You are on page 1of 40


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

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-to-
face 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
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.

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

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.
(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

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

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
• 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
• 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
• 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 sub-
groups, 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
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 Northgate Hospital

Elizabeth House Norfolk and Waveney Mental Health Partnership Trust
Walpole Loke Northgate Street
Dereham Great Yarmouth
Norfolk NR19 1EE Norfolk NR30 1BU
Tel: 01362 656322 Tel: 01493 330054

Broadland District Council Norvic Clinic

Thorpe Lodge Norfolk and Waveney Mental Health Partnership Trust
1 Yarmouth Lodge St. Andrews Business Park
Thorpe St. Andrew Thorpe St. Andrew
Norwich NR7 0DU Norwich NR17 0HT
Tel: 01603 431133 Tel: 01603 439614

Children’s Services / Adult Services / Norwich Magistrates Court

Norfolk County Council Education Whitefriars
County Hall Norwich
Martineau Lane Tel: 01603 632421
Norfolk NR1 2S Norwich Crown Court
Tel: 01603 222222 Tel: 01603 728200

Community Mental Health Team St. Martin’s Housing Trust

West Norfolk Primary Care Trust 35 Bishopgate
North House Norwich
Goodwins Road Norfolk
King’s Lynn PE30 5PD NR1 4AA
Tel: 01553 815142 Tel: 01603 667706

Hellesdon Hospital St. Matthew Housing

Norfolk and Waveney Mental Health Partnership Trust 4 The Old Church
Drayton High Road St Matthew’s Road
Norwich NR6 5BE Norwich NR1 1SP
Tel: 01603 421421 Tel: 01603 442010

HMP Norwich Stonham Housing Trust

Knox Road 23 West Parade
Norwich Norwich NR2 3DN
NR1 4LU Tel: 01953 602456
Tel: 01603 708600
Victim Support
Julian Housing 1a Silver Road
1a Oak Street Norwich
Norwich Norfolk NR3 4TX
Norfolk NR3 3AE Tel: 01603 767383
Tel: 01603 767718
West Norfolk Primary Care Trust
Learning Disability Team Fermoy Unit
Norfolk County Council Queen Elizabeth Hospital
Norfolk Social Services Gayton Road
Wymondham Health Centre King’s Lynn
18 Bridewell Street PE30 4ET
Wymondham Tel: 01553 613613
Norfolk NR18 0AR
Tel: 01953 604437 Wherry Housing Association
6 Central Avenue
Norfolk Constabulary St. Andrews Business Park
OCC Thorpe St. Andrew
Jubilee House Norwich
Falconers Chase Norfolk
Wymondham NR7 0HR
Norfolk NR18 0WW Tel: 01603 703500
Tel: 01953 424242
Youth Offending Team
Norfolk Probation Area 45 Netherwood Green
4th Floor Norwich
St. James Yarn Mill NR1 2JF
Whitefriars Tel: 01603 223617
Tel: 01603 220100
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

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 re-
offending 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
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.

Table.1 Total number of MAPPA Offenders in the Community by Category

(% Change)

Category 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06

1. Registered 21513 24572 28994 29973

Sex Offenders 14.22% 18% 3.38%
2. Violent 29594 12754* 12662 14317
Offenders -56.9% -0.72% 13.07%
and other sex
3. Other 1802 2166 2936 3363
offenders 20.2% 35.55% 14.54%
Totals 52909 39492 44592 47653
-25.36% 12.91% 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 Level 2 (% of Level 3 (% of Total per Category

MAPPA Total) MAPPA total) (% of MAPPA Total)
1. Registered Sex 6014 580 6594
Offenders (RSO) 12.62% 1.22% 13.84%
2. Violent offenders 4280 506 4786
and other sex 8.98% 1.06% 10.04%
3. Other offenders 2211 192 2403
4.64% 0.4% 5.04%
Total per Level 12505 1278 13783
26.24% 2.68% 28.92%

Table 3. Offenders referred to Levels 2 and 3 - Comparison with last year

(% Change)

Level 2 Level 3
Category of MAPPA 2004/05 2005/06 2004/05 2005/06
1. Registered Sex 5381 6014 626 580
Offenders (RSO) 11.76% -7.35%
2. Violent offenders and 3615 4280 547 506
other sex offenders 18.39% -7.49%
3. Other Offenders 2292 2211 305 192
-3.53% -37.05%
Total: 11288 12505 1478 1278
10.78% -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
Category 2004/05 2005/06 2004/05 2005/06 2004/05 2005/06
1. Breach of 1084 1321 222 219 1306 1540
License 21.86% -1.35% 17.92%
2. Breach of 55 82 18 22 73 104
Orders 49.09% 22.22% 42.47%
3. Charged with 47 50 32 11 79 61
SFO 6.38% -65.63% -22.78%

Table 5. Outcome measures: RSO arrests and Sex Offences Act Civil
Orders 2004/5 and 2005/6 (% Change)

RSO Enforcement Number of Offenders (04/05) Number of Offenders (05/06)

1. Registered sex offenders 993 1295

(RSO’s) charged/cautioned 30.41%

Sex offences Act Orders Number of Orders (04/05) Number of Orders (05/06)
2. Sexual offences prevention 503 933
orders (SOPOs) granted 85.49%
3. Noti cation Orders (NOs) 22 39
granted 77.27%
4. Foreign Travel Orders 1 1
(FTOs) granted 0%
Total Number of Orders 526 973
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-co-
operate 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

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
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
• 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
• 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
Communication and Strategic Partnerships

• The publication of the MAPPA Annual report (achieved)

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


• 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


a) Achieve dedicated MAPPA • Complete national consultation of Sept 2005 Led by PPLRU • By April 2007 all
Coordination & Administration development paper SMBs able to
capacity across all MAPPA SMBs • Consult with Duty to Co-operate confirm dedicated
agencies nationally coordinator &
during 2006/07 November 2005
• Issue Guidance to SMBs administration
posts in place
• SMBs include within business November 2005
plan for 2006/07 objective to
support aim April 2006 SMBs identify
dedicated funding to
support Coordinator
b) Develop RANSG to include Proposal to RANSG July 2005 Nil RANSG -
representation of Duty to Cooperate Invitation to DTCs leads to 6 monthly From Oct 05 - Oct 06 strengthened by DTC
agencies consultations adjacent to RANSG contributions.

Update and revise to incorporate new Completion of MAPPA Lead in Revised MAPPA
c) Revise and publish MAPPA legislation and recommendations Consultation period PPLRU in Guidance Published
Guidance from RANSG, taking account of October 2005 conjunction with SMT April 2006
feedback from consultation process staff from PPLRU re
and recommendations from HMIP Publication of De Probation and
inspections on Sex Offenders and Montfort research. Prison.
Public Protection and from De Summer 2005
Montfort University research.
Publication of HMIP/C
MAPPA thematic –
Spring 2006
Appendix 2

PC88/2005 – MAPPA National Business Plan 2005/08 4

2. Monitoring & Evaluation Strategy


a) MAPPA SMBs implement Issue guidance to MAPPA SMBs October 2005 PPLRU • MAPPA SMBs
Business Plan for 2006/07 which will have rolling 3 year
incorporate monitoring business plans in
place from April
arrangements to support:
2006 onwards
• publication of Annual Report
• LCJBs and LSCBs
• analysis of use of MAPPA risk
to receive SMB
management thresholds at Implement SMB Business Plans for April 2006 MAPPA business plans
Level 2 & 3
2006/07 SMBs • Active analysis of
• analysis of MAPPA offenders
risk management
who commit serious further
and improved
• analysis of attendance and
Integrating the
level of cooperation of Report on business plan outcomes in March 2007
agencies contributing to Level Annual Report 2006/7 management
2 & 3 meetings
information with
• analysis of diversity profile of
the business
offenders assessed at Level 2
planning process.
and Level 3.
• ViSOR in place
across the
Authority and able
b) Development of multi agency to measure
Identify and agree multi agency agreed indicators
public protection performance
indicators indicators, Implement May 2006 - Responsible
April 2007 Authority agencies
c) Improve consistency of recording Develop national templates to Draft July 2005 PPLRU Consistency and
and collation of data for MAPPA support information sharing, referral Consult Sept 2005 quality of recording
(explore interface to MAPPA, Minute taking and review Publish Nov 2005 improved, templates
NOMIS/ViSOR/OASys) processes. support case transfer

PC88/2005 – MAPPA National Business Plan 2005/08 5

d) Review current legislative • Explore links to review processes Dec 2005 PPLRU Clear process for
arrangements for Serious Case for SFO’s & Part 8 Child Serious Case Reviews
Reviews (SCR) and develop Protection Reviews for Level 2 and Level 3
• Explore links to Homicide
guidance to ensure that a Serious March 2006 MAPPA cases in
Case Review process has taken • Develop Proposal for place, which links and
place for offenders who commit consultation for RANSG & DTC April 2006 does not repeat
Serious Further Offences at Level 2 agencies, internal or other multi
and 3. • Strategy to implement SCRs agency review
drafted June 2007 processes, but
supports to ensure
lessons can be
learned and MAPPA
development informed.
3. Communication & Strategic Partnerships Strategy


Guidance issued to MAPPA SMBs to October 2005 PPLRU Public confidence
a) The Responsible Authority for ensure consistency of collation of agenda enhanced
MAPPA to publish annual report, in data and adherence to shared through publication
consultation with Lay Advisers and process. and engagement with
SMB, and supported by Ministers media of MAPPA
and the collation of national MAPPA Draft SMB Annual reports submitted April 2006 SMBs annual reports.
data from PPLU each year. to PPLRU

National data assembled and June 2006 PPLRU

publication date determined by
b) Annual reports are improved and National MAPPA
developed to improve public Publication of Annual Reports, National - April 2006 PPLRU & SMBs communication
understanding and engagement. supported by national and local Local - March 2007 strategy contributes to
communication strategy. improved public
understanding and
Area SMBs able to
develop local strategy
building from national

PC88/2005 – MAPPA National Business Plan 2005/08 6

c) Coordinate and deliver National • Annual event planned for autumn Annual PPLRU Awareness raised of
MAPPA conference each year MAPPA
d) Develop Communication • Identify opportunities to work April 2006
constructively with media to
improve public understanding of
PPLRU to maintain contact September 2005 PPLRU Consistent
e) Clear process in place to support database, with identified leads for dissemination of
consistent sharing of guidance and each Responsible Authority agency, information to key
good practice to SMBs . who will have responsibility for operational MAPPA
disseminating information to their leaders for
lead MAPPA staff. responsible authority,
Lay Advisors and duty
to cooperate agencies
4. Training Strategy


a) Deliver 2 module of national Training schedule and programme in September 2005 PPLRU Lay Advisers have
training to Lay Advisers place to support understanding and received training to
encourage shared learning from Lay support the
Advisors development of their
role and enhance
understanding of
Training delivered
During 2005/07 Lay Advisers able to
provide independent
advice and represent
public perspective at

b) Deliver National MAPPA To plan and deliver national MAPPA April 2006 PPLRU MAPPA Coordinators
Coordinators conference coordinators conference to are kept informed of
disseminate current developments good practice and
and promote shared good practice legislative
developments that
support MAPPA.
PC88/2005 – MAPPA National Business Plan 2005/08 7
c) Collation of core training material National Workgroup re established November 2005 National Work group National training pack
to support MAPPA SMBs training specifically to collate and assemble led by PPLRU assembled and in
strategy and benefit from shared training material that can be shared. place to support
learning and ensure efficient use of MAPPA SMB training
developed training materials. Strategy developed to support strategies.
maintenance of national training January 2006
d) MAPPA SMBs include a training resource pack.
strategy in business plans, to
address :
• Induction to MAPPA for National resource pack assembled
new practitioners electronically and shared. March 2006
• Training for MAPPA SMB
• Training for MAPPA
coordinators and

PC88/2005 – MAPPA National Business Plan 2005/08 8

Appendix 3



1. MAPPA Development Strategy


a) Achieve dedicated MAPPA Increase current dedicated April 06 MAPPA Manager Staff in post by FTE admin
Coordination & Administration establishment of 1 x FTE April 06 May 06 Dep
capacity in Norfolk Manager and 1 x FTE Admin Mgr July 06
to 2 x FTE admin and 1 x FTE
Manager and 1 x FTE Deputy

Develop a set of timeliness September 06 Deputy Manager Delivery

standards in relation to Standards
referrals, meetings and document
minutes approved by
SMB Oct 06
Appendix 3
Investigate the increase in September 06 MAPPA Manager SMB approves ation of
demand for MAPPP’s and new ways of Level 1 by
make recommendations to working to meet Probation
SMB demand June ‘06

b) Develop Norfolk SMB to SMB to approve DTC May 06 SMB SMB MAPPA
include all Duty to Co-operate document Manager
Expand invites to include Invite Serco Rep. Chair SMB All DTC PCT rep
Serco, representatives of PCT And PCT Rep. To agencies Jane Black
May SMB included in attended
Norfolk MAPPA
by March 07

Engage with those invited but From April 06 and RAP Increase Completed
who do not attend via single ongoing relevance of
agency meetings SMB meetings
to DTC
Development of RAP to focus April 06 agencies
on operational issues to
ensure SMB can concentrate
on strategic functions
c) Implement National MAPPA Implement new guidance May 06 Probation lead Revised
Guidance published in Spring when published Police lead MAPPA
06 MAPPA manager Guidance
PPU (Police) NPA and implemented
MAPPA manager to draw up within required
action plan in relation to timescales
findings of HMP Inspectorate
on Sex offenders

2. Monitoring & Evaluation Strategy


a) MAPPA SMBs Ensure systems in place to April 06 SMB Identify and learn
implement Business monitor and implement from trends and
Plan for 2006/07 which National Guidance statistics
will incorporate
arrangements to
• Publication of Annual Report on Business Plan October 07 Annual report Completed
Report outcomes in Annual Report costings
• Analysis of use of MAPPA Establishment of Quality April 06 QA Completed
risk management Assurance and Policy and group/MAPPA
thresholds at Level 2 & 3 Procedure sub-group from dep. Manager
SMB members. Refer to
Quality Assurance sub group
to analyse

• Analysis of MAPPA Agree protocol for SFO April 06 ongoing MAPPA

offenders who commit notification with SFO Manager/Probati
serious further offences Probation lead on lead

• Analysis of attendance Refer to Quality Assurance May 06 QA Diversity profile

and level of cooperation sub group to analyse group/MAPPA available
of agencies contributing Manager
to Level 2 & 3 meetings

• Analysis of diversity Revise referral form in May 06 MAPPA Completed

profile of offenders accordance with 13+ Census Manager/Deputy
assessed at Level 2 and categories Manager
Level 3.

• Monitor implementation of Contribute to 6 monthly risk From May 06 MAPPA Manager Evidence that
action points in probation inspection with NPA and MAPPP action
supervision plans report to SMB plans are
b) Development of multi- Implement national agreed 1/3/07 Resources ViSOR in place in
agency public performance indicators and required to be Norfolk
protection performance implementation plan for identified in
indicators ViSOR implementation
c) Implement nationally Consider national templates to August 06 Regional Group, Consistency and
agreed recording and collation support information sharing, MAPPA quality of
of data for MAPPA referral to MAPPA, Minute Manager, SMB recording
taking and review processes. improved, to aid
transfer process
Undertake gap analysis
between national and local

Refer to regional MAPPA

managers meeting

SMB to approve option based Completed

on the above

d) Review current legislative Implement co-ordinated SCR When published SMB Implement joined
arrangements for Serious process when published up SCR process to
Case Reviews (SCR) and prevent duplication
develop guidance to ensure and maximise
that a Serious Case Review learning
process has taken place for
offenders who commit Serious
Further Offences at Level 2
and 3.
3. Communication and Strategic Partnership Strategy


a) preparation of the Prepare Annual Report October 2006 MAPPA Manager Public confidence Completed
Norfolk Annual Report and in MAPPA in
in consultation with Lay Communications Norfolk
Advisors in line with Officer,
national guidance Probation, who
will project
manage the

b) Annual report is improved Prepare publicity material October 06 Publish material, Public confidence Completed
and other publicity material involving MAPPA, Lay budget to be in MAPPA in
prepared Advisors, Norfolk CJB, Police agreed Norfolk
and Public Relations staff

c) Develop communications Contact CJB and address November 06 MAPPA Proactive

strategy in collaboration with communications strategy Manager, engagement with
Norfolk Criminal Justice Board Communications Norfolk public
Officer Probation through the media
e) Clear process in place to PPLRU to maintain contact September 2005 PPLRU Consistent QA group
support consistent sharing of database, with identified leads dissemination of will advise
guidance and good practice to for each Responsible Authority information to key of good
SMBs. agency, which will have operational practice
responsibility for disseminating MAPPA leaders and issues
information to their lead for responsible to SMB -
MAPPA staff. authority, Lay ongoing
Advisors and duty
to cooperate
4. Training Strategy


a) Implement national training Delivery of MAPPA training to March 07 MAPPA Manager
materials into the Norfolk DTC agencies. Develop and Deputy
MAPPA multi agency training national training pack Manager

4. Finance Strategy

Secure funding from DTC and Costed proposal for CJB to RAP and SMB Commitment
responsible authorities on an consider ongoing funding of from CJB for
ongoing basis MAPPA – current funding ongoing MAPPA
agreed for 05/06 and 06/07 funding
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.


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

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


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
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


2. Category 2 MAPPA offenders: Violent offenders and Other Sexual offenders


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


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

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).


4. Offenders managed though Level 3 (MAPPP) & Level 2 (local inter-agency


(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.


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;
· 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?


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

165 222 115