Spurn Head Lighthouse

Normanby Hall, Scunthorpe

MAPPA

Annual

Report

2006-2007

‘06/’07
Ministerial foreword
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

3

Humber Bridge

Contents
Introduction ......................................................................................................................1 What are the MAPPA (Multi Agency Public Protection Arrangements)? .............................2
What kind type of offenders are covered by the MAPPA? How are those offenders who come under the MAPPA dealt with? What is a Risk Assessment? Why aren’t all these offenders very high risk? How are offenders managed under the MAPPA? What are Risk Management Plans? Sexual Offences Prevention Orders Risk of Sexual Harm Orders Foreign Travel Orders Notification Orders Disclosure Recall to prison

What about the victims of serious crime?..........................................................................6

Who’s Who in MAPPA? .....................................................................................................6 The Responsible Authority
Humberside Police National Probation Service – Humberside The Prison Service – Yorkshire and Humberside Area

‘Duty to Co-operate’ agencies
Who are they and what must they do? Youth Offending Teams Jobcentre Plus Local Housing Authority Registered Social Landlords Local Education Authority Local Authority Social Services - Councils with Children Services and Community Care Responsibilities Health Services

Constant Danger - Article by Amelia Hill, The Observer Newspaper.................................15 Key Progress and Achievements over the last year...........................................................18 The coming year .............................................................................................................19 Statistics ..........................................................................................................................21 Report by the SMB Chair.................................................................................................23 Area MAPPA Business Plan 2007-2008 ............................................................................24 Strategic Management Board Members...........................................................................28 Agency Contact Points ....................................................................................................29

MAPPA

Annual

Report

2006-2007

Introduction
We are pleased to present the sixth annual report on the Multi Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) in Humberside. This report aims to share with the people of Humberside details of the joint work undertaken by our services and partner agencies – statutory, voluntary, private – to manage serious sexual and violent offenders in our Area. During the year the make up of our group changed as we said goodbye to Steve Wagstaffe who was promoted to manage the Prison Service’s High Security Estate and were joined by Tony Hassall who took over as Yorkshire and Humberside Prisons Area Manager in December. Tony joins a region which has a long tradition of agencies effectively working together to protect the public, and undertake joint work on dangerous offenders, as well as having developed creative victim and restorative justice initiatives. As the three responsible authorities, we have worked harder than ever this year towards maintaining that tradition through the MAPPA. Several major inspections and reviews have taken place over the past year involving our work, perhaps most significantly the Review of the Protection of Children from Sex Offenders. We have ensured we are developing and implementing action plans to meet the recommendations arising out of these reviews. Some of the recommendations are being put in place at the time of this report’s publication - the Probation Service will be rolling out the Violent and Sex Offender Register (ViSOR) computer system enabling them more direct access to all offenders records and allow a greater exchange of information with the police and other partners, National Rules of behaviour and conduct for all residents of Approved Probation Premises have been set – others, such as the use of polygraph testing for sex offenders, satellite tracking and disclosure of sex offenders details to appropriate members of the public are currently being considered or trialed. We are however fully aware that there are many challenges ahead and this area of work is increasing year on year. Key to meeting those challenges are our good working links with our “duty to cooperate” agencies - health, social services, accommodation providers, education, youth offending teams - and others who, whilst not under a duty, are willing to assist and see the value of being involved in the process. We do that with fresh impetus this year as we integrate the work of MAPPA with the newly forming Multi Agency Risk Assessment Conferences (MARACs) set up to increase the safety of women and children in cases of domestic violence together with the Local Safeguarding Children Boards which have now been in existence for over a year. The case load remains daunting, but the hard work and professionalism of staff across all agencies shows their dedication to MAPPA and to the diverse communities within Humberside they serve and protect and we again thank all our colleagues for that. It must be acknowledged that we will never be able to eliminate entirely the risk of serious offences being committed but we restate our commitment that we will, through MAPPA, continue to do everything possible to reduce that risk and to maintain the success achieved so far.

Tim Hollis Chief Constable Humberside Police

Stephen Hemming Chief Probation Officer National Probation Service – Humberside

Tony Hassall HM Prison Service Area Manager Yorkshire and Humberside

‘06/’07
1

MAPPA

Annual

Report

2006-2007

What are the MAPPA?
Sexual and violent offenders live in all communities and are of no single age, gender, ethnicity or background. Their offences deeply affect the lives of victims and their families and inspire fear in local communities. Their impact can be profound and longlasting, leaving victims feeling unsafe even in their own homes. The Police, Probation and Prison Services have a statutory responsibility to put in place arrangements to jointly identify, assess and manage sexual and violent offenders, and these arrangements, The Multi Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) continue to form the basis of providing a mechanism for agencies to work together when they are dealing with offenders who are assessed as posing a high risk of harm to others or whose risk management is exceptionally problematic. These arrangements are contained in the Criminal Justice Act (2003) which came into effect on 5th April 2004. New National guidelines on implementing MAPPA were introduced in April 20041 and updated guidelines are expected towards the end of 2007. MAPPA contributes significantly towards the integration of the work of a number of criminal justice agencies together with social care agencies such as health, social services and housing, in order to reduce serious offending, minimise serious harm to the public and assist in the early detection of repeat offenders. In Humberside we undertake this joint work at two levels, through Local Risk Management Meetings (LRMMs, see later) and through Multi Agency Public Protection Panels (MAPPPs, see later). The administering of the MAPPA is undertaken by a central team led by a MAPPA Co-ordinator who works closely with the four divisional Police Risk Management Units in the four local authority areas Humberside covers ie; East Riding of Yorkshire Kingston upon Hull North Lincolnshire North East Lincolnshire The MAPPA Team are located within these four authority areas and have responsibility for the co-ordination of all agencies within the MAPPA process including the Responsible Authorities, the “duty to co-operate” agencies and other agencies who have voluntarily become involved. The three categories are defined as; Category 1: Registered sex offenders, i.e. those convicted or cautioned for certain sexual offences who are required to register with the police. Category 2: Violent and other offenders who generally have received a sentence of imprisonment of 12 months or more. Category 3: Other offenders not in either of the above categories but who are considered to pose a risk of serious harm to the public. The inclusion of these offenders under MAPPA is based on two considerations. First it must be established that the individual has a conviction for an offence which indicates they are capable of causing serious harm to the public. Secondly it must be reasonably considered that they currently pose a risk of serious harm to the public. The statistics at the end of this report show the number of offenders in the three categories we have in Humberside.

How are those offenders who come under the MAPPA dealt with?
When offenders have been dealt with by the courts their assimilation back into the community is usually, but not always, overseen by the National Probation Service. This may start as soon as the offender leaves court if they have been made subject to a community penalty such as a Community Order or it may be delayed until the offender is released from prison if a custodial sentence is given. At the time an offender passes through the court process an assessment of the risk they present to the public in general or any individual in particular will usually have been undertaken by the Probation Service. If they are given a custodial sentence then that assessment will be reviewed during the time they are in prison under a shared Risk Assessment Tool OASys2. The review will take into consideration information from prison and probation staff involved in any work they have undertaken on their offending behaviour whilst in prison, information from the police, from the Probation Victim Liaison Officers and from the Home Offender Managers so that agencies working with the offender will have an up to date assessment of the risk the offender poses to the public on release. Some offenders who do not come to the initial notice of the probation service are assessed by the police, e.g. Registered Sex Offenders moving into the area, again by using Home Office approved Risk Assessment tools3.

What type of offenders are covered by the MAPPA?
Three categories of offenders fall within the remit of MAPPA. Effective multi-agency public protection needs to start with the prompt and accurate identification of those relevant offenders to allow all agencies to gather and share relevant information and choose the appropriate risk management strategies.

1 The MAPPA Guidance (2003) Home Office 2 Offender Assessment System (OASys) is a Home Office approved National risk assessment tool, electronically based and accessible to staff of both The Prison Service and The National Probation Service. 3 Risk Matrix 2000 (s)

2

MAPPA

Annual

Report

2006-2007

What is a Risk Assessment?
Risk assessment in our area of work can be considered as calculating how likely an event is to occur and, if it does, the likely impact of that event, upon whom or what and with what consequences. The impact we are considering is serious harm to members of the public in general or to individuals in particular, that is harm which will be life threatening or traumatic and from which recovery, whether physical or psychological, can be expected to be difficult or impossible. Using the recognised risk assessment tools of the particular agency, offenders are assessed as presenting low, medium, high or very high risk of causing serious harm. In essence these levels of risk are defined as; Low risk: Current evidence does not indicate likelihood of causing serious harm. Medium risk: There are identifiable indicators of risk of serious harm. The offender has the potential to cause serious harm but is unlikely to do so unless there is a change of circumstances (e.g. failure to take medication, loss of accommodation, relationship breakdown, drug or alcohol misuse). High risk: There are identifiable indicators of risk of serious harm. The potential event could happen at any time and the impact would be serious. Very high risk: There is an imminent risk of serious harm. The potential event is more likely than not to happen imminently and the impact would be serious. (In NPS - Humberside we consider imminently to mean within a rolling 4 week period.)

Why aren’t all these offenders very high risk?
Remember, risk is about the likelihood of something happening and the consequences or impact if it does happen. As past behaviour is a predictor to future behaviour, all offenders must be considered as presenting some risk of re-offending and causing harm. However the degree to which they pose a risk and the seriousness of any consequences of any further offending is something which is considered in the risk assessment process. Some may be considered as presenting a high risk of re-offending but the consequences of that behaviour, although perhaps causing nuisance, cost or indeed minor harm to the victim is not serious harm as we have defined it. Others may have committed a serious offence with tragic consequences, such as murder or manslaughter, which indicates they have the capacity to cause serious harm but the likelihood of a repeat of the circumstances in which the offence occurred is low. The majority of individuals who are assessed as being a risk to others willingly comply with any arrangements made to help them overcome problems and issues which could result in serious re-offending. The offender’s risk may be to a specific individual with whom there is now no contact or it relates to a particular set of circumstances, which no longer exist. The offender may genuinely want to change the behaviour which led to their offending and is willing to undertake programmes provided by the prison or probation services. These programmes are in the main “cognitivebehavioural programmes” which have been identified and evaluated as the most effective treatment of both sexual and violent offenders.

The purpose of the MAPPA is to establish arrangements for the effective management of that risk.

King William’s Statue, Hull

3

MAPPA

Annual

Report

2006-2007

How are offenders managed under the MAPPA?
Risk management is defined as harm reduction either through the reduction of the likelihood of a risk occurring or the reduction of its impact should it occur. The structure of risk management under MAPPA is intended to enable resources to be deployed to manage the risks identified in the most efficient and effective manner. There are three levels of risk management used under the MAPPA. Although generally the higher the assessed level of risk the higher the level of management required this need not always be the case. The risk management structure is based on the principle that cases should be managed at the lowest level consistent with providing a defensible risk management plan. The three levels are; Level 1: Ordinary risk management. This is the level used in cases in which the risks posed by the offender can be managed by an agency without significant active involvement of other agencies. The majority of cases supervised in the community by the Police or the Probation Service are managed at this level. Level 2; Local inter-agency risk management. This level of management is used where significant active involvement of more than one agency is required. In Humberside we use the acronym LRMM, for Local Risk Management Meetings for this level and LRMMs are held monthly in each of the four Local Authorities at Scunthorpe, Hull, Grimsby and Beverley. Level 3; Multi Agency Public Protection Panels (MAPPPs) This level deals with those “critical few” cases which are assessed as being a high or very high risk of causing serious harm; AND they present risks that can only be managed by a plan which requires co-operation at a senior level due to the complexities of the case and/or because of the unusual resource commitments required. Additionally cases which are exceptional because of high media scrutiny or public interest are dealt with at this level because of the need to ensure public confidence in the criminal justice system is sustained. MAPPPs are held fortnightly at the National Probation Service Humberside Headquarters in Beverley. Occasionally Emergency MAPPPs are required and these can be convened within 24 hours of a referral being made. The two levels of meetings held under MAPPA result in clear actions which feed into the risk management plans which lay down specific objectives for the management of the risk the offender presents.

What are Risk Management Plans?
Risk management plans lay down specific objectives for the management of the risk the offender presents. Responsibilities and tasks are clearly defined and firm timetables established. The plan needs to be able to deal with a change in circumstances and should integrate what are described as “internal” and “external” restraints on the offender. Internal restraints are the offender’s self-management, often learned through participation in offending behaviour programmes. External restraints can take the form of conditions placed on the offender to do or not do a specific activity. Some of these controls are set in place at the start of our work with an offender in the community e.g. requirements can be attached to a Community Order by the court committing the offender to attend a programme or see a psychiatrist. Prior to an offender coming out of prison on a ”licence”, conditions can be attached to that licence laying down certain activities the offender must or must not do, places they must not go or contacts they must not make. Other external restraints are; Sexual Offences Prevention Orders Sexual Offences Prevention Orders (SOPOs) are intended to protect the public from the risk posed by sex offenders by placing restrictions on the offender’s behaviour. The miniumum duration of on Order is 5 years and there is no upper time limit. The prohibitions imposed by a SOPO can be wide ranging. They can for example include prohibiting someone from undertaking certain forms of employment such as acting as a home tutor to children, or the offender may be prohibited from visiting chat rooms on the internet. A SOPO can be taken out at any time where it can be proved that the subject has been convicted of a specific sexual offence and there is reasonable cause to believe that the Order is necessary to protect the public from further serious harm from the offender. Risk of Sexual Harm Orders These orders are similar to a Sexual Offences Prevention Order in that they aim to restrict the activities of those involved in grooming children for sexual activity but in this case a previous conviction or caution for a sexual offence is not a prerequisite. The Police can apply to the courts for a Risk of Sexual Harm Order if a person has on at least 2 occasions engaged in sexually explicit conduct or communication with a child or in the presence of a child and there is reasonable cause to believe that some form of restriction is necessary to protect a child or children from future similar acts. The behaviour considered here could include the person phoning a child and talking to him or her about sexual acts he wants to engage in with the child or it could involve sending adult pornographic images to the child. The person involved need not have previous convictions for sexual or any other offences and the acts involved do not need to amount to criminal conduct. The Order, which will be in force for a fixed period of at least 2 years, as with SOPOs, prohibit that person from identified described activities.

4

MAPPA

Annual

Report

2006-2007

The Deep, Hull

Foreign Travel Orders A foreign travel order bans those who have been convicted of a sexual offence against a child under 16 from travelling abroad where there is evidence that they intend to commit sexual offences against children when abroad. An order if granted can ban an offender from travelling to a specific country (or countries) anywhere in the world, or, for example if the offender has family in a particular country, could limit any travel abroad to that named country only.

Notification Orders Notification Orders can be applied for when a person resident in this country is known to have been convicted of a sexual offence overseas which, if it had been committed in this country, would have required them to register with the police. Such an Order then requires that the offender does register with police so that they can then be supervised and monitored by the police here. Disclosure There may, exceptionally, be some cases where management of an offender’s risk in the community cannot be carried out without the disclosure of some information to a third party outside of the usual MAPPA agencies. This may be, for example, where an employer, voluntary group organiser or church leader has a position of responsibility or control over the offender and other people who may be at serious risk from the offender. Disclosure to them of certain information about the offender may be the only way to manage that risk. Wherever possible the situation would be discussed with the offender and voluntary disclosure encouraged, with probation and/or police supporting them in this. Great caution is exercised when making such a disclosure and it is seen as an exceptional measure as the disclosure may be to individual members of the public. If such a course of action is required it is always as part of a risk management plan, which has been agreed at either of the two highest levels of MAPPA management, i.e. LRMMs or MAPPPs. Recall to prison An ultimate external restraint for offenders who are subject to supervision under “licence” following their release from prison can be a recall to prison if they break their licence condition or it is felt the risk they present is becoming unmanageable in the community.

06/’07
5

MAPPA

Annual

Report

2006-2007

What about the victims of serious crime?
The Probation Service has a statutory responsibility to contact all victims of sexual and violent crime where the perpetrator has been sentenced to 12 months or more in prison4 . In our area we have 3 specialist Victim Liaison Officers in the probation service covering the two geographical areas north and south of the Humber. The duties of those officers are to; • Make contact with relevant victims, • Consult the victim about the release arrangements for the offender and make the victim’s views known to the supervising offender manager, the local MAPPA co-ordinator, the prison authorities and, where relevant, the parole board; • Make recommendations about licence conditions or other aspects of the offender’s release; • Advise probation colleagues and the MAPPA co-ordinator about any victim concerns relevant to the management of the individual offender
4 Criminal Justice and Court Services Act (2000) sect 69.

• Keep victims informed about any significant developments during sentence or after release, including notification of release dates and any additional measures being taken to increase their safety.

Naturally, it is up to victims to decide whether they wish to take up the offer of contact with the probation service and, if they do, how much and at what stages. The duration of contact with individual victims can last for several years.

Who’s Who in MAPPA?
The Responsible Authority The Criminal Justice Act 2003 charges the Police, the National Probation Service and the Prison Service with responsibility for establishing the MAPPA and refer to the three services as “the Responsible Authority” The Strategic Management Board (SMB) The duties and obligations of the Responsible Authority are discharged through the Strategic Management Board. The current membership of the Humberside SMB is given at the end of this report. The broad brief of the SMB is to; “keep the arrangements [i.e. the MAPPA] established by it under review with a view to monitoring their effectiveness and making any changes to them that appear necessary or expedient.” Overarching these activities is the role the SMB has to shape the MAPPA framework within the Area. This involves determining the role and representation of different agencies within the framework. It also includes brokering the protocols and memoranda of understanding which formalise those roles. While some margin of discretion in defining the role is left to the Area, the following core features are common to all SMBs: (i) monitoring (on at least a quarterly basis) and evaluating the operation of the MAPPA, particularly that of the MAPPPs; (ii) establishing connections which support effective operational work with other public protection arrangements, such as Local Safeguarding Children’s Boards, Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships and the local Criminal Justice Board; (iii) preparing and publishing the Annual Report and promoting the work of the MAPPA in the Area; Humberside Police A fundamental objective of any Police Service is the prevention and detection of crime. Humberside Police’s contribution to the MAPPA process helps the service work towards meeting that objective by ensuring public safety and the prevention and detection of crimes of a serious sexual or violent nature. Dedicated Risk Management Officers attached to the Family Protection Team in each of its four Divisions focus on public protection and the management of high risk offenders in the community. They carry out risk assessments on Registered Sex Offenders using a Home Office approved procedure (Risk Matrix 2000) and then develop plans to manage that risk drawing in cooperation of other agencies through the MAPPA process as appropriate. Risk Management Officers are core members of the meetings held under the MAPPA and act as the conduit for the flow of information and required actions between MAPPA and colleagues in police operational and intelligence units. The police are currently the lead agency in Humberside for ViSOR (The Violent and Sex Offender Register), the computerised database providing a national oversight of offenders subject to MAPPA although as will be seen later this system is being rolled out to the Probation Service over the coming year. Humberside Police provide and equip the central premises for the MAPPA Team and resource the administration support and a half time Sergeant to this team. The local Operational Superintendents together with the relevant risk management officers attend both Level 2 , Local Risk Management Meetings and Level 3 Multi Agency Public Protection Panels. It has been agreed that the Operational Superintendents will deputise for the MAPPA Co-ordinator at the Level 2 Meetings in terms of Chairing the meetings where necessary. The Chairing of Level 3 Meetings is the joint responsibility of the Police (Head of CID) and the Probation Service. Additionally the Assistant Chief Constable (Crime Management and Operational Support) with responsibility for Public Protection is a member of the Strategic Management Board. (iv) planning the longer-term development of the MAPPA in the light of regular (at least annual) reviews of the arrangements, and with respect to legislative and wider criminal justice changes; and, identifying and planning how to meet common training and developmental needs of those working in the MAPPA.

(v)

6

MAPPA

Annual

Report

2006-2007

National Probation Service - Humberside The National Probation Service – Humberside’s contribution to the workings of MAPPA is wide-ranging. It starts with the initial risk assessment of offenders who come before the courts for sexual or violent offences. The risk assessment process uses a Home Office approved procedure called the Offender Assessment System (OASys). The Service then supervises and manages any such offenders placed on community orders, including action to return offenders to court if they fail to comply. As is perhaps to be expected the majority of offenders MAPPA works with have been sentenced to imprisonment for their offences and the Probation Service, under the new processes brought about by the development of the National Offender Management Service provide a continuity of management of the offender throughout the time in custody. Where those offenders have been sentenced to a custodial sentence of 12 months or more and assessed as representing a high or very high risk of causing serious harm (or is identified as a Prolific or Other Priority Offender) the home supervising probation office – the Offender Manager – will work more closely with prison colleagues in ensure that offending-related needs and identified risks of harm are addressed both during the custodial period and then in the community when the offender is released on licence. The responsibility for their supervision and management on licence following release would include requesting a revocation of the licence and a recall to prison if the offender failed to comply, or if the risk they present is assessed as being unmanageable in the community. In carrying out their responsibilities, offender managers refer appropriate cases to MAPPA where a significant input is required from other agencies in achieving the risk management plan. Those officers would then attend any meeting called under MAPPA in regard to the offender. The Probation Service delivers specialist accredited programmes to address sexual and violent offending behaviour, including a nationally recognised Sex Offender Treatment Programme and the Integrated Domestic Abuse Programme. The Probation Service manages two Approved Premises in Humberside for offenders who need an enhanced level of supervision. As well as its work with offenders the Probation Service also has a statutory responsibility to contact all victims of sexual and violent crime where the perpetrator has been sentenced to 12 months or more in prison. In our area we have 3 Victim Liaison Officers in the Probation Service covering the two geographical areas north and south of the Humber. Additionally the probation service now has staff carrying out the role of Women’s Safety Workers who work in partnership with those providing the Integrated Domestic Abuse Programme IDAP) to male perpetrators of domestic violence. The primary role of the Women’s Safety Workers is to work with the victims and the current partners of men undertaking this programme in order to promote the safety of women and children and to seek to ensure that the programme of intervention with the male offender does not put the women and children at further risk of harm. The National Probation Service – Humberside has seconded a Senior Probation Officer to the post of MAPPA Co-ordinator and 2 Probation Officers and four half time Probation Service Officers to the MAPPA Team. The Service jointly chairs Level 3 Multi Agency Public Protection Panels and currently chairs the Strategic Management Board.

The Prison Service – Yorkshire and Humberside Area The Prison Service plays an important role in protecting the public by keeping offenders in custody and working with the Probation Service under the Offender Management Model in helping the offender address the causes of their offending behaviour and undertaking other work to assist their successful resettlement. There are four prisons within the Humberside Area, HMP Hull, HMP Everthorpe, HMP Wolds and HMP Full Sutton. Of course offenders from this area are also held in other prisons nationwide and are released to Humberside from them. The main focus of the Prison Service contribution to MAPPA is at an operational level and a number of measures are in place locally across the prison estate to ensure that this will be effective and result in: Prompt identification of MAPPA offenders so that their details can be used in sentence planning arrangements, including interventions to manage and reduce risk Regular monitoring of the behaviour of those assessed as presenting the highest risk, and sharing information with police and probation colleagues All relevant risk management information being provided to multi agency meetings which help plan an offender’s release and where appropriate attendance at those meetings by relevant prison staff. At least three months notification to police and probation of the expected release dates of those offenders who have been referred to the multi-agency public protection panel (MAPPP), and at least six weeks notification of those being managed at level 2 risk meetings (LRMMs) Timely notification of changes to release dates. Consultation with Police & Probation and/or the MAPPP, for MAPPA offenders who are being risk assessed for: early release under the Home Detention Curfew Scheme; suitability for open prison conditions; and for release on temporary licence.

7

MAPPA

Annual

Report

2006-2007

Case Study 1
Miss A has been diagnosed as having a borderline personality disorder. She had difficulty coping on her own and maintaining stable accommodation and her response to the stress this caused her had shown itself in a pattern of self harm and fire setting and then assaulting and making false allegations against male and female staff of the services called to deal with her. Several years ago following Miss A having to leave her family home as other family members could not cope with her, she committed a serious Arson offence which placed her and others at risk of serious physical injury and she was sentenced to five years imprisonment. Prior to Miss A’s initial release into the community on licence she was referred to MAPPA by her offender manager and her release was managed by a Level 2 Local Risk Management Meeting (LRMM). Because of her instability and reaction to stressful situations a hostel placement with 24 hour support was located for her. However she soon again demonstrated uncontrollable and disruptive behaviour culminating in an assault on staff and threats to set fire to the establishment. Her licence was revoked and she was recalled to custody. Miss A continued to be a management problem within the prison system because of her self harming, fire setting and generally disruptive behaviour. As the time for Miss A’s re-release approached, those tasked with managing her in the community were faced with a dilemma. Unless suitable accommodation was located Miss A would to be homeless on her re-release and the consensus of opinion was that Miss A was at risk of committing serious further offences in that situation. She clearly needed support in a stable environment and her behaviour needed monitoring. However that behaviour had made it extremely unlikely that any organisation would feel able to offer her accommodation which was in any way shared with others. Prior to her re-release numerous applications were made to Probation Approved Premises (Hostels) nationally and as anticipated the applications were refused on the grounds of her history of fire setting, her personality disorder and disruptive behaviour. In light of the difficulties in locating suitable accommodation for Miss A a decision was made by a Level 2 local Risk Management Meeting to transfer the case to a central Level 3 Multi Agency Public Protection Panel (MAPPP) to try and secure additional authority and resources to break the impasse. Unfortunately Miss A was re released into the community on licence before a solution could be found. She went to reside with her family with all the inherent risks and on the understanding that this would be for a short time until more appropriate accommodation could be located. However she breached her licence within three weeks of her re-release again by acting in a way which put members of the public – this time drivers and other road users - at risk Whilst Miss A returned to custody MAPPP meetings continued to ensure risk would be minimised on her eventual inevitable release. Despite her personality difficulties it was believed that Miss A could live independently if an appropriate property was located and she received support and therefore in the absence of any identifiable alternatives MAPPA management plans focussed on trying to locate a property for Ms A within the local housing authority stock as this was seen as the only way forward. Local Authority Housing managers were included in the MAPPP meetings and, on the basis that a comprehensive risk management plan and support package was put in place to support and manage Miss A, agreement was reached that single occupancy local authority accommodation would be made available. The police service, fire and rescue service, mental health agencies, social services, supporting people and the probation service agreed to cooperate fully with the risk management plan. When Miss A was re released into the community she moved into independent local authority accommodation and her comprehensive risk management was immediately implemented. As she was not then subject to statutory supervision her source of support came from the mental health services, Humbercare Ltd’s supported housing project and the housing authority. Several months on Miss A is still in the community and living in her own accommodation. She continues to be managed by a Level 2 LRMM and although there have been several instances of “challenging” behaviour she has not reoffended nor has she put herself or others at risk of harm.

8

MAPPA

Annual

Report

2006-2007

“Duty to Co-operate” agencies
The principal responsibility for protecting the public from sexual and violent offenders continues to rest with the criminal justice agencies. However, the effectiveness of public protection often depends on more than just a criminal justice response. It is well known that other agencies play an important role in helping offenders to resettle and avoid re-offending. For example, research has shown that offenders with jobs have one-third to one-half lower rates of re-offending than offenders without employment. Re-offending among offenders who have stable accommodation on release from custody is similarly lower. The important contribution other agencies can make is also highlighted in cases where offenders have mental health problems or where they pose a risk of harm to children. In acknowledgement of the above The Criminal Justice Act 2003 imposed a duty on various organisations providing public services to co-operate with the MAPPA and we continue to work to develop the involvement of what are referred to as “Duty to Cooperate” agencies. These agencies include; • Youth Offending Teams • Jobcentre Plus • Local Education Authority • Local Housing Authority • Registered Social Landlords • Local Authority Social Services • Health Services Enabling the co-operation of all those agencies, which work with MAPPA offenders, is therefore vital. Placing that co-operation on a statutory basis underpins the good practice that has already developed; and locates it clearly within the established framework of the MAPPA.

What must the “Duty to Co-operate” agencies do?
The legislation does not define the activities the duty to cooperate involves nor does it require the agencies on which it is imposed to do anything other than what they are already required to do. The purposes of co-operation are: • to co-ordinate the involvement of different agencies in assessing and managing risk • to enable every agency, which has a legitimate interest, to contribute as fully as its existing statutory role and functions requires in a way that complements the work of other agencies

Agencies therefore participate through • the identification of MAPPA offenders and the agencies with a specific responsibility for working with the offender; • Information sharing either specific to that offender or more general advice about an agency’s role and the type of services it provides. This can helpfully involve advice about how those services can be accessed and provide a point of contact for other agencies. • the formal assessment of risk and the contribution each agency can make to the interpretation of all the relevant information about an offender; and, • co-ordinating the plans to manage the identified risks so that each agency performs its role in a way which at best complements the work of other agencies, or at least does not frustrate or compromise their work.

‘06/’07
9

MAPPA

Annual

Report

2006-2007

Case Study 2
Mr B was sentenced to a period of custody following a series of violent, driving and burglary offences which were aggravated by a sustained campaign of harassment and intimidation against a number of individuals, including ex partners, within the local community who stood up and gave evidence against him. A level of intimidation and harassment continued from Mr B’s family following his conviction. Because of his level of offending Mr B met the criteria for an enhanced level of supervision in the community on release through management by the joint police and probation Prolific and Priority Offender Team. Due to further threats being made by Mr B whilst in prison, including threats of arson and of the use of firearms, that team referred the case for MAPPA management. Immediate action was taken via police risk management team and prison colleagues to control Mr B’s communication and investigate the possibility of prosecution for the threats. Then, through a series of meetings at level 2 and 3, the MAPPA agencies agreed a plan to manage the risk this offender would present when he returned to the community. This plan was two fold. Restrictions were placed on his return to the community including; having him reside at a probation hostel under strict curfew conditions, licence conditions not to contact named individuals and excluding him from a specified area of his home town where people under threat resided. An Anti Social Behaviour Order (ASBO) was also obtained. Additionally, although the index offences did not initially mean that that the Probation Service should make statutory contact with the victims MAPPA requested that the Probation Victim Liaison Officers work with police in making contact with those identified as possibly being at risk Consultations with the victims then began in good time before the offender was due to be released from custody in order to discuss with them the proposed resettlement plans, including the planned restrictions. Police were able to assist by installing “panic alarms” where required and their properties were assessed by the local Fire and Rescue Service with appropriate advice given and fire resistant devices fitted. The MAPPA panel were able to support the request made by one family to the local housing authority for relocation to another area of the local community by providing further information which prioritised their application by taking account of the date of the offender’s release back into the community. Contact arrangements were agreed with the victims in the event that the offender breached any of the terms of his licence and advice was given on how to report any further contact with this offender to the police. This contact with the families gave them a direct point of contact with the supervising agencies, particularly the Probation Service and provided them with the reassurance that they would receive direct and timely information about any changes to this offender’s sentence and release plan and this helped to counter rumours which surfaced in their local community about this offender. Unfortunately in this instance despite all that was put in place the Mr B did breach the conditions of his licence with regard to contact with the Probation Service but all parties were kept informed of the steps the police and probation services took to recall Mr B back to custody.

10

MAPPA

Annual

Report

2006-2007

Youth Offending Teams
Local authorities across England and Wales have a statutory duty to establish Youth Offending Teams (YOTs). YOTs are themselves Multi-agency partnerships in which police and probation play an important role but they are regarded as performing a ‘single agency’ risk assessment and risk management role. One of the YOT’s roles is to be responsible for the supervision of young people on community orders, whilst subject to detention and during their licence period following their release from detention. They have skilled, specialist staff who can manage risk effectively, whilst also addressing the vulnerability of the young people themselves.

‘06/’07
Most of the young offenders for whom YOTs have responsibility will not, by virtue of the type and length of sentence they receive fall within MAPPA but with the minority that do present a high risk it is the responsibility of YOT managers - who are now core members of the local risk management meetings – to refer them to MAPPA.

Freshstart is an initiative that builds on the close working links between Jobcentre Plus and the Prison Service. Evidence suggests that employment is a key factor in reducing the likelihood of reoffending. Effective links between Jobcentre Plus and the Prison Service can help to make an impact by guaranteeing that offenders about to be released are put in touch with Jobcentre Plus staff at the earliest opportunity. This will be specifically through a work focussed interview where customers can begin to explore job opportunities and help available through New Deal or other Jobcentre Plus programmes. For those unable to work, either through disability or illness, claims to benefit can be made. There may be cases where MAPPA decides there is a need to notify local Jobcentre Plus offices that restrictions should be placed on an offender’s employment. In those rare cases only the identity of the offender and the nature of the employment from which the offender should be restricted will be disclosed to a senior manager and in most cases this would be done with the full knowledge and permission of the offender who would see the benefit of not being sent for interviews etc where wider disclosure of their offending may be required.

Jobcentre Plus Local Housing Authorities
Jobcentre Plus is an executive agency of the Department for Work and Pensions formed in 2002 when the Employment Service, which ran Jobcentres, and those parts of the Benefits Agency which provided services to people of working age through social security offices, were combined. Jobcentre Plus aims to provide work for those who can, and support for those who cannot, by: • • • • • Helping disadvantaged people into work, as a route out of poverty; Providing financial support as a safety net for people of working age while they are out of work; Addressing inequalities of opportunity; Protecting the integrity of the benefit system; and Working with employers and partners to address market failure in the labour market. The provision of accommodation for offenders released from prison presents a continuing challenge for those working in public protection. Close working ties, through MAPPA, are therefore invaluable in seeking to place offenders as sensitively and as safely as possible in their local communities. Local Housing Authorities have two functions that relate to the resettlement of offenders: the allocation of long-term accommodation and the provision of housing assistance for people who are homeless. Under homelessness legislation5 local housing authorities must ensure that advice and information about homelessness, and preventing homelessness, is available to everyone in their district free of charge. They must also ensure that suitable accommodation is available for people who apply to them for housing assistance where the authority is satisfied that those people are eligible for assistance, have become homeless through no fault of their own and they fall within a priority need group. This is known as "the main homelessness duty". The priority need groups are specified in legislation and include, among others a person who is vulnerable as a result of time spent in custody. Clearly, given the importance of accommodation in the resettlement of offenders and hence in the assessment and management of risk, local authority housing representatives can make an important contribution to the MAPPA. As indicated above, this will not necessarily mean that they have a specific duty to accommodate an offender but their advice about accommodation and the procedures by which it is allocated and the suitability of particular housing stock will provide a valuable contribution.
5 Housing Act, 1996 and Homelessness Act, 2002

All these activities underpin the Department for Work and Pensions’ purpose of promoting “opportunity and independence for all”. The priority customers, identified by the agency’s performance target structures, are those at greatest disadvantage in the labour market. These customers include people with specific disadvantages, such as ex-offenders, refugees, homeless people, drugs misusers and people without basic skills. Helping them contributes to wider goals, including cutting crime and reoffending rates.

11

MAPPA

Annual

Report

2006-2007

Case Study 3
Mr C had a history of sexual offending against adult females and young female family members. In the mid 1990s he was sentenced to a long prison sentence for committing very serious offences over a 5 year period against an adolescent female relative. He used violence, seduction and threats to ensure the girl did not disclose his behaviour. Mr C served his sentence in several prisons and was refused parole as he was seen as presenting too high a risk. He was eventually released and during the resulting short licence period he received a warning from the Parole Board for having unsupervised contact with children contrary to his licence conditions. That licence ended in 1999 but because of his conviction Mr C was required to register as a convicted sex offender with the police for life. Research into Mr C’s personal history reveals marriages to younger women who also looked much younger than their actual age and to a series of “affairs” with “young girls” Some 18 months ago social workers involved with the family of a teenage girl became aware that the girl was claiming to have a “boyfriend” but was not willing to give any details as to who this was. The girl was viewed as exceptionally vulnerable by the social workers having previously been subjected to alleged sexual abuse. At the same time police monitoring Mr C noticed that he was becoming involved with another Registered Sex Offender and increasingly being seen in the company of a teenage female. Enquiries revealed that the female was the teenager the social services had concerns about and that she was a relative and some 26 years younger than Mr C. Appropriate action was taken by both those agencies but there was no clear evidence of criminal sexual behaviour by Mr C and the girl viewed the relationship as an equal adult one and refused to co-operate with the agencies, even getting teenage friends to assist in subterfuge to enable her to see her “boyfriend”. The girl’s mother appeared unable to protect her daughter and it was believed she was in fact in a relationship with the sex offender Mr C had been seen with. A referral to MAPPA for management at Level 2 Local Risk Management (LRMM) was made by the police and it was decided that although there was no actionable evidence of sexual offending, Mr C’s behaviour did constitute a risk to the girl and the police should therefore apply for a Sexual Offences Prevention Order (SOPO) against Mr C. Other agencies, through MAPPA, offered their co-operation in co-ordinating the actions required to ensure the safety of the girl and obtaining evidence. The Probation Service provided a detailed risk assessment to support the police application. The police were successful in obtaining a SOPO in regard to Mr C and he soon breached the conditions of that Order on several occasions by again making contact with the girl. Mr C was arrested and remanded in custody following representations to the court as to the risk he was assessed as presenting. Mr C eventually pleaded guilty to 11 breaches of his SOPO and was sentenced to another long term of imprisonment. He will be subject to probation and police supervision on his release. Social Services have continued to work with the girl and her family.

12

MAPPA

Annual

Report

2006-2007

Registered Social Landlords (RSLs)
Registered Social Landlord (RSL) is the technical name for social landlords that are registered with the Housing Corporation — most are housing associations, but there are also trusts, cooperatives and companies. Housing associations are run as businesses but they do not trade for profit. Any surplus is ploughed back into the organisation to maintain existing homes and to help finance new ones. Housing associations are now the main providers of new social housing.

‘06/’07
• • Most associations are small and own fewer than 250 homes but the larger ones can own 2,500 plus homes. Some were founded centuries ago, many trace their origins to the 1960s and over the last decade many new associations have recently been formed to manage and develop homes transferred to them by local authorities. • • Not all RSLs provide accommodation for MAPPA offenders, and it is only those which do that are required to co-operate in the MAPPA. MAPPA locally therefore only engages with those RSLs when they are giving consideration to accommodating a MAPPA offender or are asked for the provision of general advice in regard to accommodation. •

Schools are able to provide their pupils with programmes of child protection awareness training. i.e. Stranger Danger etc. This training can be reinforced at times when there is a particular local risk. School staff are well placed to be alert and aware regarding activities within the locality that could provide a threat to pupils. In particular situations, and with the authorisation of MAPPA through the Police, schools are in a position to warn individuals or groups of pupils, or staff, regarding possible danger. Schools are able to provide a safe environment during the daytime for children and young people. The local school is often the first port of call for parents who want to voice their concern regarding worrying activities in the area. Schools are often able to provide helpful information to assist the work of MAPPPs.

Local Authority Social Services - Councils with Children Services and Community Care Responsibilities
Again, whilst there have been changes in how services are delivered across our Area, the links between the responsibilities of councils with social care responsibilities and the MAPPA are mainly in the area of child protection and safeguarding children. The MAPPA authorities are members of the Local Safeguarding Children Boards and individual practitioners in police, probation and social services work together to manage the risk posed to children by particular dangerous offenders. As legislation which had its roots in the report which followed the Victoria Climbié Inquiry6 came into force there was be a greater expectation, indeed a duty, placed on other agencies to have regard to the need to safeguard and promote the welfare of children. However Children’s’ Services maintained their position as principal point of contact in regard to concerns about the welfare of children Local authorities have a duty, where they have reasonable cause to suspect that a child who lives, or is found, in their area, is suffering, or likely to suffer, significant harm, to make such enquiries as they consider necessary to enable them to decide whether they should take any further action to safeguard or promote the child’s welfare. A ‘reasonable cause to suspect’ may arise because of the known presence of a dangerous offender in the area, and local authority staff work will with staff from the MAPPA agencies to manage the risk that person poses to children. Children who witness violence are of course also clearly at risk of harm themselves, be it physical or psychological and this now has more statutory recognition7. As MAPPA becomes more involved with the managing the risk posed by perpetrators of domestic violence then co-operation with staff from child protection agencies will increase. Children’s services and domestic violence forums are themselves referring individual cases into MAPPA for the management of adult offenders in ways that will, through effective, multi agency risk assessment and management, reduce the risk of harm such offenders present to children.
6 Children Act 2004 7 Adoption and Children Act 2002

Local Education Authorities (LEA)
There has recently been some amalgamations in regard to how social, community care and education services are delivered across our area, but broadly speaking the role of those departments dealing with education is four-fold: • • • • school improvement; special educational provision; access to education; and, strategic management of schools and the local education service.

Their ‘core business’ does not therefore involve them directly with the assessment and management of MAPPA offenders and their most likely involvement in the MAPPA is in cases which involve, either: (a) a MAPPA offender aged under 18 and who is referred by the Youth Offending Team to the MAPPA at either Level 2 or Level 3; or (b) a case where a MAPPA offender poses risks to young people for whom the LEA has a responsibility/duty of care which may be affected by the arrangements to manage the risks the MAPPA offender poses. The LEA representative on MAPPA provides an insight into the workings of schools and the LEA and has some knowledge of child protection, information sharing protocols and current arrangements for risk assessment. The education service, particularly schools, can make a helpful contribution to the work of MAPPA because:

13

MAPPA

Annual

Report

2006-2007

Health Services
MAPPA’s interaction with health services is as diverse as any adult offender’s contact with the service. It may be at the primary care level through for example a GP or pharmacist or at the secondary level through hospitals, consultants, etc. The “duty to co-operate” therefore whilst under the umbrella of a particular Health Trust, operates at those varying levels as the need presents itself. Clearly there are particular issues about working with health professionals and the sensitivities of information sharing and cooperation because of the very different relationship they have with their patients. However, all the advice and published guidance indicates that clarity about roles and the legal principles which enable information to be shared in certain circumstances, will avoid misunderstanding and disagreement. Reference is made to those principles in the section on information sharing in the MAPPA Guidance. As with all MAPPA cases the consent of the offender is obtained wherever possible for information to be sought or passed on. However situations where patient information may be passed on without consent include8 ; • • • where serious harm may occur to a third party where a doctor believes a patient to be a victim of abuse and the patient is unable to give or withhold consent where, without disclosure a doctor would not be acting in the overall best interests of a child or young person who is his/her patient and incapable of giving consent when, without disclosure the task of preventing, detecting or prosecuting a serious crime by the police would be prejudiced or delayed

Mental Health Trusts are perhaps the most significant health bodies on whom the duty to co-operate falls because most instances will involve mentally disordered offenders. However, the duty does apply to all health bodies and representatives from the various disciplines are core members at meetings held under MAPPA. The benefits for the health service for co-operation in MAPPA have been summarised as providing; • • • • a source of information about patients a conduit and framework for joint working a useful source of advice on appropriateness and implications of various medical treatments and interventions help in management of risk in complex cases.

8 Royal College of Psychiatrists (2000) Good Psychiatric Practice: Confidentiality

Waters Edge, Barton

‘06/’07
14

MAPPA

Annual

Report

2006-2007

Amelia Hill
Sunday January 7, 2007 The Observer

Constant danger
How should society deal with sex offenders once they have been released from jail? The Observer was given unprecedented access over several weeks to top police and probation officers managing paedophiles in the community. The results will shock and disturb. They give a frank insight into the lives of violent criminals, many of whom admit that they are continually on the brink of reoffending
David jabs his tongue violently into his cheek and nervously repeats my question. 'How long would it take me to turn my back on all the therapy and rehab and abuse a kid again?' he mutters, rocking backwards and forwards in his seat. 'I know exactly how long it would take.' It is seven years since David sexually abused a child and 18 months since he was released from prison for the second time, in order to live anonymously in the community. 'If I had kids, I would not want someone like me to be out in the community,' he admits. 'I would be afraid and angry if I knew someone like me was living with the freedom I have.' There is intense public feeling about the process of law that lets paedophiles and other dangerous offenders out into the community after their prison sentences are complete. This widespread paranoia and anxiety explodes into national panic when such people do reoffend. In such a climate, it is almost impossible to have a balanced and open political discussion about how these people should be managed. This was why Humberside agreed to give The Observer exclusive and unique access to the heart of the multi-agency public protection arrangements, or Mappa. Under Mappa, every violent and sexual offender has his or her panel of experts. Ranging from police, probation and social services to housing and health experts, these panels decide how offenders should be supervised and managed in the community. Humberside not only has the highest proportion of registered sex offenders in the country; it was also the region that came under severe criticism for the handling of intelligence regarding Ian Huntley, who went on to murder 10-year-olds Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman. For two weeks The Observer attended panel meetings usually barred to journalists and the public, at which all the agencies openly discussed their fears about the risks posed by offenders living locally and drew up action plans that gave the public as much protection as possible. We watched as senior officials worked together, deciding every detail of the lives of offenders living in their area. Where should they live, for example - how near to the schools, parks and playgrounds? What jobs could they take? And what - if anything should landlords, neighbours and employers be told about their past? We were privy to discussions at which experts revealed their belief that specific offenders were in danger of reoffending. The dilemmas faced by the public protection team were chilling: what should be done about the paedophile who has completed his prison sentence but is showing signs of returning to his offending behaviour? What about the sex offender whose behaviour is becoming increasingly unreliable but who is still on licence? Delaying his recall for a moment too long could mean the murder of another child. But returning him to custody unnecessarily is not just an abuse of his human rights but highly expensive and damaging to any hopes of eventual rehabilitation. In another case, panel members struggled to decide what to do about the violent offender with mental health problems and a history of knife attacks, whose parents had recently given him a samurai sword. Medical experts monitoring his behaviour said that, if he continued taking his medication, he was a risk to no one. But if he stopped taking his pills, he could be a severe danger to the public.

The police officer responsible for David's risk management, Constable Longstaff, has never asked David this question. Earlier, however, she had estimated that it would take at least two to three months for the 33-year-old to first gather the courage and then engineer a situation in which he could attack a child. Seconds later, we discover the truth. 'It would take me between 30 seconds and a minute,' David says quietly. There is no boastfulness or doubt in his voice. When asked to elaborate, he details his plan. It is completely convincing. 'There is a bridge I cross every day when I come home from the shops. Boys play in the field there. They're the sort who always come up to me, asking for cigarettes. Underneath that bridge it is dark. That's where I'd take them,' he says. Longstaff briefly closes her eyes in despair. David continues. Now he is almost pleading: 'I'm scared, because if I reoffend I will lose my flat and I don't want to lose my flat. But every day there's a risk I will lose control. I never mean to stop on the bridge but sometimes I find myself watching boys and I don't know how long I've been standing there.' David has been convicted of numerous indecent assaults on children over the past decades. He was finally imprisoned in 1993 and, after his sentence expired, was placed on the sex offenders' register. In 1999 he reoffended and was returned to prison. When he was released for the second time, he returned to Humberside, where he was born. But the police continue to have concerns about the level of danger he still represents to the community. They have graded him as being at 'high risk' of reoffending; the second highest category. 'Being considered high risk sounds serious, doesn't it?' Longstaff had said before David arrived at the police station to meet us. 'In reality, it means I spend an hour in his flat every three to six months, chatting to him about what he's been up to. You can't get much information out of these people on these visits. It's only if they choose to talk to you or accidentally let something slip.' David, however, is one of the more communicative offenders on Longstaff's list. It is chilling how candidly he admits the power his sexual perversions continue to hold over him.

15

MAPPA

Annual

Report

2006-2007

In yet another case, the experts tried to decide what should be done about the offender about to be released from prison, who had asked to be sent on an £80,000, year-long, residential therapy course. This man, said his probation officer, continued to represent a high risk to the public. She argued strongly that he should be sent on the course, which would delay his return to the community and place him under constant supervision. But health experts on the panel were less convinced: the course was expensive and had only a limited chance of successfully rehabilitating the offender, they argued. For the same money they could fund a year's treatment for three people with Alzheimer's. Why, they asked, should this offender's needs be given priority? Perhaps the most astonishing experiences were the conversations we had with the offenders themselves. We asked how successful they felt this multi-agency approach was at preventing them reoffending. Their replies were often terrifying. James is one offender who was recently identified as being on the cusp of reoffending. He was convicted of abusing children in 1972 and has been in and out of prison ever since. He is now monitored by Police Constable Jeff Smith, with whom he has a close, if tense, relationship. 'I have had these feelings since I was 12 years old,' admitted James. 'Over the years I have developed a pattern. I make friends with lonely single mothers or older people who look after their grandchildren and who either need help or are just friendly people.' Smith recently discovered that he had yet again begun the process of grooming a family to gain access to a girl. The policeman moved quickly. The family was warned to break all contact with him, and Smith raised James's risk category, meaning his contact with the offender was increased. 'I am glad someone saw what I was doing and reported me,' James said. 'I didn't start off intentionally grooming that family but I can see now that I was building up towards that. 'I can't say that I'll never reoffend again,' he added. 'I'm like this and I can't help it. It's not an addiction; it's how I am. It's just a case of remembering what I was told on the rehabilitation courses I have done in prison.' Mappa was set up by the Home Office in 2001 to build on good practice and to counter the professional suspicion that existed in some areas between police, probation and social workers. The lack of co-ordination between services created a stand-off that had left many offenders free from effective supervision, enabling them to slip through the net and reoffend. Instead of operating in isolation, Mappa panel members were instructed to work together to assess and deal with the risks posed by the most dangerous and violent offenders living in the community, pooling intelligence and skills. It is difficult and expensive work: the panels must decode the chaotic and unpredictable lives led by the most dangerous people in their communities. They must anticipate and identify often minute changes in their lives that could tip the balance in these people's behaviour and trigger a fresh offence. Inevitably, mistakes do happen. It was not long after Christmas two years ago that Peter Voisey snatched a six-year-old girl in north Tyneside from her bath and raped her, although he was supposed to have been monitored in the community. More recently, the family of a three-year-old girl abducted and raped by Craig Sweeney were left asking how details of his behaviour had not been shared between agencies in Gwent and Avon and Somerset.

Some of those tragedies were caused by failures and mistakes from which lessons could be - and were - learnt but, as John Godley, Mappa co-ordinator for the Humberside area pointed out, the system is beset by other problems that are less easily solved. 'Managing these people is not as straightforward as the public like to think,' he said. 'When a criminal reoffends, the public cry out that those charged with managing them should have anticipated it and stopped it before it happened. 'But although the public protection system is vastly better than it was, it is still not perfect,' he admitted. The public, said Godley, assume that there are a few violent and sex offenders in any community and many agencies able to supervise their behaviour. 'In reality,' he said, 'it is absolutely the other way round.' According to Visor, the violent and sex offenders' register, there are 860 individuals who pose a significant risk to the public in Humberside, and 306 others who are no longer on the sexual offences register but are still listed on Visor. Humberside has the highest proportion of registered sex offenders in the country: 81 for every 100,000 of the population9. Nationally, there are 45,737 live cases on Visor and 10,861 others not being actively managed. The level of management and supervision offenders receive can be well over minimum levels but, said Godley: 'The simple, if disturbing, truth is that no region in the country has a bottomless pit of staff and resources.' Home Office research showing the probability of sex and violent offenders reoffending is terrifying. Offenders believed to be 'very high risk' have more than a 90 per cent chance of recidivism. Around half of all high-risk offenders will reoffend, and up to a third of medium-risk offenders will commit another crime. It is hard for any system to triumph over such entrenched offending behaviour but the level of supervision of sex offenders, set nationally, seems astonishing to an outside observer. While Humberside has one exceptional case where an offender is being visited three times a day by three separate agencies, other offenders are monitored at the minimum level suitable to their level of risk as set by national guidance. Under minimum standards, registered sex offenders considered to be low-risk are visited by a police officer once a year, while medium-risk offenders are seen every six to nine months. Highrisk offenders, like David, receive visits once every three to six months. Those deemed to be at very high risk of reoffending are visited once every three months. 'With lots of these men, we can all see that, slowly but surely, they're back on a path to reoffending,' admitted Longstaff. 'All we can do is hope that we're around at the specific moment they do something concrete enough to recall them to jail. 'The truth is that I would not want the public to realise exactly how little I can do in law,' she added. 'Some of these offenders have done things so horrible and dangerous that, if the public knew they were out and walking round the streets, there would be uproar.' Despite the risks and difficulties, however, Mappa does seem to be working. According to the most recent figures from the Home Office, there are now almost 30,000 offenders on the national sex offenders' register - or an increase of 4 per cent on the year before. Yet in 2005 just 250 serious crimes were committed by offenders in the programme.

9 2005 - 2006 figures

16

MAPPA

Annual

Report

2006-2007

An idea of how many crimes were anticipated and prevented can be gleaned from the fact that 1,640 of the 13,783 offenders in the two most serious categories of risk were found to have breached their licences or Sexual Offences Protection Order, both of which impose conditions on offenders, such as staying away from playgrounds or schools. All were returned to custody immediately. The risk of a criminal reoffending haunts those whose job it is to minimise all risks. In another exclusive piece of access, The Observer attended a training day for the most senior probation officers in Humberside. 'I find it hard to contain the sheer disgust, fear and revulsion I feel towards these men,' said one officer. 'I feel repulsion towards them. I feel hatred.' John Godley, who carried out the training, says that, although these feelings may not be politically correct, it is healthy to acknowledge them. Another officer said: 'If you don't privately admit the feelings you have when working with, for example, someone who has raped a two-year-old, you can't deal with them professionally in public.' The need to control such feelings is central to the success of the probation officer. It is only by getting close enough to the offender to gain their trust that the layers of fantasy and worrying behaviour can be laid bare. While hoping that offenders do learn a degree of self-control from rehabilitation courses and therapy, many feel that the only way these people can be properly monitored in the community is by putting them under 24-hour surveillance. But this is not the catch-all solution it appears. 'If I asked for 24hour surveillance for half the people I thought deserved it, I would be told I wasn't doing my job properly because I wasn't being realistic about the protection we can offer the public,' said Longstaff. 'And they'd be right to say that: you need dozens of officers to keep a round-the-clock on an individual. You tell me how we can afford to pay for that.' Experts have other complaints about the limits of their power: case managers have no legal right of entry into the house of an offender, for example. 'If I go round to talk to an offender in his home, he can refuse to let me in and there's nothing I can do about it,' explained Longstaff 10. 'We also need greater sentences for sex offenders. You can get life for rape, but virtually no one ever does.' Even the other socalled 'solution' to the problem of violent and sexual offenders in the community, - the naming and shaming known as 'Sarah's Law' - creates deep divides among professionals. 'From the parents' and public's point of view, I see why Sarah's Law seems so attractive,' said one police officer. 'If we lived in a nation where we could trust people to use the information sensibly, I would support its introduction. But the truth is that we have a significant minority who would use that information to attack offenders, which would drive them underground. That would be the worst thing: at least if we know where these people are and they trust us enough to talk to us, we have a chance of stopping them reoffending.'

Detective Chief Superintendent Gavin Baggs, Humberside Police head of CID, is candid about the likelihood of ever creating entirely safe communities for our children to grow up in. 'The public have to accept there is no such thing as a completely riskfree environment,' he said. 'The truth is that we, as a nation, are not prepared to accept the constraints on all our lives that would require.' Baggs points to the furore sparked by the reported decision of some schools to ban parents taking photographs of children during plays and sporting events. 'There is a risk that some of those photos will be being taken for the wrong reasons, but it's a such a small risk,' he said. 'But where do you stop? Where do you draw the line?' Even if the public did decide that the risks to their children were so high that it was acceptable to lock up everyone even suspected of having the potential to commit a violent offence, or if they agreed to pay the taxes necessary for their 24-hour surveillance, the safety of our children is not guaranteed. Statistics show that we should be less worried about offenders we know about and monitor and more concerned by those others neighbours, uncles and friends we have grown to trust - who have never been convicted of a crime. 'The public would not stand for the level of Big Brother controls that would be necessary to stop all offenders, both known and unknown,' said Angela Montgomery, senior manager for risk and child protection at Humberside probation service. 'We have to get the message across that we're not going to eradicate risk, no matter how hard we work. The public need to realise that sex offenders will always exist. There will always be a risk that you live next to one, or have one in your family. Society needs to be more mature and take responsibility for the reality of the world we live in.'

Names of sex offenders have been changed.

10 This situation has now changed. From 31st March 2007 section 58 Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006 created powers for police to search and enter homes of Registered Sex Offenders.

17

MAPPA

Annual

Report

2006-2007

Scunthorpe Steelworks

‘06/’07
Key Progress and Achievements over the last year
Work has continued strengthen the composition and influence of the Strategic Management Board, to build upon existing good practice at the operational level of MAPPA and to make the MAPPA process in our Area more accessible and inclusive. Our achievements during 2006 – 2007 have included: • The consolidation of The MAPPA team and their establishing themselves from a base in their new premises. A restructuring of the Probation MAPPA cover for Hull has taken place and is now more clearly defined. The Police Risk Management Officer team has remained unchanged with all the benefits this continuity brings. The sergeants attached to those teams are though now playing an increasingly active role in the MAPPA process. A detective sergeant has been appointed half time to the MAPPA team and now works alongside the MAPPA Coordinator in the team office. • The MAPPA team have been pro-active in setting up systems with probation field offices and local prisons to facilitate early identification of relevant MAPPA offenders in our area and ensure that all necessary notifications and referrals are made at an nearly stage. It is an expectation that all relevant MAPPA offenders serving custodial sentences will be referred to MAPPA at the appropriate level at least 6 months prior to their release. • In order to extend the co-ordinated management of risk to include those offenders under 18 years of age and to ensure the appropriate referral of those offenders to the MAPPA level 2 and 3 process the Probation Officer attached to the MAPPA team now attends the monthly Youth Offending Team Risk Meetings in Hull. The success of this practice means it is to be rolled out to the other YOTs within Humberside. • There is an obvious link between MAPPA and the management of the perpetrators of domestic violence. Over the last year there has been an increased focus on the role of MAPPA in contributing to the safety of women and children who suffer either directly or indirectly from the damaging effects of domestic abuse. It is acknowledged that involving a domestic violence perpetrator in a programme of challenging work on their behaviour can increase the risk to any victims or potential victims. Therefore as the Probation Service continues to have domestic violence offenders under their supervision undertake the Integrated Domestic Abuse Programme (IDAP) it is recognised that there is a need for multi-agency co-ordination of work to ensure the safety of victims, current partners and children of the men undertaking that programme. Over the last year therefore all offenders who are to undertake the IDAP have been referred to and discussed at Level 2 Multi Agency Risk Management meetings under MAPPA to ensure that all agencies are fully aware of the current situation with its inherent risks and that measures are in place to minimise that risk. As a result the Women’s Safety Workers in Probation now regularly attend the MAPPA level 2 and 3 meetings. • ViSOR continues to be an effective tool in the management of offenders both nationally and in our Area. The main thrust to date however has been with Registered Sex Offenders and very high risk violent offenders and the police have had prime responsibility for maintaining and interrogating the ViSOR system. The Probation Service is due to take up its responsibility in the use of ViSOR for managing violent and other offenders towards the end of this year and over the last 12 months the building blocks have been put in place to facilitate this. Trails have taken place in several Probation Areas - in our region this was in South Yorkshire - and staff and terminal locations have been identified in our area with a view to bringing ViSOR on line towards the end of the year. The Probation Officers attached to our MAPPA Team now have access to ViSOR. • In November 2006 Humberside Area allowed unprecedented access to the work we do under MAPPA by a senior reporter from a national broadsheet newspaper. The reporter spent two weeks with our MAPPA team and Police Risk Management Officers, attending MAPPP panels, home visits and offender interviews. The resulting article, shown earlier in this report, appeared in the National Sunday press . • Training delivery by the MAPPA Team has continued. The Probation Officers attached to the MAPPA team have undertaken the delivery of training on The Assessment and Management of Risk to all Offender Managers in our area and have participated in training delivered to the police, probation and prison service on assessing and managing Sex Offenders and using the Risk Matrix 2000 assessment tool.

18

MAPPA

Annual

Report

2006-2007

The coming year …
Having mentioned the many achievements this year which have strengthened the MAPPA and enabled better communication and working relationships between agencies, there is always room for improvement as new legislation, guidance and technology comes on stream. For the year 2007 – 2008 we are looking to consolidate our current position and further improve using the Strategic Management Board’s Business Plan which can be seen later in this report. The key areas for MAPPA to look at for the coming year are as follows: • The successful roll out of ViSOR within the Humberside Probation Service, by having the appropriate probation staff trained and the commissioning of I.T. systems. The knowledge and experience of the police ViSOR teams will be drawn on, conducting joint training when appropriate. Following a consultation period earlier this year the new MAPPA guidance is expected to be introduced towards the end of 2007 and we look forward to implementing the improved processes. By actively informing the public of the work of MAPPA, improve public confidence in MAPPA and ensure the public expectations are reasonable. When appropriate, engage the media to promote awareness of MAPPA. • Engage in initiatives to establish protocols and communication links between MAPPA and Multi Agency Risk Assessment Conferences (MARACS) and Local Safeguarding Children’s Boards in order to work with victims of domestic violence and protect the welfare of children. • Promote awareness of and make effective use of additional legislation and protocols. E.g. police powers of entry, foreign travel notifications etc. To aim for better working relationships with Lay Advisors and to ensure correct Lay Advisors training is done to enable effective communication at SMB meetings. Improve the sharing of information between agencies, to ensure correct identification of MAPPA offenders and improve referrals to MAPPA. Identify training opportunities that will benefit MAPPA agencies to ensure closer partnership working. Promote regular user group meetings to share best practice and aim for all agencies in all areas to work towards consistency.

• •

What do the Statistics tell us?
The statistics presented cover the period from 1st April 2006 to 31st March 2007 and the format and content is again substantially the same as last year’s with the work being done under MAPPA at level 2 (Local Risk Management Meetings) and level 3 (Multi agency Public Protection Panels) being detailed. It is understood that this format will change next year to include information on those offenders managed at Level 1, Ordinary Risk Management. The total number of offenders coming under MAPPA in our Area this year is 1209, an increase of 3.2% on last years figures of 1172 against an expected rise of 2.2% nationally. Our total when viewed against a predicted figure of 48692 across the 42 Areas of England and Wales remains at just under 2.5% of that national MAPPA case load. There were 653 Category 1 Registered Sex Offenders living in our area on the 31st March 2007 a reduction of 8.7%, against a figure of 715 for the previous year. The number of those Registered Sex Offenders in our Area in contravention of their registration requirements reduced, during the reporting period, 2006 – 2007, 27 of those Registered Sex Offenders were cautioned or convicted for breaching the requirements of their registration, as against 30 last year, 2005 – 2006. The number of Category 2 offenders, i.e. violent and other sex offenders, recorded as living in this area in the reporting period is 484. This an increase of 23.8% over last years figures of 391 but it is important to remember that this is the number who have lived in the area for any period, however short, at any time during the year and not the number of such offenders present on any one day. 19 The number of Category 3 offenders dealt with during the reporting period has to be considered on two levels and again it is the focus on domestic violence offenders which makes this necessary. If we stick rigidly to the definition of Category 3 offenders, that is those offenders not in either of the above two categories but who have a conviction for an offence which indicates they are capable of causing serious harm and who at the current time it is reasonably considered that they pose a risk of serious harm then the number considered this year was 72. This figure will include a high proportion of domestic violence perpetrators because as stated in previous reports often the sentences for offences involving domestic abuse involve a Community Order with a requirement that the offender participates in a programme of work aimed at reducing the likelihood of their re-offending in such a way. Such sentences do not at this time meet the criteria for automatic consideration under MAPPA Category 2, Violent Offenders (a sentence of at least 12 months imprisonment is required) but nevertheless the offenders behaviour and attitude can still be such that there is considered to be a current risk of serious harm to their victims meeting the criteria for Category 3. However, additionally in our Area it is practice to take all offenders who are attending the Integrated Domestic Abuse Programme to a Level 2 (local inter-agency management) meeting to ensure all appropriate agencies are aware of the situation as research indicates this is a time when risk to partners could increase. If such referrals are included, they will be under Category 3 and therefore this figure becomes 158. At 72 the increase in Category 3 offenders is just over 8% up on last year.

MAPPA

Annual

Report

2006-2007

187 offenders across the area were dealt with at the lower level of risk management, Level 2, Local Risk Management Meetings. This figure does not include those offenders who may have been managed at the higher level 3 at some point and who then have been returned to local management. At 15.4% of our total MAPPA caseload (1209) this figure is comparable to last years percentage (13.4%) and therefore is again lower than the expectation that nationally cases managed at Level 2 will make up 20% of the total MAPPA caseload. 35 Offenders were managed by Level 3 Multi Agency Public Protection Panels at some stage during the reporting period. At 2.9% of the total MAPPA caseload in this area this is again within the nationally predicted range of less than 5%. 2 of the 187 cases managed at Level 2, Local Risk Management, and 3 of the 35 cases managed at Level 3, Multi Agency Public Protection Panel were returned to custody for breaching the conditions of their licence. Revocation of the licence and recall to prison should not be seen as a failure of the risk management process, rather it is an indication that those managing the offenders are prepared to take swift, decisive action when, by reoffending or through their behaviour, an offender indicates that the risk they present to the public in the community is unacceptable. Following the offender’s return to prison further work can be undertaken to address that behaviour or other risk management initiatives can be put in place. There can then be a consideration for further release when the risk presented by the offender is considered acceptable. There are in place procedures for the identification, notification and review of cases where offenders under probation supervision have been charged with committing a Serious Further Offence (SFO). This SFO notification and review procedure is intended to ensure robust and rigorous scrutiny of SFO cases; and promote strong defensible practice in the management of risk of serious harm. Any failures can be identified and rectified, but also good practice, not withstanding the commission of a serious further offence, can be recognised and supported. The trigger factor for this process is the seriousness of the further offence committed not the level of supervision or risk management being applied so this is not purely a MAPPA initiative. However scrutiny of these cases should lead to learning and possible changes in service delivery relevant to all offenders including those managed under MAPPA. In Humberside during the review period one case being managed at Level 2, Local Risk Management, committed a serious further offence.

Sexual Offences Prevention Orders are obtained on application to a court. They place restrictions on an offender to prohibit access to certain places (e.g. schools and parks) and to certain groups of people (e.g. children). The Order remains in place for a minimum of 5 years. In Humberside during 2006 – 2007, 55 Sexual Offences Prevention Orders were applied for. 48 full Orders and 37 Interim Orders have been granted. The discrepancy between the applications and Orders granted is due to counting activities which commenced or were completed during the review period and of course some applications will have overlapped this period. The orders were made both at point of sentence for a sexual offence following close liaison with Police Risk Management Officers, police officer in the case and the Probation Service and also as stand alone applications when concern had arisen about an offender’s behaviour. One offender has been taken to court and convicted of breaching the Order and is currently serving a custodial sentence for that breach. Notification Orders can be applied for when a person resident in this country is known to have been convicted of a sexual offence overseas which, if committed in this country, would have required them to register with the police. Such an Order then requires that the offender does register with police and they can then be supervised and monitored by the police. Two Notification Orders were successfully applied for in our Area during the reporting period. A Foreign Travel Order bans those who have been convicted of a sexual offence against a child under 16 from travelling abroad in certain circumstances. An order, if granted, can ban an offender from travelling to a specific country (or countries) anywhere in the world or limit travel to a named country. No such Orders were applied for in our Area during the reporting period.

20

MAPPA

Annual

Report

2006-2007

MAPPA ANNUAL REPORTS STATISTICAL INFORMATION
For the reporting period 1st APRIL 2006 - 31st MARCH 2007

Humberside
1. Category 1 MAPPA offenders: Registered Sex Offenders (RSO)
i) The number of RSOs in total living in our Area on 31st March 2007. Area total broken down to Basic Police Command Unit (BCU) level. This is information principally held by the police and is a snapshot of RSOs on 31/03/07. It does NOT include RSOs in prison. BCU N.E. Lincs (Grimsby) N. Lincs (Scunthorpe) East Riding of Yorks Hull TOTAL RSO 114 131 142 266 653

a) The number of RSOs in our Area per 100,000 head of population. RSO Per 100,000 73

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 are counted TOTAL 27

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 our Area between 1st April 2006 and 31st March 2007. (a) 55 (b) 37 (c) 48

The total number of full SOPOs imposed includes 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 our Area between 1st April 2006 and 31st March 2007. (a) 2 (b) 2 (c) 2

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

21

MAPPA

Annual

Report

2006-2007

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 our Area between 1st April 2006 and 31st March 2007. This figure includes only those Category 2 offenders who have lived in our Area during the reporting period. They do not include those Category 2 offenders who are still in custody. Nor do they include any offenders who also meet Category 1.

TOTAL

484

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 does not include any offenders who are included in either the Category 1 or 2 (i.e. (i) and (vi) above).

TOTAL

72*

*This figure comprises those offenders whose actual current assessed risk places them in Category 3. Additionally, in our Area it is practice to take all offenders who are attending the Integrated Domestic Abuse Programme to a Level 2 (local inter-agency management) meeting to ensure all appropriate agencies are aware of the situation as research indicates this is a time when risk to partners could increase. If such referrals are included this figure becomes 158.

4. Offenders managed though Level 3 (MAPPP) & Level 2 (local inter-agency management)
(viii) The number of MAPPA offenders in each of the three Categories (i.e. (1)- RSOs, (2)- V&O and (3)- OthO above) who 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. Cat.1 (RSO) Level 2 Level 3 47 16 Cat.2 (Violent) 71 16 Cat.3(Other) 69 3

(ix) Of the cases managed at levels 3 or 2 (i.e. (viii)) between 1st April 2006 and 31st March 2007,the following:

(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?

(a) Level 2 Level 3 2 3

(b) 1 0

(c) 1 0

PLEASE NOTE: Only measures appropriate to the level at which the offender was managed at the time of their breach/further offence are recorded (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 is 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.

22

MAPPA

Annual

Report

2006-2007

Report of the Strategic Management Board
This year has seen an increase in both the volume and complexity of work for all agencies involved in Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements which has caused all agencies to commit significant resourcing and commitment to ensure the safety of the public in Humberside. The focus for that commitment is through the Strategic Management Board and Humberside SMB, in reviewing its Business Plan for 2006/07 has achieved the following: • • • • • The establishment of a dedicated MAPPA Co-ordination and Administration Team. A detailed response to the Public Protection Unit from the SMB regarding draft MAPPA guidance. An agreed Action Plan to implement the recommendations of the HMIP/C MAPPA Thematic Inspection. Robust monitoring arrangements to support the production of the MAPPA Annual Report. Briefings have been made to the Local Safeguarding Children’s Boards and Local Criminal Justice Boards within Humberside.

This year has seen significant media attention focussed on protecting the public, particularly children, from sexual offenders and in order to ensure that we continue to do all we can to maintain the highest level of protection possible the government called for a review of the management of child sex offenders11. The recommendations which came from this review have been incorporated in the Strategic Management Board’s Business Plan for 2006-07. In terms of the future, I would like to state that the quality of multi-agency working in what is a difficult area of work has never been as high and that the commitment and professionalism of all staff at all grades is to be commended. I again thank all staff in the statutory, voluntary and private sector for their “can do” approach and their willingness to go the extra mile in individual cases in order to ensure the protection of the public. However, the ultimate objective of developing a safer place to live and work cannot be achieved without the engagement of all the diverse communities which make up the Humberside Area and I hope that through this report, the SMB can raise the community’s awareness of the work we are doing and encourage that engagement. It was as a recognition of the need to engage with the public that the Responsible Authorities in Humberside allowed the National Press access to MAPPA and the article produced as a result of this access gives a good indication of the work carried out in Humberside.

Angela Montgomery Chair Humberside Area Strategic Management Board
11 The Review of Protection of Children from Sex Offenders. COI on behalf of Home Office, June 2007

23

MAPPA

Annual

Report

2006-2007

MULTI AGENCY PUBLIC PROTECTION ARRANGEMENTS AREA MAPPA BUSINESS PLAN 2007 - 2008
1. MAPPA DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY
STRATEGIC AIM Implement the revised MAPPA Guidance DELIVERY PLAN • Risk Policies to be revised MILESTONES March 2008 RESOURCE Senior Manager for Risk Chief Superintendent for MAPPA Training of staff in new MAPPA Guidance Implement the Action Plan arising from the recommendations of the HMI P/C MAPPA Thematic Inspection • Promote full discussion/consultation in respect of the recommendations to Strategic Management Board and all member organisations • Probation Service to implement the national guidance • In respect of the duty of other agencies to review serious cases (child protection/mental health) there is an agreement that this requires co-ordination and monitoring in order for the Strategic Management Board to have an overview of both the number and category of cases • Funding to be agreed for Administrative Support • Post/s to be advertised and staff to be in post • Backlog of Minutes to be cleared • Implementation of the administrative provision for MAPPA following the requirement to implement the Sex Offender Review • Audit of Minutes produced for MAPPA in respect of: Timeliness, Quality • Servive Progress Plan Priority achieved June 2007 Strategic Management Board Process for the collection, collation and analysis of Serious Case Data March 2008 The Senior Management Team of each organisation to implement the Action Plan Implementation of the recommendations OUTCOME Implementation of revised MAPPA Guidance

Serious Case Reviews – ensure that all agencies are involved in the review of serious cases

December 2007

Strategic Management Board

Process for the collection, collation and analysis of Serious Case Data

Improve the administration of MAPPA Minutes

September 2007 December 2007 December 2007

January 2008

March 2008

24

MAPPA

Annual

Report

2006-2007

1. MAPPA DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY (cont)
STRATEGIC AIM To identify the cost of SMB’s contribution to MAPPA DELIVERY PLAN • Funding to be agreed for administrative support. Identification of Probation’s contribution to MAPPA. • Development of a costing model for all agencies including Probation • Agreement by the SMB for the Model to be implemented across all agencies • Post/s to be advertised and staff to be in post • Quarterly figures to be produced in respect of attendance at MAPPP Levels 2/Level 3 • Six months of costing results to be presented to the SMB and Probation costs to be presented to SLT • Quarterly costings to be produced thereafter • Annual Cost to be collated and analysed Review of the Protection of Children from Sex Offenders • To develop and implement an Action Plan MILESTONES June 2007 RESOURCE Strategic Management Board OUTCOME Administrative support in place. Model for costing all agencies input to MAPPA developed and in use. Collation and analysis of actual agency costs

June 2007

June 2007

September 2007 September 2007

September 2007

December 2007 March 2008

September 2008

Strategic Management Board

Implementation of action plan.

To explore the appointment of a Child Protection Social Worker to the MAPPA Team from April 2008

• SMB representative from Hull to liaise with the three other SMB representatives from East Riding, North Lincs, North East Lincs to agree funding contributions. • Recruitment and selection arrangements to take place. • Person to be in post.

December 2007

Child Protection Social Worker in post with MAPPA Team.

February 2008

April 2008

25

MAPPA

Annual

Report

2006-2007

2. MONITORING AND EVALUATION STRATEGY
STRATEGIC AIM Measure attendance at MAPPP meetings DELIVERY PLAN • A target of 75% attendance at Level 2/3 MAPPP by all agencies • A target of 75% of all referrals to MAPPA to be made 6 months prior to release • The responsible Authorities and Health Trusts together with the MAPPA Co-ordinator to develop a Protocol regarding such transfers MILESTONES September 2007 RESOURCE MAPPA Team OUTCOME Regular Performance Reports

Timescales to be set for MAPPA Referrals

March 2008

MAPPA Team

Regular Performance Reports

To develop a policy in respect of the transfer of high risk/MAPPA cases into and out of the Humberside Strategic Management Board area

March 2008

Police Probation Health Prisons

Regular Performance Reports

To ensure full commitment of all agencies to the Strategic Management Board

• A target of 75% attendance at Strategic Management Board of named agency representatives

March 2008

Strategic Management Board

Regular Performance Reports

3. COMMUNICATION AND STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS STRATEGY
STRATEGIC AIM The Responsible Authorities within MAPPA to publish the Annual Report DELIVERY PLAN • Steering Group to be identified to manage and collate the data to produce the Annual Report • Briefings to be presented to Head teachers, Councillors and MPs within Humberside • Briefings to LSCBs MILESTONES July 2007 RESOURCE Strategic Management Board OUTCOME Annual Report to be produced by 2008

Improved communications regarding MAPPA across Humberside

March 2008

Senior Manager Risk Chief Superintendent MAPPA

Improved communication and knowledge

March 2008

Senior Manager Risk Chief Superintendent MAPPA

• Briefings to LCJBs

March 2008

Senior Manager Risk Chief Superintendent MAPPA

Appointments of additional Lay Advisor

• Recruitment to take place

March 2008

Responsible Authorities

Lay Advisor appointed

26

MAPPA

Annual

Report

2006-2007

4. TRAINING STRATEGY
STRATEGIC AIM To organise a development day with an outside facilitator for the Strategic Management Board and the MAPPA Team DELIVERY PLAN • Identify a suitable facilitator, dates and venue • Identify suitable cases for review • Develop a Strategic Mission Statement MILESTONES March 2008 RESOURCE Prison Service Probation Service OUTCOME Three Year Plan agreed by the Strategic Management Board Annual Objectives agreed by the MAPPA Team

MAPPA Training

• Development of a 3 year Plan for MAPPA training for all agencies

March 2008

MAPPA Co-ordinator Training Managers

Plan to be produced for approval by the Strategic Management Board

‘06/’07
Brigg Market Place

27

MAPPA

Annual

Report

2006-2007

Strategic Management Board Members*
Angela Montgomery Solicitor & Secretary to Humberside Probation Board Senior Manager for Risk National Probation Service - Humberside 21 Flemingate Beverley East Riding of Yorkshire HU17 0NP 01482 398034 Angela.Montgomery@humbersid.probation.gsx.gov.uk John Crosse Assistant Chief Constable Humberside Police Headquarters Priory Road Police Station KINGSTON UPON HULL HU5 5SF 0845 6060222 John.Crosse@humberside.pnn.police.uk Mr Said Ali Divisional Manager – Specialist Services Humber Mental Health and Teaching NHS Trust HQ Beverley Road Willerby HU10 6ED 01482 389100 Said.Ali@humber.nhs.uk Darren O’Neill East Riding Youth Offending Team Council Offices Main Road Skirlaugh East Riding of Yorkshire HU11 5HN 01482 396623 darren.oneill@eastriding.gov.uk Claire Clucas Independent Lay Adviser c/o National Probation Service - Humberside 21 Flemingate Beverley East Riding of Yorkshire HU17 0NP 01482 398034 Philip Holmes Director of Children, Adult & Family Services ERYC County Hall Beverley East Yorkshire HU17 9BA 01482 392000 Philip.holmes@eastriding.gov.uk Nigel Richardson Director of Children and Young People’s Services Kingston Upon Hull City Council The Guildhall Alfred Gelder Street Hull HU1 2AA 01482 616004 nigel.richardson@hullcc.gov.uk Julie Ogley Executive Director of Community Care North East Lincolnshire Council Municipal Buildings Town Hall Square Grimsby DN31 1HU 01472 325456 julie.ogley@nelincs.gov.uk Nicky Dunlop Deputy Governor HMP Hull Hedon Road Hull HU9 5LS 01482 282200 nicky.dunlop@hmps.gsi.gov.uk Phil Edwards Head of Offender Management Group HMP Full Sutton Full Sutton York YO41 1PS 01759 475100 phillip.edwards02@hmps.gsi.gov.uk Richard Stiff Executive Director for Children's Services North Lincolnshire Council Pittwood House Ashby Road Scunthorpe DN16 1AB 01724 296296 Richard.Stiff@northlincs.gov.uk John Godley MAPPA Co-ordinator C/o Pearson Park LPT Humberside Police Priory Road Police Station Priory Road Hull HU5 5SF 01482 334835 john.godley@humberside.pnn.police.uk

* as at 14th September 2007

28

MAPPA

Annual

Report

2006-2007

Agency Contact Points
Humberside Police
Police Headquarters Priory Road Kingston–upon-Hull HU5 5SF 0845 6060222

National Probation Service – Humberside
Head Office 21 Flemingate Beverley East Yorkshire HU17 0NP 01482 867271

HM Prison Service
Yorkshire and Humberside Area Office Marston House Audby Lane Wetherby LS22 7SD 01937 544500

MAPPA Co-ordinator
C/o Pearson Park LPT Humberside Police Priory Road Police Station Priory Road HULL HU5 5SF 01482 334835

29

‘0

Skidby Windmill

06/’07

Photographs by kind permission of: Edge Interactive Ltd and North Lincolnshire Council