a year of progress, development and success in the management of public protection issues within County Durham and Darlington. The strength of the partnership between the Responsible Authorities, Prison, Police and Probation has continued to grow and additional resources have been brought in. The report also includes inputs from Duty to Co-operate Agencies and it is the bringing together of all these people which has contributed to the success we have had in managing those offenders who pose the highest risk of harm in our communities.

Russell Bruce Chief Officer National Probation Service County Durham

Jon Stoddart Chief Constable Durham Constabulary

Phil Copple North East Area Manager HM Prison Service

Ministerial Forward
These are the sixth MAPPA annual reports, and the first with a foreword by the Ministry of Justice. I want, first of all, to underline the Government's continued commitment to these arrangements. Protecting the public from dangerous offenders is a core aim for the new Department. Just as the effectiveness of MAPPA locally depends on the quality of working relationships, we will work with the Home Office, the Police, and others, to develop the best possible framework within which the MAPPA can operate. On 13 June, the Government published a Review of the Protection of Children from Sex Offenders. This sets out a programme of actions which include developing the use of drug treatment for sex offenders and piloting the use of compulsory polygraph testing as a risk management tool, enhancements to the regime operating at Approved Premises, and also a range of actions impacting directly upon the way the MAPPA work. I want to highlight two of them here. Firstly, research tells us that the arrangements are already used successfully to disclose information about dangerous offenders but we think this can be improved upon. MAPPA agencies will be required to consider disclosure in every case. We will pilot a scheme where parents will be able to register a child-protection interest in a named individual with whom they have a personal relationship and who has regular unsupervised access to their child. If that person has convictions for child sex offences and the child is at risk, there will be a presumption that the offences will be disclosed to the parent. Secondly, as MAPPA has developed over the past 6 years, best practice models have been identified which show that specific roles and approaches are required to ensure it is managed effectively. We are committed to strengthening MAPPA arrangements and ensuring that robust performance management is in place. To achieve this, we intend to introduce new national standards, which will ensure a consistent approach across Areas and we will be making available £1.2million to support Areas in implementing the standards. We aim to do everything that can reasonably be done to protect people from known, dangerous offenders. We know that there is always room for improvement. I commend this annual report to you as an indication of the commitment, skills and achievements of the professionals, and lay advisers, in managing and monitoring this essential, often difficult area of business.

Maria Eagle MP Parliamentary Under Secretary of State

What is MAPPA?
MAPPA stands for Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements and MAPPA has now been in place since 2001 in all 42 Police and Probation areas in England and Wales. These arrangements provide the framework for the co-ordinated risk management of potentially dangerous offenders by different agencies. Its aim is to protect the public from these offenders once they are given community sentences or are released from prison. There are three categories of offenders managed under the MAPPA arrangements:

1. Registered Sex Offenders (RSO's) 2. Violent and other sexual offenders 3. Other offenders who are assessed as posing a risk of serious harm to the public

Just as there are three categories of MAPPA offenders, there are also three levels of risk which offenders fall into under the MAPPA process:

sis. Level 1 is the lowest risk. Offenders will be managed by a single agency, usually the Probation Service or the Police but also the Youth Service or Health Care agencies. Level 2 offenders pose a higher risk. Offenders are managed by Multi-Agency Risk Management Meetings, which draw in staff from across the statutory and voluntary sector. Level 3 is the highest risk. It is reserved for the critical few who present a risk of serious harm in the community. Comprehensive assessment tools are used to ensure that they are properly identified, monitored and supervised. Level 3 offenders are managed by Multi Agency Protection Panels, chaired by a Chief Officer from Probation. Part of his/her task is to draw together comprehensive risk management plans and to hold other agencies to account for there part in the plans which are reviewed on a regular basis.nt for there part in the plans which

A tool which is used in the MAPPA arena is the Sexual Offences Prevention Order (SOPO). Legislation allows Courts to make SOPOs on conviction and the County Durham & Darlington Public Protection Unit has taken the opportunity to ask Courts to consider such Orders in every case where they could assist in managing offenders more safely in the community. Sentencers appear to have welcomed this decision and in most cases have followed the proposals made by Probation staff in their reports. It has resulted in some very practical steps to control offenders' behaviour. Such Orders have limited offenders access to the internet; prevented unsupervised contact with children and prevented access to areas where children might gather such as playgrounds or leisure centres.

Risk Management Plans
What’s in them and who makes them?
John had been convicted on two separate occasions for offences of rape and had been released from prison at the end of his sentence. He was subject to an extended period of supervision on licence by the probation service and was a registered sex offender for life. He had completed the sex offender treatment programme in prison, but was felt to have made little progress Meetings about John began approximately 6 months prior to his release from prison. Initial meetings were attended by representatives from all three responsible authorities - Police, Probation and Prisons - and the process began of ensuring that all relevant information and intelligence was shared. As the release date came closer the attendance at the meetings broadened to reflect the comprehensive nature of the risk plan which was needed to be put in place. The case was managed at MAPPA Level 3 and because of the seriousness of the risks posed, advice and support was sought from a Chartered Forensic Psychologist who provided specialist assessments of the risks of re-offending and the sort of behaviours that might occur. Victims views were represented by the Victim Liaison Officer.

The Initial Plan To reside in approved premises with curfew conditions Approved premises to monitor times of entering and leaving residence An exclusion order to be drawn up to prevent John being in the vicinity of the victims Victims to be visited by Victim Liaison Officer and updated regularly on situation and offered panic alarms Licence conditions to require him to do further work on Sex Offender Treatment Programme, and disclose details of any relationships he formed with females John to notify vehicle details to police John not to take employment without the consent of his offender manager John to be seen weekly by Offender Manager and Police Officer from PPU in addition to contact with approved premises staff

Despite the tight package which was put around him, concerns about John remained high and in fact began to increase. Under these circumstances the plan was expanded and he was: Placed under surveillance by the Police His mobile phone records were monitored As he had found a job, a disclosure was made to his employer Plans were also identified to allow for his swift recall to prison if the point was reached were it was felt he could no longer be managed in the community.

What is Serious Harm?
Definitions of Harm

Serious Harm
Harm which is life threatening or traumatic and from which recovery, whether physical or psychological, can be expected to be difficult or impossible

Very High Risk
There is imminent risk of serious harm. The potential event is more likely than not to happen imminently and the impact would be serious

High Risk
There are identifiable indicators of risk of serious harm. The potential event could happen at any time and the impact could be serious

Medium Risk
There are identifiable indicators of risk of harm. The offender has the potential to cause harm but is unlikely to do so unless there is a change of circumstances

Low Risk
No significant current indicators of risk

MAPPA: The Reality

Registrations are up
This year the number of sex offenders required to register with the police has gone up to 468. This was not unexpected as due to the length of time offenders are required to remain on the register, the number of new people joining exceeds the number of people de-registering. This doesn't mean County Durham and Darlington are becoming more dangerous places to live. It means that the number of people who are being actively supervised in the community continues to grow. In County Durham and Darlington no offenders were unaccounted for during 2006-2007.

No one at the highest level of risk committed a Serious Further Offence (SFO)
Offenders within MAPPA and those on the sex offenders register are proactively managed within County Durham and Darlington with additional resources being made available to manage the higher risk offenders. This has included surveillance operations, intelligence gathering in co-operation with neighbouring police areas, requirements to reside in approved premises and a range of special assessments and interventions. Where offenders are identified and managed within MAPPA, everything possible is done to ensure that the community is kept safe and that the opportunities for further offences are minimised.

Domestic Violence continues to be the biggest growth area
Awareness of domestic violence has brought an increasing number of perpetrators into the MAPPA arena and has stretched resources available to protect women across statutory and voluntary agencies. In the coming year County Durham and Darlington will be implementing the MARAC process (Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conferencing) which will provide a specialist forum where the needs of victims of domestic violence can be assessed and management support offered. MARAC and MAPPA will be complimentary processes but both are aimed at keeping the safety of the victim and the prevention of further victimisation at the heart of the process.

Over 6,000 hours has been spent planning the management of MAPPA Level 2 & 3 Offenders
This figure is a conservative estimate based on an average of eight people attending meetings that last approximately 2 hours each with around 400 meetings being held in a year. This represents a massive commitment of resources from the agencies involved and on top of this is the time spent on delivering the plans which have been identified

Sex Offenders Prevention Orders are up
SOPO's are orders of the court which place additional prohibitions on offenders. In 2006-2007 100 orders existed in the area. In Co Durham and Darlington SOPO's are requested routinely for all sex offenders appearing at court and the range of prohibitions included are designed to manage the risks of individual offenders. Typically this might involve prohibiting an offender from being in children's play areas. Breaching the terms of a SOPO is an offence punishable by imprisonment of up to five years by the Crown Court.

Local operation of MAPPA
Review of the last 6 years
Within County Durham and Darlington, the core mechanism for delivering MAPPA remains the joint Police and Probation PUBLIC PROTECTION UNIT (PPU). The unit was set up in 1999 originally with three staff from the Police and three from Probation. Over the last seven years it has grown to include five Police Constables and a Sergeant, six Probation Officers and a Probation Middle Manager, a member of the Youth Engagement Service and a full time MAPPA administrator. The staffing within the unit has been relatively stable which has allowed high levels of expertise and knowledge to be developed. Staff have been trained to administer and interpret a range of assessment tools and Durham Constabulary was a lead partner in the roll out of VISOR. VISOR is the Violent and Sex Offenders Register, a national database of high risk offenders which is used by the Police as a case management tool and an aid to investigation. Probation staff are currently leading a rollout of VISOR to Probation areas. During the life of the unit staff have had to adapt to new legislation including the introduction of Sex Offender Prevention Orders. SOPO's are now requested at point of sentence and allow additional protective measures to be put in place which restrict offenders movements and exclude them from areas where they might seek to target new victims. SOPO conditions include:

Prohibited from owning or using a computer/laptop or any other equipment capable of downloading images from the internet including a camera phone Prohibited from permitting children or a person under 18 years of age of entering/remaining in premises/vessels/tents/caravans or similar closed places in possession/control of the offender Prohibited from entering/remaining on premises/land including parks/school play areas used by children Prohibited from entering/loitering within 50 metres of public toilets

Since the unit was established the number of registered sex offenders in County Durham and Darlington has increased to the current 468. This number is unlikely to fall in the near future mainly due to the very lengthy registration period which some offenders face. The biggest growth area within MAPPA however is in the number of Level 2 meetings which are being held in relation to perpetrators of Domestic Violence. All agencies in County Durham and Darlington have invested significant resources in identifying and bringing to justice perpetrators of Domestic Violence and there is increased awareness of the impact on victims and on their children. Last year Police and Probation were joined by the Prison Service as a responsible authority and a wide range of other agencies have signed up as ‘Duty to Co-operate Agencies’ within County Durham and Darlington. These include PCT and Mental Health Trusts, Children's Services, Housing Providers, Local Authorities, Domestic Violence Services, Education Providers, Crown Prosecution Service and Victim Support.



Attendees at meetings are drawn from statutory and voluntary agencies. There is nationwide co-operation with staff travelling from across the country to attend relevant meetings, for example when an offender proposes to move from one area to another. During the past 12 months in County Durham and Darlington we have worked closely with criminal justice partners from as far south as Sussex and as far north as Edinburgh. The high levels of co-operation within the unit and between agencies and the willingness to be flexible and adaptable all work to support the high levels of protection afforded to communities and individuals in County Durham and Darlington.

MAPPA & Victims
Part of the management of any offender is the identification of past victims and of individuals who are currently at risk. The action plans which are drawn up at MAPPA meetings require attention to be given to the offender, but they also look at the information needs of victims and protective factors which can be put in on their behalf. The Probation Service employs a full time Victim Liaison Officer as well as a Women's Support Worker who supports victims of Domestic Violence. Victims are entitled to know of any key developments regarding the offender, such as:

Details of a recall or a reduction in sentence after an appeal If an offender applies for or is given a work placement in the Community If the offender absconds If the offender is transferred to a different prison The outcome of a parole review If the case is closing and contact with the offender is being ended When the offender is due to be released

The job of victims workers in relation to MAPPA is to represent the views of victims at meetings, if they are known, and need to be considered. As a result, restrictions are often placed on offenders to exclude them from areas where victims live or work and to prevent them from making contact. This can be done as part of licence requirements on release from prison or as a condition of a Sex Offender Prevention Order (SOPO). Victims can also be offered more personal protection including alarms which are monitored and linked directly to the police, changes in locks and in extreme cases, cameras which cover their houses.

The role of the Prison Service in MAPPA
The Prison Service, as a Responsible Authority for MAPPA, has an Area Public Protection Co-ordinator who represents the Area Manager on the MAPPA Strategic Management Board and co-ordinates the delivery of public protection across North East prisons. Each prison has a Head of Public Protection who works within an Offender Management Team and is the dedicated contact point for public protection. In September 2006 a single system for managing offenders assessed as high or very high risk of causing serious harm to the public was introduced. These offenders have an Offender Manager, based in the Probation Service, who will work with them from the beginning to the end of their sentence. The Prison Service ensures that they have an Offender Supervisor who provides a strong link between the offender and the Offender Manager. The Offender Supervisor is responsible for ensuring that targets set for the offender by their Offender Manager are worked towards and met. A large part of this work will be directed at reducing and managing risk.

The prisons in the North East make an important contribution to MAPPA and public protection by:
Prompt identification of MAPPA offenders following reception into prison Sharing information with Police and Probation to make sure that there is a full picture for risk assessment Attending and providing information for level 2 and level 3 panels Using the Offender Assessment System (OASys) - a risk assessment tool shared with Probation to assess risk regularly and consistently Manage and identify risk whilst individuals subject to MAPPA are in custody through Inter-departmental Risk Management Meetings (held within the prison and attended by prison based Offender Supervisors, internal Probation Officers, Offender Managers and the Police) Through sentence planning, identify and use offending behaviour programmes and other interventions to reduce individual offender's risk Ensuring that the release dates of MAPPA offenders are notified to police and Probation well in advance and that necessary contributions are made to ensure that an effective release plan is in place.

VISOR The Violent and Sexual Offenders Register (VISOR) is currently being introduced to the Prison Service. It is a networked confidential system, created and owned by the Police Service, which allows information about dangerous offenders to be shared by Police, Probation and Prisons nationally. Whilst prisons are in the early stages of introducing this work, early indications are that it will have a significant impact on the delivery of public protection. The Prison Service recognises that there is an ever increasing MAPPA population, and that the proportion of those received into prison is likely to grow with the introduction of public protection sentences. As a responsible Authority, the Prison Service acknowledges the importance of this work and recognises that they have a vital role to fulfil in protecting the public.

The role of the Police in MAPPA
The partnership arrangements for the management of registered sex offenders and dangerous people have developed over the past 10 years. I have witnessed these developments first hand, from the early visionary days of joint Police Officer and Probation teams to the situation we have now where these partnership arrangements have been extended and supported by robust risk assessment processes and the willingness to share information across multi-agency partnerships. Durham Constabulary is committed to working in partnership to protect the public from offenders who are managed within the community. In order to provide community reassurance about these arrangements, the Constabulary has undertaken to commit dedicated police resources, a position which is mirrored by our Probation Service and Youth Engagement Service colleagues. The investment in staff dedicated to public protection has grown incrementally over the past 10 years and I have witnessed on many occasions the commitment by public protection staff and the professionalism they demonstrate in discharging their duty. Inevitably, registered sex offenders and dangerous people will live in our communities and must be monitored following their requirement to register as a sex offender. Our multi-agency teams demonstrate the utmost professionalism in the assessment of risk and the range of options at their teams disposal. They ensure not only that these offenders are managed within these communities, but also that where appropriate, restrictions are placed upon them to minimise any risk that they pose. The past ten years has coincided with the use of increasingly innovative techniques in the management of this risk, as well as using legislation effectively, in particular the use of Sexual Offence Prevention Orders. At the same time, Durham Constabulary has utilised a number of both overt and covert methods of monitoring such offenders, commensurate with a continuous assessment of risk. This assessment is an ongoing process during the period of registration and is reliant upon both Police intelligence as well as information from our partner agencies. Our operating practices, in particular the dedicated staffing of joint multi-agency teams, has been recognised as best practice nationally and County Durham and Darlington continues to attract attention from across the country to explore what we do. Protecting vulnerable people and communities is high on the agenda of both Durham Constabulary and the Police Authority. Public protection is just one aspect within this vulnerability agenda but it will continue to receive a high priority with our partners.

Ian Scott Detective Chief Superintendent - Durham Constabulary

The Role of the Safeguarding Children Unit Children’s Services Darlington
Children's Services in Darlington have worked closely with Durham and Darlington MAPPA since its implementation. Whilst this provides a framework for the assessment and management of risk posed by serious and violent offenders, it also provides a crucial tool for planning and protecting children from harm. The MAPPA and the Darlington Safeguarding Children Board Child Protection Procedures both compliment each other. They are constantly reviewed and updated in line with new legislation and good practice identified. There have been a number of situations that have clearly reduced the risk posed to children and vulnerable adults by the sharing of information. A recent case was brought to the notice of Darlington Safeguarding Unit from a prison in the south of the country. A serious sex offender was due for release after a 10 year sentence and so a MAPPA was held. The offender wished to return to the area, stating clearly the child was now an adult and there would be no concerns for their welfare. This allowed Children's Services to share information relating to the index offence and clarify the current risk to the victims. On release, the offender did not report to his officer and an alert went out which resulted in a recall. This was because the offender was found attempting to make his way to the area. Clearly this is an example of the relationship the agencies have with the MAPPA process. As an officer that has worked in the child protection/safeguarding field before the development of MAPPA up to the current time, it is my opinion that the identification of risks to children are minimised due to the information sharing from all level of meetings through the arrangements in place. Plans agreed by multi-agency professionals are robust and increase the protection to vulnerable adults and children. These plans assist decision-making at child protection conferences and aid assessments carried out by key workers to reduce any drift in planning for children. I am aware that there is and has always been an excellent working relationship with my colleagues in the Public Protection Unit. The flow of information/intelligence has been a catalyst for a number of successful outcomes in relation to cases involving RSO and other violent offenders. Recently, a case involving a serious offender from Darlington was the subject of frequent MAPPA meetings prior to his release in to the community. During the course of these meetings I suggested a joint approach to the extended family via the family group conference process (a service widely used in Darlington Children's Services). This proved very successful and was another example of how MAPPA procedures can be linked with current procedures to support and enhance the planning and protection of children from suffering or likely to suffer significant harm.

Elaine Clarke Safeguarding Children Manager

The role of Primary Care Trusts in MAPPA*
PCTs came into being on 1st April 2002 following implementation of The Primary Care Trust (Functions) England Regulations (2002). As part of the NHS re-organisation in 2003, six PCTs in County Durham and Darlington were created. In a 2006 reorganisation, the PCTs in County Durham merged to form one County Durham PCT (Darlington remains a separate PCT although some functions are shared, including Executive Directors of Commissioning and Public Health.) PCTs work with the public as individuals and communities. They have a responsibility for Public Health within PCT geographical boundaries. County Durham and Darlington PCTs have been partners in the MAPPA process since 2002. The earliest links between PCTs and MAPPA were via child protection processes and these links remain strong. The Director of Public Health is the lead PCT Director for Child Protection and MAPPA; Senior professionals and managers within Child Protection are the PCT representatives on MAPPA; and Child Protection professionals are the most likely to attend MAPPA case meetings. As well as commissioning NHS services for Acute Hospitals and Mental Health/Learning Disability Service providers, the PCTs commission prison health services. PCTs also directly provide such services as Health Visiting and District Nursing. General practitioners (GPs) are employed as independent Practitioners through PCTs, and GPs in turn directly employ primary care practice staff. Primary Care workers (i.e. GPs, their staff and Health Visitors) are at the forefront of public protection as they can be in a position to recognise risk and identify possible victims and perpetrators. They are also very likely to be involved in offering support services to families and victims, referring clients and patients to other associated NHS services, particularly mental health services and Genito Urinary Medicine (GUM), as well as referring to other agencies such as Social Care or Police. With regard to the protection of the public, PCTs exercise this responsibility through their contribution to MAPPA, Domestic Abuse Strategies and plans, Homicide Reviews and Child Protection work. The Public Health function works closely with Clinical Governance in the PCTs to ensure that all staff who come into contact with the public have an appropriate level of training and are risk assessed themselves e.g. CRB checked. The Director of Public Health and PCTs also work with Local Authorities, Constabulary and other organisations to plan for emergency situations other than those covered by MAPPA.

*Section 343 (6) of the Criminal Justice Act (2003) whereby PCTs have a duty to cooperate with the Responsible Authority for Durham and Darlington.

The role of the Youth Engagement Service in MAPPA
County Durham Youth Engagement Service (CDYES) has been represented within Durham and Darlington Public Protection Unit since 2000 and, as a service, continues to value the close links between the two agencies. There are a number of benefits to be gained from dual representation that impact positively on the work delivered by practitioners working with young people who pose a risk of harm to the public. One of the benefits has been the speed at which information is exchanged between CDYES and the PPU. Locally, shared intelligence received by PPU staff has proved to be invaluable as it has allowed practitioners managing high risk young people to take positive action if required, especially those subject to licence conditions, I.S.S.P or those included in MAPPA arrangements. The recall of a small minority of young people who have been considered to pose a risk of harm has been facilitated by the close links between the two agencies. Young people who are due to be released from custodial sentences for sexual or violent offences are not always considered appropriate for inclusion into the MAPPA arena. However, the exchange of information regarding potential risk issues can be swiftly communicated via CDYES and PPU and the secure estates. In terms of referring young people for consideration for level 2 meetings, this process has witnessed a more considered approach from CDYES case managers who have the opportunity to discuss cases with PPU in advance. This has ensured that only those young people who do pose a significant risk of harm are entering the MAPPA arena as the consequences for this small group can be far reaching. One of the benefits of improved links is raising awareness that young people should not be treated with the same approach as adult offenders or perpetrators of sexual harm and there is recognition that many of these young people are extremely vulnerable in their own right. The risk management meetings make this distinction, as demonstrated recently with a high profile case which has been successful, not only in significantly reducing the risks identified but also in meeting the needs of the young person's emotional, social and educational development. The changes to sex offender registration requirements have resulted in many young people being ineligible to register and these numbers have seen a decline over the past two years. While they may not attract registration, many still pose significant risks and consultation and information exchange between the two agencies has proved to be extremely beneficial. The recent introduction of the A.I.M (Assessment, Information and Moving on) procedures offers another route for agencies that have concerns regarding young people who sexually harm. Some young people who do not fit the criteria for MAPPA can be signposted into these procedures if appropriate, but it allows for the PPU to maintain a presence as they are invited to the A.I.M meetings and can equally contribute. There are some young people who are subject to lengthy custodial sentences that require their supervision to be transferred to Probation colleagues within the PPU and there is now a mechanism to ensure a smooth transition between agencies. Where possible, the Probation Officer within the PPU will attend the young person's custodial planning meeting (usually held every three months) with the CDYES case manager so the young person has the opportunity to be introduced and changes and expectations discussed.


Recently, the presence of CDYES within an initial adult MAPPA meeting saw information being shared which was a result of that young man being under the supervision of CDYES as a youth. Having that information and being able to participate in the subsequent risk management planning that took place is evidence of good practice . In terms of future plans to improve links and good practice, it is important not to become too complacent. CDYES are currently beginning to develop risk management policies that incorporate not just the assessment process, but look at the journey a young person could take from when their behaviour may be simply causing concern through to them entering the criminal justice system and onwards. CDYES is awaiting guidance from the Youth Justice Board on Minimum Standards for Public Protection and a self assessment matrix will assist in developing CDYES’s own action plan that will build and strengthen existing arrangements. More recently discussions have been taking place to explore the introduction of a screening panel with the PPU managers. This panel will make decisions regarding referrals from CDYES to the PPU much more robust and improve CDYES’s recording of the decision making process.

Gill Shelby Acting Head County Durham Youth Engagement Service

The role of Local Authority Community Services in MAPPA
From a housing perspective, we engage with MAPPA at both a strategic and operational level. The multi-agency meetings held at a local level are of vital importance in determining the most appropriate accommodation for specific individuals. The meetings give us an opportunity to share information, measure the risks involved and minimise potential harm. Most of the local meetings we attend relate to people in need of accommodation. Without satisfactory housing these people are more likely to re-offend, so it is in everyone’s best interest that we actively assist in identifying suitable accommodation. Without MAPPA we would be putting both our Housing Officers and members of the public inadvertently at risk so it is a valuable tool for all parties involved in the process.

Required for the reporting period 1st APRIL 2006 - 31st MARCH 2007

County Durham & Darlington
Type your area name here: NPS County Durham

1. Category 1 MAPPA offenders: Registered Sex Offenders (RSO) i) The number of RSOs living in your Area on 31st March 2007 – Area total, plus broken down to named BCU level.
This is information principally held by the police and is a snapshot of RSOs on 31/03/07. It should NOT include RSOs in prison.

Total 348 BCU (List Below) North South RSO 180 168

a) The number of RSOs per 100'000 head of population. (This figure will be calculated centrally by NOMS). RSO Per 100k 57

ii) The number of sex offenders having a registration requirement who were either cautioned or convicted for breaches of the requirement, between 1st April 2006 and 31st March 2007. Only those cautions that have actually taken place and breaches that have been successfully completed during the reporting period should be counted Total 15 iii) The number of (a) Sexual Offences Prevention Orders (SOPOs) applied for (b) interim SOPOs granted and (c) full SOPOs imposed by the courts in your Area between 1st April 2006 and 31st March 2007. (a) 44 (b) 0 (c) 34

The total number of full SOPOs imposed should include both those granted on application and as an auxiliary order at the point of sentencing.

iv) The number of (a) Notification Orders applied for (b) interim Notification Orders granted and (c) full Notification Orders imposed by the courts in your Area between 1st April 2006 and 31st March 2007. (a) 0 (b) 0 (c) 0

v) The number of Foreign Travel Orders (a) applied for and (b) imposed by the courts in your Area between 1st April 2006 and 31st March 2007. (a) 0 (b) 0

2. Category 2 MAPPA offenders: Violent offenders and Other Sexual offenders (V&OS) vi) The number of violent and other sexual offenders (as defined by Section 327 (3), (4) and (5) of the Criminal Justice Act (2003)) living in your Area between 1st April 2006 and 31st March 2007. You should include in this figure only those Category 2 offenders who are living in your Area during the reporting period. You should NOT include those Category 2 offenders who are still in custody. Care must also be taken NOT to include here any Category 1 offenders. Total 104

3. Category 3 MAPPA offenders: Other Offenders (OthO) vii) The number of ‘other offenders’ (as defined by Section 325 (2)(b) of the Criminal Justice Act (2003)) between 1st April 2006 and 31st March 2007. This figure should not include any offenders who are included in either the Category 1 or 2 (i.e. (i) and (vi) above). Total 78 4. Offenders managed though Level 3 (MAPPP) & Level 2 (local inter-agency management)

(viii) Identify how many MAPPA offenders in each of the three Categories (i.e. (1)- RSOs, (2)- V&O and (3)- OthO above) have been managed through the MAPPP (level 3) and through local inter-agency risk management (level 2) between 1st April 2006 and 31st March 2007. The criteria for referring a case to the MAPPP are defined in MAPPA Guidance as those in which the offender: is assessed under OASys as being a high or very high risk of causing serious harm; AND presents risks that can only be managed by a plan which requires close co-operation at a senior level due to the complexity of the case and/or because of the unusual resource commitments it requires; OR

although not assessed as a high or very high risk, the case is exceptional because the likelihood of media scrutiny and/or public interest in the management of the case is very high and there is a need to ensure that public confidence in the criminal justice system is sustained. The level 2 figure should include those offenders who have not been managed at level 3 at any point in the counting period & meet the criteria set out in the MAPPA Guidance as follows: The management of the offender requires the active involvement of more than one agency but the complexity of managing the risk is not so great as to require referral to Level 3, the MAPPP.

Level 2 Level 3

Cat.1 (RSO) 26 17

Cat.2 (Violent) 45 1

Cat.3(Other) 78 2

(ix) Of the cases managed at levels 3 or 2 (i.e. (viii)) between 1st April 2006 and 31st March 2007, how many, whilst managed at that level: (a) Were returned to custody for a breach of licence? (b) Were returned to custody for a breach of a sexual offences prevention order? (c) Were charged with a serious sexual or violent offence?? PLEASE NOTE: Only record outcome measures appropriate to the level at which the offender was managed at the time of their breach/further offence (e.g. if an offender was initially managed at Level 3 but goes on to commit a serious further offence after he has been moved to Level 2, he should be recorded in the 'Level 2' row for question (c))

For these purposes a serious sexual and violent offence is one of the following (i.e. the same offences as used to trigger reporting in the National Probation Service as a ‘serious further offence’): a Murder; b Attempted murder; c Arson (where there is an intent to endanger life); d Manslaughter; e Rape; f Kidnap/abduction or attempted kidnap/abduction. g Any other very serious violent or very serious sexual offence, armed robbery (defined as robbery involving a firearm), assault with a deadly weapon or hostage taking. h Any other violent or sexual offence where the offender/ offence is likely to attract significant media interest or which raises wider issues of national interest. (a) Level 2 Level 3 0 0 (b) 0 0 (c) 0 0

Strategic Management Board
The SMB is the group which is charged with the responsibility to oversee the operation of the MAPPA in County Durham and Darlington. The group meets on a quarterly basis and is jointly chaired by Hazel Willoughby Director of Offender Management In Probation and Chief Supt Ian Scott who is Head of CID within Durham Constabulary. Agencies represented on the SMB are:

Prisons Education Strategic Health Authority PCT’s Mental Health trusts Domestic Violence Groups Durham County council Darlington Council Youth Services Victims Lay Members representing local communities

(In addition to the SMB, a steering group meets on a monthly basis to look at operational issues affecting the PPU)

County Durham Probation Servicece
Forest House Aykley Heads Business Park Durham DH1 5TS Tel: 0191 383 9083 Fax: 0191 383 7979