Making our communities safer and reducing re-offending is our highest priority and one of our biggest challenges. That is why the work undertaken through these multi-agency public protection arrangements (MAPPA) is so important. The supervision and management of sexual and violent offenders who pose the highest risk of serious harm, whether in the community or in custody, is complex and challenging; and is an aspect of public service where the public rightly expects all reasonable action to be taken. Although we have made significant progress in the last five years with the development of MAPPA across England and Wales, the review this year of a number of tragic incidents where people have been murdered or seriously injured reminded us of the importance of reviewing performance, improving practice and learning lessons. It is vital that these tasks are undertaken by the probation, police and prison services, as well as by those other agencies that contribute to the assessment and management of offenders. The publication of MAPPA Business Plans by each Area in this year’s annual reports offers a helpful and necessary programme of local development and review and must lead to enhanced practice. It will be essential that this progress is transparent and shared with local communities. In addition to this, however, it is important that no opportunity is missed to consider other measures that will further enhance public safety. That is why we are undertaking the Child Sex Offender Review, to look at how a particular group of offenders, who provoke anxiety for many, are best managed in the community. The review is consulting a wide range of practitioners and key stakeholders including the MAPPA lay advisors, and will report around the end of the year. Finally, in commending this report to you, I want to take the opportunity to thank all those involved locally in working with sexual and violent offenders, or in ensuring that these arrangements are fit for purpose. Where MAPPA is working well it is based on maintaining high professional standards and effective multi-agency collaboration in the delivery of robust risk management plans. While it is not possible to eliminate risk entirely, where all reasonable action is taken the risk of further serious harm can be reduced to a minimum and fewer victims will be exposed to repeat offending.

Gerry Sutcliffe MP
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Criminal Justice and Offender Management

This year has seen a significant rise in the number of referrals to the MAPPP team. The MAPPP process is now a core consideration in Risk Management for most agencies. This is testament to the development of MAPPP within Norfolk. Public Protection continues to receive high profile coverage nationally and remains a challenging issue for Norfolk Constabulary and our partner agencies alike. We recognise that we must make the most efficient use of our finite resources. By embracing the joint working within the MAPPA we can reduce duplication and ensure a strong corporate response. No single agency can tackle these challenges alone and it is vitally important that agencies continue to support and inform the MAPPP process. This way, together, I believe we are able to offer the best protection for the public of Norfolk.

Carole Howlett
Chief Constable Norfolk Constabulary

Our role as one of the Responsible Authorities within the MAPPP Arrangements has developed considerably and yielded positive outcomes over the last year. It has provided for closer working relationships with various agencies to improve upon the sharing of information. This in turn allows a better targetted approach to the period of sentence spent in custody and a continuous focus upon the risk management of offenders released back into the community.

James Shanley
Prison Governor HMP Norwich

Now in its 6th year, the Norfolk Multi Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) continues to provide a framework for managing the risks to the public presented by violent and sexual offenders. As one of the Responsible Authorities, Norfolk Probation Area continues to work closely with the agencies to enhance public safety across the county.

The number of violent and sexual crimes committed represent a small proportion of the total recorded crime in the county, but for the victims and their families they inevitably cause a great deal of fear and concern. It is with this in mind that our dedicated team of professionals work hard to ensure that all the agencies work together to deliver close and effective management of the perpetrators of these crimes. Furthermore, we strive to ensure that the views of victims are taken fully into consideration when important decisions are being taken about the restrictions to be placed on offenders on release or in the community. The MAPPA have brought a consistency, depth and focus to offender risk assessment and management which I am confident will continue to help protect the people of Norfolk. This, our fifth annual report, outlines the progress and achievements that have been made here in Norfolk over the past year and underlines our joint commitment to reducing crime and making Norfolk an even safer place to live.

Martin Graham
Chief Officer Norfolk Probation Area


This has been another very busy year for the MAPPA with lots of changes both operationally and strategically. We would like to take this opportunity to welcome John as our new Lay Advisor; he comes from a background in Industry and following retirement took a post with the schools inspectorate, Ofstead. He has made a valuable contribution so far to both the Strategic Management Board (SMB) and the Policy and Procedures Group. He joins Pat, our original Lay Advisor, who comes from a Health background, and who has been very active within the MAPPA to date. Coming from divergent backgrounds and having different personalities that compliment each other, we are confident that they will bring a much needed boost to the Strategic Management Board. The number of referrals to MAPPP has increased dramatically. A panel consisting of the MAPPA Manager, the Deputy MAPPA Manager and the Detective Inspector from the Family Protection Unit rigorously screens these. At present we reject about 40% of all referrals, as they do not meet the MAPPA criteria. Despite this the number of MAPPP meetings has at least doubled over last year’s figures. Due to the increased number of referrals we have had to employ a further administrative assistant. This post has been part funded by the local Criminal Justice Board, for which we are very grateful. MAPPA relies entirely on contributions from agencies represented on the Strategic Management Board; we receive no direct funding from the Government to operate this important arm of public protection. We have also appointed a Deputy Manager this year who in addition to chairing the Level 2 meetings for Norwich and the West of the County, (the Manager chairs the Level 3 meetings and the Level 2 meetings in the East of the County) will develop a more strategic role within MAPPA. The Deputy will initially take all aspects of Housing and Circles of Support as his remit. Circles of Support is an organisation which offers practical support and mentorship to sex offenders within the community. It is supported by the Lucy Faithful Foundation, an agency that has many years experience in the assessment and treatment of sex offenders. The volunteers who provide support to the sex offenders through the “Circle” will undergo specialist training before beginning their role with the offender. This will provide much needed support for sex offenders who can be unsupported in the community, a position that can often contribute to offending. It is hoped that an offender supported by a “Circle” will be less likely to offend and in turn present less of a risk of harm to the public. Circles of Support has been very successful in other parts of the country over a 4-year period. The Strategic Management Board has developed two sub-groups this year, the Quality Assurance Group and the Policy and Procedures Group. This is in line with the requirements of the National Business Plan (see Appendix 2) and the Local Business Plan (see Appendix 3). The Quality Assurance Group has already reviewed a local case, which prompted both local and national media attention and led to changes in Government policy. Lastly we take great pride in announcing that the entire MAPPA team have been awarded a Certificate of Achievement by Norfolk’s Chief Constable Carole Howlett, in recognition of the consistently good work undertaken by the team to protect the public of Norfolk. This is a rare honour for any member of any police force, but for us as civilians working alongside the Public Protection Unit, this is especially valued.

The issue of risk management remains high on everybody’s agenda. This year has seen the MAPPA process tackle some of the most potentially serious cases within the county. This has involved a great deal of work behind the scenes by the Norfolk MAPPA team to ensure that each meeting is focussed and successful. Securing agency attendance and holding the partner agencies to account for their roles and actions in each case has been the key in a number of high profile cases. The Norfolk MAPPP has seen issues raised on a local and national level. One such high profile case has led to a change in law in relation to public protection measures. There have also been cases where the MAPPP have been able to support another agency in diverting from policy in order to provide the most appropriate support to reduce the risk of re-offending. This demonstrates the strength of the Multi Agency approach. As always, the team are constantly looking to see what changes are needed to increase efficiency and effectiveness. This year is no exception, there will be changes but the MAPPA approach can only strengthen. A very good year. Paul Brown,
Detective Inspector Public Protection Unit

A young woman with a personality disorder and well known to the Mental Health Services told someone she wanted to kidnap, sexually abuse and murder a child. It was further reported that she had been standing outside local schools. This was reported to the police and a MAPPP was called. The MAPPP needed more information to make an informed decision about the case. It requested that Children’s Services visit and assess the young woman’s friends and family with children; the police were requested to interview the young woman (who fully admitted her sexual preoccupation with children), Education were informed and their representative interviewed the Head Teachers of a number of schools in her neighbourhood, warnings were posted with schools to ensure children’s safety whilst in the playground and before and after school; a consultant forensic psychiatrist provided the MAPPP with a report on the young woman’s mental state. Due to the close collaboration by all agencies it was ascertained that no harm had yet been done to any child. The young woman was charged with an offence of Threatening to Kill an Unknown Child for which she was sentenced to 2 years imprisonment and a Sex Offender Prevention Order (SOPO) for an indefinite period, with a number of restrictions on her behaviour, was applied on conviction. During her time in prison she was subject to MAPPP meetings on a regular basis; this allowed the Panel members to be updated on her attitudes in prison and her plans for release. Strict licence conditions ensured that her accommodation was stringently monitored, her plans for employment were challenged and the restrictions of her SOPO were adhered to. Police Sex Offender Visiting Officers, the Probation Service and Mental Health teams will robustly monitor her on her return to the community.

MAPPA stands for Multi Agency Public Protection Arrangements. Unlike many of the large urban conurbations, who have a number of MAPPA covering specific geographical areas of their region, (for instance the West Midlands has 21 separate MAPPA), Norfolk has just one unit, which covers the whole county. The MAPPA team in Norfolk consists of 4 people, a Manager (sometimes called the MAPPA Co-ordinator), a Deputy Manager, and two full time administrative assistants. The team is based in a police station in Norwich that also houses the Norwich branch of the Family Protection Unit of Norfolk Constabulary which comprises three teams – Public Protection Unit, Family Protection Unit and the Adult Protection Unit. The placing of the MAPPA team within this unit allows for very close working relationships with the police and as both the MAPPP Manager and the Deputy Manager are both fully trained and experienced Probation Officers, this means we enjoy a close working relationship with the Probation Service too. The Multi Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) exists to ensure that those offenders in the community whose previous offences or current behaviour suggest that they could pose a risk, are identified, assessed and managed. The MAPPA first began operating in April 2001. Through legislation a Duty was placed on the Police, the Probation Service and, more recently, the Prison Service (the Responsible Authorities) to jointly assess the risk that individual sexual and violent offenders pose and manage that risk through inter-agency co-operation. This is particularly the case for those offenders who give society the greatest cause for concern, the “critical few” (Level 3 cases), but also those whose profile suggests that their risk might escalate if not addressed through the sharing of relevant information amongst those agencies involved in the assessment of risk of serious harm. The prime function of MAPPA is to protect the public through the use of multi agency working, to share information between a variety of agencies so that risk to the public can be assessed and managed. This is done through a MAPPP, (Multi Agency Public Protection Panel). Representatives from a number of different agencies involved with the offender meet face-toface on a regular basis. The members of the panel listen to information from all the agencies involved assess the risk they pose to the public then develop a multi agency risk management plan. MAPPA deals with people who have been convicted of an offence, or whose behaviour is cause for concern and presents a high or very high risk of harm to the public, which needs to be managed by a number of agencies working together to reduce that risk. Risk of harm to the public is not restricted to offenders who are subject to supervision by Norfolk Probation Area or involvement with Norfolk Police. The identification and management of risk must be a multi agency responsibility and this has been recognised in Norfolk through the establishment of close working arrangements between Norfolk Probation, Norfolk Police, the Prison Service, Local Authority Housing, Education and Social Services as well as Health, the Youth Offending Service and others.

Category 1 Registered Sex Offenders The identification of such offenders lies primarily with the police. Although such offenders can be on statutory supervision to the Probation Service, it is necessary to liaise with the police regarding assessment and management issues. Category 2 Violent and other Sex Offenders Whilst category 2 offences do not attract any requirement to register with the police, all offenders will be under the statutory supervision of the Probation Service, with the exception of a small number of offenders sentenced prior to the Criminal Justice Act 1991. Category 3 Offenders These do not fall into either category 1 or 2 by virtue of the offence they have committed or sentence received, but they still pose a risk of serious harm to society. They are identified according to two criteria; firstly it has to be established that the person has committed an offence which indicates they are capable of causing serious harm to the public, and secondly that it must be reasonably considered the person may cause serious harm to the public.


What is “Risk”? The dictionary defines risk as “hazard, or the chance of bad circumstances”. In the context of the MAPPA we are concerned with looking at risk in terms of “risk of serious harm to the public”. The level of risk of harm that a person poses is subject to constant variation according to their current circumstances and is therefore subject to constant evaluation by the agency primarily responsible for the case. This agency will then advise MAPPP of any changes in circumstances so that the risk management plan can be altered to suit the level of risk posed. It is important to remember that risk can go down as well as up. What is “Serious Harm”? Serious harm is defined as “behaviour which is life threatening or traumatic and from which recovery, whether physical or psychological, can be expected to be difficult or impossible to recover from”. How do we assess “Risk”? To make the most effective use of resources there are 3 separate but connected levels at which risk is assessed and managed. Generally the higher the level of risk the higher the level of management required. The level a case is managed at is dependent on the nature of that risk and how it can be managed. Risk is not static, it is dynamic, Offenders can move between different levels of risk according to differing circumstances. Level one – ordinary risk management – this is used for offenders who are assessed as high risk, or are on the threshold of high risk, but who have limited needs, are fully responsive and cooperative with the agency managing them and there are few concerns about their behaviour. Risk can be appropriately managed within normal risk management or supervision plans. Therefore there will usually be no need to hold a multi agency meeting, unless circumstances change. Level 2 – local inter agency risk management – this is for offenders where risk assessment is a complex issue or needs more than one agency to properly manage the risk. Cases will be discussed at a Level 2 MAPPP meeting so that information can be exchanged, proper risk assessments undertaken and plans agreed. Level 3 – MAPPP – Multi Agency Public Protection Panel – these are the “critical few”, the highest risk cases that because of the seriousness of the offence or the notoriety of the offender need to be managed at the highest level. This system ensures that time and resources can be devoted to the highest risk offenders, thus ensuring the maximum protection for the community. It is important to remember that MAPPP does not itself manage the offender; the agency that referred the offender retains primary responsibility for them. However, by bringing a case to the MAPPP the agency helps to ensure other agencies co-operate as far as their existing statutory duties require. Thus, the practical purpose of MAPPA is to enable each agency to discharge its duties more effectively through co-operation.

A young man aged 14, (who had previously committed a sexual offence) displayed violent and aggressive tendencies and sexually inappropriate and abusive behaviour both at home and at school. He had been excluded from school for over 12 months. Attempts had been made to educate him at home through distance learning, but this was proving unsuccessful. His parents lacked control over him and he was terrorising the family. It was further discovered he was trying to access Internet pornography. It was thought likely that he would commit a more serious sexual offence in the near future. By calling a MAPPP the panel were able to progress the young man’s transfer to a residential school where he is now subject to strict discipline, has clear boundaries set out in relation to his behaviour and is responding well to this structured environment.

SOME QUESTIONS ANSWERED What is the legal authority for MAPPP?
The Sex Offender Act 1997 required the police to establish arrangements for the assessment and management of the risk posed by Registered Sex Offenders, The Criminal Justice and Court Services Act 2000 placed a legal requirement on all areas to establish Multi Agency Public Protection Panels (MAPPP) to assess and manage offenders that pose a high risk of serious harm to the public. Police and Probation were identified as the lead Responsible Authorities. The Criminal Justice Act 2003 strengthened the MAPPA legislation and involved the Prison Service as another Responsible Authority. The 2003 Act further strengthened the MAPPA process by placing a Duty to Cooperate with MAPPA on a range of other agencies: e.g., Police, Probation, Prisons, Youth Offending Teams, Jobcentre Plus, Local Education Authorities, Local Housing Authorities, Registered Social Landlords, Social Services, Strategic Health Authorities, Primary Care Trusts, NHS Trusts, Electronic Monitoring Providers, Adult Services.

Who Sits on MAPPPs?
Each panel is chaired in Norfolk by either the MAPPA Manager if it is Level 3 case or is a Level 2 case originating from the East of the County. At Level 3 MAPPPs senior representatives from the Probation Service, the Police and Children’s Services make up the core attendees, along with practitioners from any of the agencies who may be involved with the offender. The need for senior management at these meetings reflects the level of risk Level 3 offenders pose and the need to have people at the MAPPP who can authorise additional expenditure; for instance surveillance or a placement at Probation Approved Premises. The Deputy Manager chairs Level 2 cases in the West of the county and the Central area (Norwich). Core members of the Probation Service, Police, Children’s Services attend on a regular basis, with professionals from Mental Health, Education, Housing and other agencies having involvement with the offender are invited as appropriate.

What can a MAPPP do?
The panel can advise agencies of action they might take to improve public protection and effectively manage risk in individual cases. The agencies present will agree a range of measures to form a Public Protection Plan. For instance, restrictions on where a person will live, exclusion zones to prevent them from contacting victims, curfew times, supervision or treatment objectives, sharing information, advice to the offender or potential victims, or the co-ordination of contact arrangements for children. The police will also bring cases where a Sex Offender Prevention Order (SOPO) is considered necessary to protect the public for consideration by the panel. The panel is also a forum for considering any form of public disclosure.

What about confidentiality?
Information shared at MAPPPs is confidential to the agencies represented at that meeting and will only be used as agreed for the protection of the public. Each agency is responsible for ensuring the information and documentation is stored appropriately. Notes from the meetings are subject to the Government Protective Marking Scheme and are usually classed as “restricted”, however, in rare instances they may be considered as “confidential”.

Do victims have direct access to MAPPP?
No, the meeting is confined to representatives from agencies and organisations involved with MAPPA. However the views and concerns of victims are crucial in helping agencies decide on the most appropriate strategies for managing offenders. In many instances the victim has an opportunity to present their views to the Victim Liaison Officer or other agencies working with them, who will then advise the panel.

Do offenders attend MAPPPs?
In Norfolk the offender does not attend the MAPPP; the meeting involves only those professionals involved with the offender. The offender is informed they have been subject to the MAPPP process in the vast majority of cases. It is important for the offender to understand that they are being managed through MAPPP and that several agencies have concerns about their behaviour. Sometimes in exceptional circumstances, it is considered to be in the best interests of public protection not to inform the offender, but these instances are very rare and would only apply if the information is sensitive and needs to be kept confidential to protect victims or the public at large.

COMMENTS ON STATISTICS (please see Appendix 4)
At first glance there appears to be an increase in MAPPA cases this year. Much of the increase is in Level 2, Category 2 cases. In 2004 at a meeting between Norfolk and Suffolk MAPPA Managers and Probation Programme Managers in connection with the IDAP (Integrated Domestic Abuse Programme), it was agreed that MAPPA would adhere to the programme requirements of the IDAP run by the Probation Service to tackle domestic violence. The requirement for the programme states that all men referred to it should be included in the MAPPA process; the meeting agreed that this would be at Level 2. This was trailed for some months when the programme was running in Great Yarmouth with some degree of success. However, when the programme was run out over the whole county it soon became apparent MAPPA was becoming overwhelmed with referrals, many of which would not normally meet the strict criteria laid down in the MAPPA Guidelines. Consequently we have had to review our policy in relation to this and from June 2006 have only accepted the IDAP referrals that would meet the MAPPA criteria. A Local Risk Management Team will manage the remainder as Level 1 MAPPP meetings. Police, Probation, Domestic Violence Units and Children’s Services will be represented at these meetings. The other bulge in the statistics has been caused by the need to hold Level 3 meetings to discuss all applications for Sex Offender Prevention Orders (SOPO). Whilst only three have been applied for, several others have been discussed and are at the information gathering or legal processing stage awaiting a SOPO application. From August 2006 it was agreed that such applications could also be discussed at Level 2 MAPPPs. Of the 637 RSO’s in this area on 31-3-06, 11 were returned to Custody, Cautioned or Convicted for breach of their Orders. These breaches and convictions were of a minor nature; for instance failure to comply with registration procedures, none of the offender’s committed serious sexual offences. Given the large number of sex offenders involved, this indicates that Police and Probation robustly managed them. This figure represents less than 1.75% of all known Registered Sex Offenders in the County. No offenders within the MAPPP system, excluding those mentioned above, were convicted of a Serious Further Offence. This would indicate that the system of risk management is working.

In 2003 the Home Office piloted the introduction of Lay Advisors to certain MAPPA Strategic Management Boards throughput the country. Although Norfolk was not part of these pilots, their evaluation demonstrated the significant contribution that Lay Advisors could make to the process. During the early part of January 2005, we sought to recruit two Lay Advisors. We were fortunate to be able to recruit two Lay Advisors at that time, however one had to withdraw for personal reasons and we had to set about the task of appointing another. We now have 2 Lay Advisors one with a background in nursing, with interests in drama and another with a background in engineering and interests in supporting disabled children, art and education. The first advisor completed her training last year and has become a valuable member of the Strategic Management Board and Quality Assurance Group. The newly appointed Lay Advisor took up his role in Spring 2006. Both Lay Advisors attend the Strategic Management Board and the Responsible Authorities Partnership Group (RAP). Our second Lay advisor will also be a member of the Policy and Procedures group, a sub group of the Strategic Management Board. The appointment of the Lay Advisors ensures that a community interest is represented on the Strategic Management Board. Coming with a wealth of life experience they will play a key role in bringing a different perspective to the review and monitoring of MAPPA. Whilst they do not represent the public in the way, for example, that local councillors do in reporting to the local community independently or canvassing community views, they will bring “the ordinary persons’ point of view”. Their role is defined as that of a “critical friend”.

Crucial to this is their role in challenging the views of agencies and professionals so as to ensure that the concerns and issues of the wider community are reflected upon in developing the scheme. The professionals engaged in the MAPPA are diligent and rigorous but, on occasion, it can be difficult to bring to bear the ordinary persons point of view alongside their professional judgment. This is where the Lay Advisors play a part; in asking pointed questions of the SMB and commenting on the way that the Board delivers on its core activities they will challenge Board members views and perceptions. Further, the Lay Advisors will be expected to offer the SMB their views on how it can communicate its work effectively to the local community.

John, Lay Advisor, writes: It is always good to be associated with a success story, and MAPPA in Norfolk is clearly one. There have been no Serious Further Offences (as defined by the Home Office) among MAPPP cases in Norfolk. This indicates a thorough and robust risk management plan was in place to manage the most serious offenders (Level 2 and Level 3) in Norfolk. There are many challenges on the horizon; funding, the growing number of referrals, the unequal contribution from some agencies and so on, and these are problems that I feel that Lay Advisors can help to resolve. This will be a challenge that I shall enjoy. Our strengths come from our different perspectives and our independence. Apart from the MAPPA Manager and her Deputy, all other members of the Board have split responsibilities – we (the Lay Advisors) can be single-minded in our support for MAPPA. My colleague is a health service professional and member of a Primary Care Trust; I was a senior manager in Industry before becoming an Ofsted Inspector, so we have a diverse mix of experience to draw on. I am impressed with the number of highly dedicated managers and staff involved in MAPPA and find it a pleasure to work with them. I am still being inducted into MAPPA; I shall be joining the new Policies and Procedures sub-group and have been asked to present a paper on communications to the next Strategic Management Board.

Pat, Lay Advisor, writes: Since my appointment last year I have considerably increased my understanding of the vitally important role that MAPPA plays in ensuring public safety. I have visited and talked with many of the agencies involved in this highly complex work. I have listened to their difficulties and frustrations; I have asked numerous questions and occasionally challenged views. As my training for the role encouraged, I have acted as a 'Critical Friend', and without exception my input and comment has been valued equally with that of the professionals. I have also been joined by another Lay Advisor and look forward to working together to strengthen the Lay role. With this increased understanding I remain convinced that MAPPA offers the most effective system of managing offenders in the community. No single Criminal Justice Agency has all the answers when managing risks, only through agencies working together and cooperating with each other, can we ensure fewer people become the victims of these serious crimes. This last year has been especially busy in terms of looking at ways of improving the processes and structures of the SMB, and with full Lay involvement we have hopefully designed and implemented structures that will improve the effectiveness and function of the SMB. For me this piece of work has been a powerful example of Lay involvement ensuring and supporting scrutiny of the processes, priorities, and working methods of MAPPA agencies, and I look forward to evaluating their effectiveness. To conclude, I do feel that my understanding has increased enormously, although I know I have lots more to learn. I have been truly impressed by the hard work, dedication and commitment of Norfolk's MAPPA team. Supported by the Responsible Authority Partnership, they constantly strive to ensure the MAPPA partnership approach really is as effective as it can be in reducing the risks to the most vulnerable in our communities.

To ensure that the various organisations providing public services operate collaboratively, the Criminal Justice Act (2003) imposes on them a ‘Duty to Co-operate’ with the MAPPA Responsible Authorities. Norfolk has a long history of collaborative work across agencies and whilst this new Duty builds on many existing arrangements, it brings consistency and ensures that agencies recognise the contribution that they make through their mainstream provision to public protection. Over the last year the Responsible Authorities have been working with Local Authority Housing, Education and Social Services, the Norfolk Primary Care Trusts, Jobcentre Plus, the Norfolk Youth Offending Service and others to draw up a Memorandum of Understanding detailing the contribution that they will make within their existing statutory role and functions to the MAPPA. In practical terms this has involved representatives from the agencies contributing to the assessment and management of high risk offenders subject to Multi Agency Public Protection Panel (MAPPP) meetings, giving advice from their agencies perspective on broad issues that affect the operation of MAPPP and sharing information to enable all bodies to work together effectively.

Norfolk Children's Services and MAPPP have worked closely together over the last year to ensure high standards in Child Protection. 'Working Together 2006' is clear about the need for collaborative work between organisations and agencies to identify and manage people who present a risk of harm to children. In my view, the MAPPA arrangements in Norfolk are robust in terms of the quality of the risk identification and assessment processes, and the associated effectiveness of the information sharing arrangements. We have worked successfully together on a number of cases to ensure that resources are available to take forward risk management plans developed in MAPPP meetings. This has included joint work with both individuals and with various institutions. Stella Lovie
Child Protection Manager Children’s Services

In 2000 the government introduced the Criminal Justice and Court Services Act. This Act set up the MAPPA and strengthened earlier legislation around the victims of crime. The Probation Service offers face-to-face contact with victims of violent or sexual crimes through a Victim Liaison Officer (VLO) for victims where the offender receives a 12 months or longer sentence. This enables the VLO to provide victims with information about criminal justice and custodial processes. The VLO will also discuss with the victim whether they wish to contribute information or views in relation to licence conditions, such as exclusion zones or non-contact requirements when the prisoner is released from custody. If the victim wishes to be kept informed about the offender’s progress through prison, for example when they are due to be released, the VLO will provide this information. The VLO will also act as a conduit at MAPPP to ensure that the victim’s views are available to those on the Panel making decisions about the offender and considering restrictions on them when they are returned to the community. One of the most important tasks of the MAPPP is to ensure that past victims are not put at risk again when an offender is released; risk management plans feature victim issues. Other agencies are also concerned with victim issues including Victim Support, who offer a free and confidential service whether a crime has been reported or not. A witness service exists in every Court in England and Wales, provided by Victim Support, which offers support and assistance before, during and after a trial. The police also offer advice and support to victims of violent and sexual crimes and can, for instance, install safety measures such as alarms or reinforced doors within the victim’s home.

National Victim Support line: 0845 303 0900 Norfolk Victim Support: 01603 767383

A man with a long history of severe violence toward his partner and children, often resulting in hospitalisation, was given a custodial sentence for an offence of assault against his partner. Serious concerns were raised about the safety of his partner and children on his release from prison. Working together, members of the MAPPP were able to put together a risk management plan which allowed the woman and her children to be relocated to another county, their names were changed, and an injunction was taken out to prevent the man from having any contact with the family. At last the family could begin to rebuild their lives. The man had stringent conditions placed on his licence, which prevent him from contacting his family, and excluded him from entering the area where they lived.


Up to now the police and the Probation Service have relied on local unconnected computer databases to record details of offenders in their area. This has made it difficult to keep track of individuals as they move from area to area. ViSOR is a computer based Violent and Sex Offender Register and is set to play a vital role both nationally and locally in monitoring sex, dangerous and violent offenders. ViSOR was introduced to Norfolk police in 2004. The information sharing potential under ViSOR will make police and Probation Officers responsible for monitoring this category of offender more effective. All police and Probation areas will have ViSOR in the near future therefore any information added by police or probation in one part of the country will become immediately searchable by police and probation in another part of the country. Large amounts of information can be held on offenders making it more difficult for them to change their appearance and emerge undetected in another part of the country. ViSOR will comply with the Human Rights Act and the Data Protection Act.

Disclosure of information
Information about individuals is shared at MAPPP meetings and is confidential to those agencies that attend. At the start of the MAPPP meeting a confidentiality statement is read out and all the agencies that attend the meetings have signed a confidentiality protocol. A balance is struck between having sufficient information to make an informed decision to manage the risk the person poses, but at the same time, not breaching the confidential nature of the information that is shared. Sometimes it may be necessary to share information with agencies not present at the MAPPP about a person’s history to protect a victim or others in the community. However, this is only done after careful consideration and with the recommendation of the MAPPP Manager or authorised by the Detective Inspector supervising the Public Protection Unit. Information is always disclosed in a sensitive way, sometimes agencies are only told about the person in general terms. Occasionally, where appropriate, more specific information is given. Disclosure of information is one of the areas covered by the Duty to Co-operate document. All agencies concerned with MAPPA have their own information sharing protocols, which enable them to disclose information to MAPPA.

There is clearly a need to bring about consistency in both referrals and response from all agencies involved in MAPPP. This requires that agencies understand the role of MAPPP; what it can and can’t do. To this end the current MAPPA Manager has made a number of presentations to Primary Care Trusts, Mental Health agencies, the Local Safeguarding Children’s Board and the Probation Service with the aim of bringing about consistency and clarification. This work is ongoing and the present Manager has a schedule of presentations and informal gatherings planned over the next 12 months to raise awareness of MAPPA throughout Norfolk.

Norfolk Probation Area is committed to working closely with other agencies in seeking to prevent offenders from causing harm, as it recognises that this is the most effective way of safeguarding the community. This can only be achieved by collaborative arrangements with other criminal justice agencies for managing risk of harm represented by offenders Norfolk Probation Area supervises and is the highest priority for this Service. The duty of Norfolk Probation Area is primarily to victims and the public. Working closely with other agencies through MAPPA ensures that relevant information is shared that through detailed and validated risk assessments are undertaken and that risk management plans are robust, well implemented and monitored. MAPPA procedures ensure that the decisions and actions taken are defensible and that all of us are accountable. The year ahead presents MAPPA with the greatest challenge so far, to ensure that procedures are consolidated and the involvement of agencies in the community is extended further for the benefit of the public. Sarah Wardley
Assistant Chief Officer Norfolk Probation Area

A man with a lengthy history of serious robbery offences using firearms, who also had a personality disorder, was about to be released from custody after serving the whole of an 8-year sentence for armed robbery. Concerns were raised that not only was this man a danger to the public at large but that he was a particular danger to police as he had stated on numerous occasions that he intended to commit another robbery on his release and shoot as many police officers as he could during the commission of the robbery. He also presented as a high risk of suicide. The MAPPP heard from a forensic psychologist and a forensic psychiatrist that this man was considered too dangerous to be managed within the community. There had been a disagreement about funding his transfer to a secure hospital and at the time of the MAPPP the money was not forthcoming. The police put together a plan on how to manage him in the community whilst also safeguarding police officers; Probation sought extra funding from the Home Office for secure accommodation for him and drew up a list of strict licence conditions for his release. However, through the support of the MAPPP process the psychiatrist was eventually able to secure funding through the Health Service for the man’s transfer to a secure psychiatric hospital where it is likely he will remain for the foreseeable future.

The Sexual offences Act 2003 introduced a number of Civil Orders which help the MAPPA to protect the public, particularly children, and those vulnerable to abuse. They are Civil Orders where the burden of proof is lower than that needed for a criminal prosecution.

Sexual Offences Prevention Orders – SOPOs
These Orders are used for people who already have a conviction for a sexual offence, but who are currently using “grooming” or predatory behaviour at a level which is concerning, but where there is insufficient evidence for a criminal prosecution. For example an offender may be frequenting parks or children’s playgrounds. A SOPO could be sought by the police and restrictions placed on the offender to prevent him from entering such areas, or having contact with children under the age of 16. Whenever the police bring an application for a SOPO, there is a requirement that they should bring the case before a MAPPP to share information and make a corporate decision about the viability of such an Order for that offender.

Notification Orders
These are aimed at people who have been convicted of certain sexual offences committed abroad and require them to comply with the Sexual Offences Act 2003 in terms of Registration. This means they are managed the same as anyone who had committed an offence in the UK and who is subject to the Sex Offender Registration process, where they are visited by police and have to notify the police of change of address etc.

Foreign Travel Orders
These apply to offenders who have committed sexual offences here and where there is cause for concern that they are travelling abroad for the purpose of committing further sexual offences. In Norfolk the first of these Orders was recently granted by the Court to restrict the travel of a man who had convictions for sexual assault against children in the UK and in Bulgaria. He had informed his Offender Manager that he had booked a holiday to Bulgaria and following a MAPPP meeting the police were able to successfully apply for a Foreign Travel Order to prevent him travelling to that country. Foreign Travel Orders are imposed for a period of 6 months. (This Order was granted after 31/3/06 and is therefore not included in the statistical information at the end of this report).

Risk of Sexual Harm Orders
The Courts would impose such an order on persons thought to pose a risk of sexual harm to children they would use such an Order to restrict grooming or preparatory behaviour. They could for instance be used if an adult were sending pornography to a child or sending indecent text messages to a child’s mobile phone.

The Strategic Management Board (SMB) provides oversight of the Arrangements in Norfolk. The Board draws its membership from Senior Managers from the Responsible Authority agencies (the Probation Service, the Police and the Prison Service) and from key stakeholders concerned with Criminal Justice, Public Protection and Offender Management. In addition to this, two Lay Advisors represent the wider community. The SMB has the statutory duty to ensure rigor and scrutiny in the review and monitoring of MAPPA. Over this last period it has been active in ensuring that in Norfolk we have effective multi-agency risk assessments and management arrangements in place and in making any changes to them when necessary. Each year the SMB develops a Programme of Work to take forward its principle activities: • To monitor and evaluate the operation of the Arrangements and identify areas for improvement. • To promote the work of MAPPA across Norfolk and the contribution that it makes to protecting the public. • To monitor and evaluate the operation of the Arrangements and identify areas for improvement. • To ensure that the work of MAPPA supports and compliments the work being undertaken by other public protection arrangements.

Meeting on a regular basis throughout the year the Norfolk SMB has: • Developed and agreed local policies and procedures for interagency work to protect the public. • Facilitated effective working relationships based on trust and shared objectives between professionals from a wide variety of statutory and community agencies. • Worked to bring about agreement and mutual understanding amongst agencies about the nature of risk and appropriate levels of intervention. • Worked alongside the Norfolk Local Safeguarding Children Board, the District Crime and Disorder Groups and the county Criminal Justice Board to ensure a holistic approach to public protection. • Helped to improve the quality of public protection work through multi agency training. • To promote the work of MAPPA across Norfolk and the contribution that it makes to protect the public. Over the last 12 months the Strategic Management Board of MAPPA has set up two subgroups, the Quality Assurance Group and the Policy and Procedures sub-group. Monthly meetings of the Responsible Authorities Partnership (RAP) have also been introduced which allow this group to undertake operational tasks, which are then presented to the Strategic Management Board for discussion and ratification. The Prison Service routinely shares information regarding an offender’s custodial behaviour within MAPPPs. This allows a complete picture of an offender’s progress, through Offending Behaviour Programmes, and other structured activity, to be balanced against general behaviour, previous offending, and for improved risk assessment for return to the community. The structure offered by MAPPA allows for more effective communication between interested agencies. MAPPP can inform the prison as to the level of risk presented by the offender, and identification of particular issues or concerns can allow for offending behaviour interventions to be targeted to reduce the risk through the time spent in custody. Equally, if during the course of a period of custody other behaviour is noted which seems to indicate a potential increase or change in risk, this can also be communicated to the MAPPP agencies and allow for effective plans to be made prior to release. Jayne Frost
HMP Norwich Chair Strategic Management Board

A man who was convicted of sexually abusing his stepdaughter served a 5-year custodial sentence; he was subject to Sex Offender Registration and had a number of restrictions placed on him through his Licence including his place of residence. His partner had divorced him whilst he was in prison, but he had a property in his own right. On his release into the community he returned to his own home. There were conditions on his licence that he did not reside with or associate with anyone under the age of 16. Shortly after his release he found a new partner. He told his Probation Officer and the Police Sex Offender Visitors that she had no children. The police liaised closely with Children’s Services and requested a MAPPP, at which time it became apparent that, in fact his new partner had 2 daughters aged 12 and 14, the same age range as the stepdaughter whom he had offended against. Children’s Services and police made a joint visit to the woman who was unaware of his conviction. The children were interviewed; fortunately he had not abused them. The woman told police that he spent at least 3 nights a week at her home, he had failed to inform the police of a secondary address and as a result of this the police were able to charge him with Breach of his Sex Offender Registration. In addition, he had broken the conditions of his Licence that prevented him from having contact or residing with persons under the age of 16. This led to an immediate recall to prison and later, a further custodial sentence at which point the Court decided to impose a Sex Offender Prevention Order at the point of sentence for an indefinite period.


Breckland District Council Elizabeth House Walpole Loke Dereham Norfolk NR19 1EE Tel: 01362 656322 Broadland District Council Thorpe Lodge 1 Yarmouth Lodge Thorpe St. Andrew Norwich NR7 0DU Tel: 01603 431133 Children’s Services / Adult Services / Norfolk County Council Education County Hall Martineau Lane Norwich Norfolk NR1 2S Tel: 01603 222222 Community Mental Health Team West Norfolk Primary Care Trust North House Goodwins Road King’s Lynn PE30 5PD Tel: 01553 815142 Hellesdon Hospital Norfolk and Waveney Mental Health Partnership Trust Drayton High Road Norwich NR6 5BE Tel: 01603 421421 HMP Norwich Knox Road Norwich NR1 4LU Tel: 01603 708600 Julian Housing 1a Oak Street Norwich Norfolk NR3 3AE Tel: 01603 767718 Learning Disability Team Norfolk County Council Norfolk Social Services Wymondham Health Centre 18 Bridewell Street Wymondham Norfolk NR18 0AR Tel: 01953 604437 Norfolk Constabulary OCC Jubilee House Falconers Chase Wymondham Norfolk NR18 0WW Tel: 01953 424242 Norfolk Probation Area 4th Floor St. James Yarn Mill Whitefriars Norwich Tel: 01603 220100

Northgate Hospital Norfolk and Waveney Mental Health Partnership Trust Northgate Street Great Yarmouth Norfolk NR30 1BU Tel: 01493 330054 Norvic Clinic Norfolk and Waveney Mental Health Partnership Trust St. Andrews Business Park Thorpe St. Andrew Norwich NR17 0HT Tel: 01603 439614 Norwich Magistrates Court Whitefriars Norwich Tel: 01603 632421 Norwich Crown Court Tel: 01603 728200 St. Martin’s Housing Trust 35 Bishopgate Norwich Norfolk NR1 4AA Tel: 01603 667706 St. Matthew Housing 4 The Old Church St Matthew’s Road Norwich NR1 1SP Tel: 01603 442010 Stonham Housing Trust 23 West Parade Norwich NR2 3DN Tel: 01953 602456 Victim Support 1a Silver Road Norwich Norfolk NR3 4TX Tel: 01603 767383 West Norfolk Primary Care Trust Fermoy Unit Queen Elizabeth Hospital Gayton Road King’s Lynn PE30 4ET Tel: 01553 613613 Wherry Housing Association 6 Central Avenue St. Andrews Business Park Thorpe St. Andrew Norwich Norfolk NR7 0HR Tel: 01603 703500 Youth Offending Team 45 Netherwood Green Norwich NR1 2JF Tel: 01603 223617

Appendix 1

A National Overview of the Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements 2001 - 2006

It is now just over 5 years since the implementation of the Criminal Justice and Courts’ Services Act 2000 that led to the formation of the Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements, commonly known as MAPPA. As the national strategic body overseeing the implementation and development of these arrangements it is important for us to review the progress made, to identify the challenges ahead and set out the national plans for improvement. It is also an opportunity for the first time to provide a national commentary on the MAPPA annual statistics and to explain what they are telling us about the growth and complexity of these arrangements. Much has been achieved in terms of enhancing public safety in the last 5 years and the arrangements are rightly described as world leading. Yet we are acutely conscious that a number of serious case reviews and other reports published this year indicate there is still much to do to ensure that the arrangements are fit for purpose and apply consistently across England and Wales. Unless those operating these arrangements ensure that all reasonable action is taken to reduce the harm caused by sexual and violent offenders they will have failed. While we recognise that it is never possible to eliminate risk entirely the public are entitled to expect the authorities to do their job properly. Making our communities safer and reducing reoffending is our highest priority and one of the greatest challenges facing the agencies and staff involved. Over the last year all agencies responsible for establishing, maintaining or contributing to these public protection arrangements have been extremely busy: the probation service, the prison service, the police service who form the Responsible Authority in each area, plus the range of agencies who have a duty to co-operate in these arrangements and include health, housing, education, social services, youth offending teams, Jobcentre Plus, and electronic monitoring services. In addition to the agencies, each area has this year benefited from the input of lay advisers. These are people recruited locally but appointed by the Secretary of State to offer key support to the strategic management of the MAPPA process. Their role is essentially to ask often fundamental questions of senior practitioners and bring a community perspective to a process that could otherwise lose sight of its main function: to protect members of the public from serious harm. Together, all of those inputting to the MAPPA have ensured that more high risk sexual and violent offenders have been identified and proactively managed this year than ever before.

The National MAPPA Statistics
As the scale and complexity of MAPPA has increased so the analysis of the annual report statistics has become more important in understanding local and national developments in these arrangements. The national analysis offered below, based upon reports from the areas, highlights a number of important trends, particularly in respect of the volume of referrals for multi-agency management at Level 2 and Level 3 (MAPPP), and the outcomes of that management. The individual area MAPPA annual reports are published elsewhere on this web-page and should be consulted for detailed local commentary.

MAPPA Offenders The number of offenders in the community that come within the remit of MAPPA increased this year, as anticipated, although the rate of that increase has slowed from last year (13% to 7%) - see Table 1. A number of factors may have contributed to this slow down. Firstly, the increase of registered sex offenders (RSOs) is much less than in previous years at just over 3%; secondly, fewer offenders than expected have been referred into MAPPA under Category 3. (These are those offenders who are neither registered sex offenders nor currently supervised by the probation service/ youth offending team but do have a history of physical or sexual violence and are considered by the Responsible Authority to pose a current risk of serious harm to the public.) The reasons for these variations from expectation are unclear but the RSO variation may in part be due to a number of areas last year (2004/5) incorporating offenders who were still in prison and to refinements areas have continued to make to referral procedures and the management of risk thresholds. Registered Sex Offenders continue to form by far the largest category – see Chart 1.


Total number of MAPPA Offenders in the Community by Category (% Change)
2002/03 21513 2003/04 24572 14.22% 12754* -56.9% 2004/05 28994 18% 12662 -0.72% 2005/06 29973 3.38% 14317 13.07%

Category 1. Registered Sex Offenders (RSO) 2. Violent Offenders and other sex offenders 3. Other offenders Totals


1802 52909

2166 20.2% 39492 -25.36%

2936 35.55% 44592 12.91%

3363 14.54% 47653 6.86%


In 2003/4 the criteria for Violent offenders (Category 2) changed to exclude those offenders held in custody.

Chart. 1

Total number of MAPPA Offenders in the Community 2005/6

Registered Sex Offenders
For the first time this year the MAPPA annual reports include a breakdown of the total RSO population for the basic policing units within each area (see individual area reports). This, together with the density of RSOs per 100,000 of the population, which ranges from 36/100,000 to 81/100,000 across the 42 Areas of England and Wales, illustrates the variable distribution of RSOs within the community. There are no obvious or simple explanations for the distribution of RSOs, which in any case is barely significant statistically.

MAPPA management levels
It is important to remember that the majority of offenders within MAPPA do not pose a significant risk of serious harm to the public and can therefore be properly managed through the normal supervision arrangements provided by the probation service, youth offending teams and by police sex offender registration. This is described as Level 1 management and accounts for about 71% of the MAPPA population. However, for offenders whose risk of serious harm is high or complex and requires active management by more than one agency, referral to Level 2 or Level 3 (MAPPP) meetings is vital. A case will generally only qualify for Level 3 management where the intervention of senior agency representatives is required to effect the risk management plan with the authority to release or prioritise exceptional resources. Chart 2 shows the breakdown of management Levels this year.

Chart 2

MAPPA Offenders by Management Level

This is the second year in which both Level 2 and Level 3 (MAPPP) data has been available and Tables 2 and 3 illustrate the number of offenders now subject to collaborative/ multi-agency risk management (29% of the MAPPA total). For each of these 13,783 offenders agencies will be required to meet on a number of occasions and to progress actions that reduce the likelihood of re-offending. The tables also provide a fuller picture of the commitment and resources being provided by the Responsible Authority and other partner agencies within MAPPA. The Level 3 MAPPP, the highest level of risk management, continues to focus on the most complex offenders, sometimes referred to as the ‘critical few’, and involves senior managers within each area. The use of Level 3 MAPPP has been refined over the last 3 years as part of a concerted effort to ensure that resources are focused where they can be most effective in enhancing public protection. This year they have been employed in under 3% of the total MAPPA caseload. At the same time, Level 2 risk management meetings, which are locally based, have increased in number (12,505) and become the engine room for MAPPA. Whilst there is an element of focus on Level 3, all Areas have recognized the necessity of ensuring adequate management and administrative support for Level 2; and this is reflected in Business Plans.

Table 2. Breakdown of Level 2 and Level 3 MAPPA Offenders for 2005/6

Category of Offender 1. Registered Sex Offenders (RSO) 2. Violent offenders and other sex offenders 3. Other offenders Total per Level

Level 2 (% of MAPPA Total) 6014 12.62% 4280 8.98% 2211 4.64% 12505 26.24%

Level 3 (% of MAPPA total) 580 1.22% 506 1.06% 192 0.4% 1278 2.68%

Total per Category (% of MAPPA Total) 6594 13.84% 4786 10.04% 2403 5.04% 13783 28.92%

Table 3.

Offenders referred to Levels 2 and 3 - Comparison with last year (% Change)
Level 2 2004/05 5381 3615 2292 11288 Level 3 2004/05 626 547 305 1478

Category of MAPPA Offender 1. Registered Sex Offenders (RSO) 2. Violent offenders and other sex offenders 3. Other Offenders Total:

2005/06 6014 11.76% 4280 18.39% 2211 -3.53% 12505 10.78%

2005/06 580 -7.35% 506 -7.49% 192 -37.05% 1278 -13.53%

Interventions and Outcomes
Information about the scale and categories of offender is complemented by information on direct interventions and outcomes for this MAPPA managed group (ie those under Levels 2 and 3). These measures deal with breaches of Licence and Court order, with sex offender registration requirements and related Court orders, and with further offending – see tables 4 and 5. The headline figure is, no doubt, that reflecting the number of offenders who, while managed at Levels 2 or 3, are charged with a serious sexual or violent offence. Compared with 2004/5, this year saw a reduction in the number of serious further offences in this population from 79 (0.6%) to 61 (0.44%) cases this year. And the biggest impact was where you would want and expect it – with the more intensively managed Level 3 cases. On the face of it the figures are encouraging but they should be treated with caution for 2 reasons. Firstly, we have only collected the data for 2 years; secondly, with such small numbers any change can trigger a wholly disproportionate, misleading percentage variation. What is apparent, however, is that the figure is low and whilst any serious re-offending is a matter of great concern, such a low serious re-offending rate for this particular group of offenders is to be welcomed and supports the view that MAPPA is making a real contribution to the management of dangerousness in communities.

The data relating to breach of licence and court orders is positive as this reflects an increase in action taken in level 2 and 3 cases prior to them having opportunity to commit serious further harm; ie to recall offenders to prison. A similarly encouraging picture emerges from a reading of the data on various sex offender provisions – see table 5. Action taken to enforce the sex offender registration requirements through caution and conviction increased by 30% from last year and affected 1295 offenders, 4.3% of the total registered in the community. There was also considerable use made of the range of new civil orders available under the Sex Offences Act 2003(sexual offences prevention orders, notification orders, foreign travel orders). In total 973 orders have been granted this year an increase of 446.

Table 4.

Outcome measures: Level 2 and Level 3 activity for 2005/6 (% Change)
Level 2 Level 3 Total of Level 2 &3 2004/05

Category of MAPPA Offender 1. Breach of License 2. Breach of Orders 3. Charged with SFO






1084 55 47

1321 21.86% 82 49.09% 50 6.38%

222 18 32

219 -1.35% 22 22.22% 11 -65.63%

1306 73 79

1540 17.92% 104 42.47% 61 -22.78%

Table 5.

Outcome measures: RSO arrests and Sex Offences Act Civil Orders 2004/5 and 2005/6 (% Change)
Number of Offenders (04/05) 993 Number of Offenders (05/06) 1295 30.41%

RSO Enforcement 1. Registered sex offenders (RSO’s) charged/cautioned

Sex offences Act Orders 2. Sexual offences prevention orders (SOPOs) granted 3. Noti cation Orders (NOs) granted 4. Foreign Travel Orders (FTOs) granted Total Number of Orders

Number of Orders (04/05) 503 22 1 526

Number of Orders (05/06) 933 85.49% 39 77.27% 1 0% 973 84.98%

A Year of Challenges
The raw data provided in the national statistics is helpful but necessarily quantitative. In order to get a better feel for the quality of MAPPA business it is necessary to work with other forms of analysis and, during the course of this year, a number of inspection reports and a small number of management reviews of specific cases have been published which have both detailed shortcomings in practice and highlighted many positive developments in public protection practice. It is essential that the product of these, and future, reviews and reports shape the development of MAPPA through central guidance and local practice and it is instructive to set out the lessons learned this year. Strengthening Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements Published in October 2005 and available on This research was undertaken by De Montfort University and found evidence of greater effectiveness and efficiency across MAPPA teams in England and Wales, compared to an earlier review of public protection arrangements, which had been conducted before the MAPPA legislation was introduced in 2001. It found that areas were meeting the MAPPA Guidance specification to a large extent. It also found that the arrangements had been strengthened by the inclusion of the Prison Service within the Responsible Authority and by the designation of a number of duty-to-cooperate agencies (a consequence of the Criminal Justice Act 2003). The MAPPA process facilitated effective contributions by agencies so that representatives could make operational decisions and develop risk management plans. The report made a number of recommendations for policy and practice development which are being taken forward through the revision of the MAPPA Guidance and the MAPPA business planning process. Managing Sex Offenders in the Community A joint thematic inspection by Her Majesty’s Inspectorates of Probation and Police published in November 2005 and available on This inspection found that there was greater focus by police and probation on improving the assessment and management of high risk sex offenders which offered the prospect of improved performance. However it noted a number of deficiencies in relation to MAPPA case management records; police home visits for registered sex offenders and training for both police and probation staff on assessment and management of risk of harm. These deficiencies have been addressed through the National Offender Management Service Risk of Harm Improvement strategy and the development and imminent publication of the Police Public Protection Manual. An Independent Review of a Serious Further Offence case: Damien Hanson and Elliot White published in February 2006 and available on

This was a report by Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Probation into the murder of John Monckton and attempted murder of his wife Homeyra in November 2004 by two men under the supervision of the London Probation Area. The report identified overall failures and some specific deficiencies in the way the two cases were managed. Although neither offender was referred to MAPPA Damien Hanson, who was assessed as presenting a high risk of serious harm, should have been. Importantly the report has established a number of principles against which future case management within MAPPA and the National Probation Service will be judged. Key amongst these is that the public is entitled to expect that the authorities will do their job properly i.e. to take all reasonable action to keep risk to a minimum. In response to this report, an action plan was issued to the National Probation Services to ensure delivery of effective implementation of the report’s five ‘key’ recommendations and 31 practice recommendations. An Independent Review of a Serious Further Offence case: Anthony Rice published in May 2006 and available on This report was completed following the murder of Naomi Bryant in August 2005. The independent review was requested by the Responsible Authority for MAPPA in Hampshire who were concerned by a number of issues that had contributed to the risk management failure. The report details principal findings and recommendations for a range of agencies within and outside MAPPA. Each of which is being taken forward. Importantly it revealed the failure to manage the offender’s risk of harm to the public was not due to any single act of negligence or deficiency. Rather it was a cumulative failure of processes and actions throughout his sentence supervision, both in prison and in the community. This is an essential point to grasp and reinforces the importance of having an integrated offender management system from start to end of sentence with clear and consistent practice between the three core MAPPA agencies, prisons, probation and police. The key recommendation for MAPPA was about maintaining a better balance between human rights of offenders and protecting the public, and using existing MAPPA guidance properly. Work is already underway to revise and strengthen national guidance and improve MAPPA’s foundations by way of the national and Area MAPPA business plans. Joint Police/Probation/Prisons Thematic Inspection Report: Putting Risk of Harm Into Context published in September 2006 and available on This report found that much had been achieved, including that planned interventions were generally effective in containing offending behaviour. There were also many areas for improvement and the report makes recommendations for the more consistent use of MAPPA and sharing of MAPPA good practice, improved risk of harm assessments and sentence planning and greater victim awareness. It is important to note that the fieldwork to support the inspection concluded in the autumn of 2005, prior to the launch of the Risk of Harm Improvement Action plan and other actions referred to in this overview. Nevertheless, the report has been welcomed and will be considered in further detail by the National Offender Management Service (NOMS) Risk of Harm Improvement Board as well as the Responsible Authority National Steering Group (RANSG).

Actions to develop MAPPA
Effecting change to these public protection arrangements requires concerted action from a range of agencies and key stakeholders. MAPPA is not an agency but a set of national arrangements that requires each contributor to ensure that their own agency’s practice is fit for purpose and that the manner of their collaboration is effective in assessing and managing the risk posed by sexual and violent offenders. It is important to note that MAPPA has benefited significantly this year from the work undertaken by individual agencies; work that has a direct bearing on how dangerous offenders are assessed and managed. This includes the OASys Quality Assurance Programme implemented from July 2005; implementation of the offender management model from April 2006; the launch of the NOMS Risk of harm Guidance and Training resource pack June 2006; and the planned roll-out of the Police Public Protection Manual. MAPPA will increasingly benefit from the expansion of ViSOR (the Violent and Sex Offenders Register). ViSOR is an integral part of plans to strengthen public protection through improved risk assessment and management and will provide electronic support for MAPPA allowing efficient data sharing between Police, Probation and Prisons. The police have been using ViSOR since April 2005 and the system will be implemented into the prison and the probation service during 2006/7. For the first time the Responsible Authorities will be working together on the same I.T system to Reduce Re-offending.

The National MAPPA Business Plan
As the national coordinating body for the Responsible Authority, the RANSG, is tasked with exercising oversight of MAPPA and ensuring its continued development. To help meet these aims the RANSG published, in November 2005, a three year National MAPPA Business Plan 2005-8. The plan identifies four broad areas of MAPPA where significant and consistent improvement is necessary. These include the following; MAPPA Development Strategy Achieve dedicated MAPPA coordination and administration capacity in all areas during • 2006/7 (underway) • Develop RANSG to include national representation of Duty to cooperate agencies (achieved) • Revise and publish MAPPA Guidance (by April 2007 – see existing Guidance at: Monitoring and Evaluation Areas to implement a MAPPA Business Plan for 2006/7 (achieved – see area annual • reports) Development of multi-agency public protection performance indicators (underway) • • Improve the recording and collation of data (underway) • Develop guidance for a serious case review process (planned for consultation later this year)

Communication and Strategic Partnerships • • • • The publication of the MAPPA Annual report (achieved) Development of the annual report to improve public understanding and engagement (ongoing) National MAPPA conference (achieved – November 2005) Develop a national communication strategy (issued in June, but Child Sex Offender Review may add further impetus)

Training • • • • Delivery of lay adviser national training (delivered but also developing so far) National coordinators conference (delivered – May 2006) Collate core training material (underway) Areas to implement a training strategy for new practitioners, new members of the strategic management board and for coordinators and administrators (underway)

Areas have been asked to produce annual reports on this model and local business plans are attached to area annual reports for the first time. Future reports will record the progress that has been achieved.

The introduction of MAPPA enables agencies to work more closely than ever before to exchange information and manage offenders collaboratively, ensuring that potentially dangerous offenders are being properly risk assessed and robustly managed in the community. Effective management of high-risk offenders, as a discipline, is still relatively in its infancy. There is continuous development and the standards and good practice of tomorrow are likely to be different from today’s, achieved through experience and research. The challenge therefore is not only to match current practice with what we know, but also to respond rapidly to new learning. The Inspectorate helpfully suggests that what they are describing can be better understood as the identification of stages on a journey rather than a destination reached. Since their introduction in 2001, the 42 MAPPAs covering England and Wales have travelled a great distance in a short time to establish the new arrangements. The vital public protection work of MAPPA is undertaken by skilled and committed staff and everyone engaged in the arrangements acknowledges the need for constant vigilance and improvement. The journey is not easy, but communities are safer because, as this report demonstrates, the Responsible Authorities are travelling together in the right direction.
John Scott Head of the Public Protection and Licensed Release Unit National Offender Management Service Terence Grange Chief Constable of Dyfed Powys Police and ACPO Public Protection Lead Tony Robson Her Majesty’s Prison Service On behalf of the Responsible Authority National Steering Group



1. MAPPA Development Strategy

MILESTONES Sept 2005 •


STRATEGIC AIM a) Achieve dedicated MAPPA Coordination & Administration capacity across all MAPPA SMBs during 2006/07 November 2005 November 2005 April 2006 SMBs identify dedicated funding to support Coordinator role Nil

DELIVERY PLAN Complete national consultation of development paper Consult with Duty to Co-operate agencies nationally Issue Guidance to SMBs

OUTCOME By April 2007 all SMBs able to confirm dedicated coordinator & administration posts in place

SMBs include within business plan for 2006/07 objective to support aim

b) Develop RANSG to include representation of Duty to Cooperate agencies

Proposal to RANSG Invitation to DTCs leads to 6 monthly consultations adjacent to RANSG meetings

July 2005 From Oct 05 - Oct 06

RANSG strengthened by DTC contributions.

c) Revise and publish MAPPA Guidance

Completion of Consultation period October 2005 Publication of De Montfort research. Summer 2005 Publication of HMIP/C MAPPA thematic – Spring 2006

Update and revise to incorporate new legislation and recommendations from RANSG, taking account of feedback from consultation process and recommendations from HMIP inspections on Sex Offenders and Public Protection and from De Montfort University research.

MAPPA Lead in PPLRU in conjunction with SMT staff from PPLRU re Probation and Prison.

Revised MAPPA Guidance Published April 2006

Appendix 2

PC88/2005 – MAPPA National Business Plan 2005/08


2. Monitoring & Evaluation Strategy

DELIVERY PLAN Issue guidance to MAPPA SMBs •

MILESTONES October 2005


• April 2006 • MAPPA SMBs

Implement SMB Business Plans for 2006/07

STRATEGIC AIM a) MAPPA SMBs implement Business Plan for 2006/07 which will incorporate monitoring arrangements to support: • publication of Annual Report • analysis of use of MAPPA risk management thresholds at Level 2 & 3 • analysis of MAPPA offenders who commit serious further offences • analysis of attendance and level of cooperation of agencies contributing to Level 2 & 3 meetings • analysis of diversity profile of offenders assessed at Level 2 and Level 3. March 2007 • ViSOR in place across the Responsible Authority and able to measure agreed indicators Responsible Authority agencies PPLRU

Report on business plan outcomes in Annual Report 2006/7

OUTCOME MAPPA SMBs have rolling 3 year business plans in place from April 2006 onwards LCJBs and LSCBs to receive SMB business plans Active analysis of risk management and improved accountability Integrating the ViSOR management information with the business planning process.

b) Development of multi agency public protection performance indicators May 2006 April 2007 Draft July 2005 Consult Sept 2005 Publish Nov 2005

Identify and agree multi agency indicators, Implement

c) Improve consistency of recording and collation of data for MAPPA (explore interface NOMIS/ViSOR/OASys)

Develop national templates to support information sharing, referral to MAPPA, Minute taking and review processes.

Consistency and quality of recording improved, templates support case transfer processes.

PC88/2005 – MAPPA National Business Plan 2005/08


• Dec 2005 PPLRU

• March 2006 April 2006

d) Review current legislative arrangements for Serious Case Reviews (SCR) and develop guidance to ensure that a Serious Case Review process has taken place for offenders who commit Serious Further Offences at Level 2 and 3. June 2007

Explore links to review processes for SFO’s & Part 8 Child Protection Reviews Explore links to Homicide Reviews Develop Proposal for consultation for RANSG & DTC agencies, Strategy to implement SCRs drafted Clear process for Serious Case Reviews for Level 2 and Level 3 MAPPA cases in place, which links and does not repeat internal or other multi agency review processes, but supports to ensure lessons can be learned and MAPPA development informed.

3. Communication & Strategic Partnerships Strategy
MILESTONES October 2005 RESOURCE PPLRU OUTCOME Public confidence agenda enhanced through publication and engagement with media of MAPPA annual reports. SMBs


DELIVERY PLAN Guidance issued to MAPPA SMBs to ensure consistency of collation of data and adherence to shared process. April 2006

a) The Responsible Authority for MAPPA to publish annual report, in consultation with Lay Advisers and SMB, and supported by Ministers and the collation of national MAPPA data from PPLU each year. June 2006 PPLRU

Draft SMB Annual reports submitted to PPLRU

National data assembled and publication date determined by Minister

b) Annual reports are improved and developed to improve public understanding and engagement.

Publication of Annual Reports, supported by national and local communication strategy.

National - April 2006 Local - March 2007


National MAPPA communication strategy contributes to improved public understanding and confidence. Area SMBs able to develop local strategy building from national strategy

PC88/2005 – MAPPA National Business Plan 2005/08


• Annual April 2006 PPLRU Awareness raised of MAPPA

c) Coordinate and deliver National MAPPA conference d) Develop Communication strategy September 2005 PPLRU

e) Clear process in place to support consistent sharing of guidance and good practice to SMBs .

Annual event planned for autumn each year • Identify opportunities to work constructively with media to improve public understanding of MAPPA PPLRU to maintain contact database, with identified leads for each Responsible Authority agency, who will have responsibility for disseminating information to their lead MAPPA staff. Consistent dissemination of information to key operational MAPPA leaders for responsible authority, Lay Advisors and duty to cooperate agencies

4. Training Strategy
MILESTONES September 2005 RESOURCE PPLRU OUTCOME Lay Advisers have received training to support the development of their role and enhance understanding of MAPPA. Lay Advisers able to provide independent advice and represent public perspective at MAPPA SMBs.

STRATEGIC AIM nd a) Deliver 2 module of national training to Lay Advisers

DELIVERY PLAN Training schedule and programme in place to support understanding and encourage shared learning from Lay Advisors

Training delivered During 2005/07

b) Deliver National MAPPA Coordinators conference

To plan and deliver national MAPPA coordinators conference to disseminate current developments and promote shared good practice

April 2006


MAPPA Coordinators are kept informed of good practice and legislative developments that support MAPPA. 7

PC88/2005 – MAPPA National Business Plan 2005/08

c) Collation of core training material to support MAPPA SMBs training strategy and benefit from shared learning and ensure efficient use of developed training materials. January 2006

National Workgroup re established specifically to collate and assemble training material that can be shared.

November 2005

National Work group led by PPLRU

Strategy developed to support maintenance of national training resource pack.

National training pack assembled and in place to support MAPPA SMB training strategies.

d) MAPPA SMBs include a training strategy in business plans, to address : • Induction to MAPPA for new practitioners • Training for MAPPA SMB members • Training for MAPPA coordinators and administrators March 2006

National resource pack assembled electronically and shared.

PC88/2005 – MAPPA National Business Plan 2005/08




1. MAPPA Development Strategy MILESTONES April 06 RESOURCE/WHO MAPPA Manager OUTCOME Staff in post by April 06 PROGRESS FTE admin May 06 Dep Mgr July 06

STRATEGIC AIM a) Achieve dedicated MAPPA Coordination & Administration capacity in Norfolk

DELIVERY PLAN Increase current dedicated establishment of 1 x FTE Manager and 1 x FTE Admin to 2 x FTE admin and 1 x FTE Manager and 1 x FTE Deputy Manager September 06

Develop a set of timeliness standards in relation to referrals, meetings and minutes

Deputy Manager

Delivery Standards document approved by SMB Oct 06

Appendix 3

Investigate the increase in demand for MAPPP’s and make recommendations to SMB May 06 SMB Invite Serco Rep. And PCT Rep. To May SMB Chair SMB SMB MAPPA Manager

September 06

MAPPA Manager

SMB approves new ways of working to meet demand

Implement ation of Level 1 by Probation June ‘06

b) Develop Norfolk SMB to include all Duty to Co-operate agencies

SMB to approve DTC document

Expand invites to include Serco, representatives of PCT

All DTC agencies included in Norfolk MAPPA by March 07

PCT rep Jane Black attended

Engage with those invited but who do not attend via single agency meetings April 06

From April 06 and ongoing


Development of RAP to focus on operational issues to ensure SMB can concentrate on strategic functions

Increase relevance of SMB meetings to DTC agencies


c) Implement National MAPPA Guidance published in Spring 06

Implement new guidance when published

May 06

Probation lead Police lead MAPPA manager

PPU (Police) NPA and MAPPA manager to draw up action plan in relation to findings of HMP Inspectorate on Sex offenders

Revised MAPPA Guidance implemented within required timescales

2. Monitoring & Evaluation Strategy MILESTONES April 06 RESOURCE SMB OUTCOME Identify and learn from trends and statistics

STRATEGIC AIM a) MAPPA SMBs implement Business Plan for 2006/07 which will incorporate monitoring arrangements to support: October 07

DELIVERY PLAN Ensure systems in place to monitor and implement National Guidance

Annual report costings Completed

Publication of Annual Report

Report on Business Plan outcomes in Annual Report 2006-7

Analysis of use of MAPPA Establishment of Quality risk management Assurance and Policy and thresholds at Level 2 & 3 Procedure sub-group from SMB members. Refer to Quality Assurance sub group to analyse April 06 ongoing MAPPA Manager/Probati on lead QA group/MAPPA Manager Diversity profile available

April 06

QA group/MAPPA dep. Manager


Analysis of MAPPA offenders who commit serious further offences May 06

Agree protocol for SFO notification with SFO Probation lead

Analysis of attendance and level of cooperation of agencies contributing to Level 2 & 3 meetings May 06

Refer to Quality Assurance sub group to analyse

Analysis of diversity profile of offenders assessed at Level 2 and Level 3.

Revise referral form in accordance with 13+ Census categories

MAPPA Manager/Deputy Manager



Monitor implementation of action points in probation supervision plans

Contribute to 6 monthly risk inspection with NPA and report to SMB

From May 06

MAPPA Manager

Evidence that MAPPP action plans are implemented

b) Development of multiagency public protection performance indicators 1/3/07 ViSOR in place in Norfolk August 06 Resources required to be identified in implementation plan Regional Group, MAPPA Manager, SMB Consistency and quality of recording improved, to aid transfer process

Implement national agreed performance indicators and implementation plan for ViSOR

c) Implement nationally agreed recording and collation of data for MAPPA

Consider national templates to support information sharing, referral to MAPPA, Minute taking and review processes.

Undertake gap analysis between national and local templates

Refer to regional MAPPA managers meeting Completed

SMB to approve option based on the above When published SMB Implement joined up SCR process to prevent duplication and maximise learning

d) Review current legislative arrangements for Serious Case Reviews (SCR) and develop guidance to ensure that a Serious Case Review process has taken place for offenders who commit Serious Further Offences at Level 2 and 3.

Implement co-ordinated SCR process when published

3. Communication and Strategic Partnership Strategy DELIVERY PLAN October 2006 MAPPA Manager and Communications Officer, Probation, who will project manage the report. Publish material, budget to be agreed MILESTONES RESOURCE OUTCOME Public confidence in MAPPA in Norfolk Completed


a) preparation of the Norfolk Annual Report in consultation with Lay Advisors in line with national guidance

Prepare Annual Report

b) Annual report is improved and other publicity material prepared October 06

Prepare publicity material involving MAPPA, Lay Advisors, Norfolk CJB, Police and Public Relations staff

Public confidence in MAPPA in Norfolk


c) Develop communications strategy in collaboration with Norfolk Criminal Justice Board

Contact CJB and address communications strategy

November 06

MAPPA Manager, Communications Officer Probation

Proactive engagement with Norfolk public through the media

e) Clear process in place to support consistent sharing of guidance and good practice to SMBs.

PPLRU to maintain contact September 2005 database, with identified leads for each Responsible Authority agency, which will have responsibility for disseminating information to their lead MAPPA staff.


Consistent dissemination of information to key operational MAPPA leaders for responsible authority, Lay Advisors and duty to cooperate agencies OUTCOME

QA group will advise of good practice and issues to SMB ongoing

4. Training Strategy MILESTONES March 07 RESOURCE MAPPA Manager and Deputy Manager

STRATEGIC AIM a) Implement national training materials into the Norfolk MAPPA multi agency training

DELIVERY PLAN Delivery of MAPPA training to DTC agencies. Develop national training pack

4. Finance Strategy RAP and SMB Commitment from CJB for ongoing MAPPA funding

Secure funding from DTC and responsible authorities on an ongoing basis

Costed proposal for CJB to consider ongoing funding of MAPPA – current funding agreed for 05/06 and 06/07 only

Appendix 4


Required for the reporting period 1st APRIL 2005 - 31st MARCH 2006
The statistical information you will be required to publish in this year’s report will be substantially the same as last year's.

Type your area name here: NORFOLK

1. Category 1 MAPPA offenders: Registered Sex Offenders (RSO) i) The number of RSOs living in your Area on 31st March 2006.
This is information principally held by the police and is a snapshot of RSOs on 31/03/06. It should NOT include RSOs in prison.

637 REGISTERED SEX OFFENDERS a) The number of RSOs per 100'000 head of population. (This figure will be calculated centrally by NPD) 79 per 100,000 head of population ii) The number of sex offenders having a registration requirement who were either cautioned or convicted for breaches of the requirement, between 1st April 2005 and 31st March 2006 Only those cautions that have actually taken place and breaches that have been successfully completed during the reporting period should be counted 11 iii) The number of (a) Sexual Offences Prevention Orders (SOPOs) applied for (b) interim SOPOs granted and (c) full SOPOs imposed by the courts in your Area between 1st April 2005 and 31st March 2006 APPLIED FOR = 3 INTERIM = 0 GRANTED = 2 + ONE APPLIED FOR IN MARCH ‘06, BUT STILL GOING THROUGH THE LEGAL PROCESS iv) The number of (a) Notification Orders applied for (b) interim Notification Orders granted and (c) full Notification Orders imposed by the courts in your Area between 1st April 2005 and 31st March 2006 APPLIED FOR = 0 GRANTED = 0

v) The number of Foreign Travel Orders (a) applied for and (b) imposed by the courts in your Area between 1st April 2005 and 31st March 2006 APPLIED FOR = 0 GRANTED = 0 LEVEL 2 CATEGORY 1 OFFENDERS = 28 REGISTERED SEX OFFENDERS 2. Category 2 MAPPA offenders: Violent offenders and Other Sexual offenders (V&OS) vi) The number of violent and other sexual offenders (as defined by Section 327 (3), (4) and (5) of the Criminal Justice Act (2003)) living in your Area between 1st April 2005 and 31st March 2006 LEVEL 2 CATEGORY 2 = 24 (SOME IDAP CASES – SEE NOTE BELOW)

You should include in this figure only those Category 2 offenders who are living in your Area during the reporting period. You should NOT include those Category 2 offenders who are still in custody. Care must also be taken NOT to include here any Category 1 offenders.
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 2005 and 31st March 2006.

This figure should not include any offenders who are included in either the Category 1 or 2 (i.e. (i) and (vi) above).
LEVEL 2 CATEGORY 3 =19 4. Offenders managed though Level 3 (MAPPP) & Level 2 (local inter-agency management) (viii) Identify how many MAPPA offenders in each of the three Categories (i.e. (1)- RSOs, (2)- V&O and (3)- OthO above) have been managed through the MAPPP (level 3) and through local inter-agency risk management (level 2) between 1st April 2005 and 31st March 2006. LEVEL 3 CATEGORY 1 = 9 LEVEL 3 CATEGORY 2 = 9 LEVEL 3 CATEGORY 3 = 2

The level 3 figure is the ‘critical few’. The criteria for referring a case to the MAPPP are defined in MAPPA Guidance as those in which the offender: · is assessed under OASys as being a high or very high risk of causing serious harm; AND · presents risks that can only be managed by a plan which requires close co-operation at a senior level due to the complexity of the case and/or because of the unusual resource commitments it requires; OR

· although not assessed as a high or very high risk, the case is exceptional because the likelihood of media scrutiny and/or public interest in the management of the case is very high and there is a need to ensure that public confidence in the criminal justice system is sustained. The level 2 figure should include those offenders who have not been managed at level 3 at any point in the counting period & meet the criteria set out in the MAPPA Guidance as follows: · The management of the offender requires the active involvement of more than one agency but the complexity of managing the risk is not so great as to require referral to Level 3, the MAPPP
(ix) Of the cases managed at levels 3 or 2 (i.e. (viii)) between 1st April 2005 and 31st March 2006 how many, whilst managed at that level: (a) Were returned to custody for a breach of licence? 11 in total, 2 x breach licence/SOPO (level 3) (see below) 1 x hospital order (level 3) 9 x breach licence (level 2) (b) Were returned to custody for a breach of a restraining order or sexual o f f e n c e s p r e v e n t i o n o r d e r ? 1 x level 3 (breach SOPO) 1 x level 3 (breach restraining order) (c) Were charged with a serious sexual or violent offence? NONE PLEASE NOTE: Only record outcome measures appropriate to the level at which the offender was managed at the time of their breach/further offence (e.g. if an offender was initially managed at Level 3 but goes on to commit a serious further offence after he has been moved to Level 2, he should be recorded in the 'Level 2' column 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.
In accordance with the instruction from ACPO in relation to publishing the numbers of Registered Sex Offenders per Basic Command Unit (BCU – Effectively Policing Areas or Divisions) I can report the following: Norfolk Constabulary snapshot in April 2006 (Subject to daily change) Eastern Area Central Area Western Area