You are on page 1of 33

North Yorkshire Area

Multi-Agency Public Protection


Arrangements

Annual Report 2005-2006


1. National Perspective

Foreword
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 advisers, 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 allreasonable action is taken the risk of further serious harm can be reduced to a minimum and fewer
victims will be exposed to repeat offending.

1
Contents

Page
1. National Perspective 1

2. Introduction 3-4

3. What is MAPPA? 5

4. Operation in North Yorkshire 7


a. Strategic Management Board (SMB) 8
b. Key Achievements 9
c. Victim Work 10
d. MAPPA Offenders: 11
Sexual Offender Management
Violent Offender Management
Domestic Violence
e. Approved Premises 16
f. Potentially Dangerous Individuals 17
g. Disclosure 18

5. Frequently Asked Questions 19

6. Statistical Information 20

7. Contacts 21

MAPPA-The First Five Years 22

2
2. Introduction

Welcome to this the fifth annual


report of the North Yorkshire and
City of York Multi Agency Public
Protection Arrangements (MAPPA).
Protecting the Public from the most serious
offenders living in our communities continues to be our
highest priority. Managing offenders and balancing the
needs of victims, families and the communities in which
they live is not an easy task and agencies need to work
together. The implementation of the Criminal Justice Act
2003 introduced a new duty to cooperate agreement and
we applaud the commitment that key agencies such as
Housing, Social Services, Education, Health and the Youth
Offending Teams have made towards increasing public
Della Cannings QPM BSc
protection in our Area.
Chief Constable
Nationally 2005/6 has seen a considerable increase in North Yorkshire Police
public interest in the operations of MAPPA. The HM
Inspectorate of Probation’s report into the murder of Mr
Monkton by two known offenders Hanson & White
attracted widespread media coverage and a nationwide
review by responsible authorities of their MAPPA
procedures. Significantly, Hanson & White had not been
made the subject of MAPPA procedures, but improved
risk assessment and identification would have ensured
that they were.

The probation service in North Yorkshire has undertaken Roz Brown


a thorough review of its risk and public protection Chief Officer
procedures which were revised and re-issued in North Yorkshire Probation
November 2005. An action plan is in place to address
lessons learned as a result of the Hanson & White report.

Public attention has also focussed in the past year on


the provision of suitable accommodation for offenders
returning to live in the community. The probation service
manage a national network of approved premises, or
hostels, which provide accommodation for those age 18+
who are on bail, subject to probation supervision or to a
statutory licence on release from prison.
Norman Griffin
Governor
HM Prison Service

3
report.

North Yorkshire operates one hostel as part of this The probation service in North Yorkshire has
national network of approved premises. Known as undertaken a thorough review of its risk and public pro-
Southview, and situated in York, it has been operating tection procedures which were revised and
since 1995 and over the past 11 years has become an re-issued in November 2005. An action plan is in place to
integral part of the local community. The hostel manager address lessons learned as a result of the Hanson & White
keeps in close personal contact with the heads of local report.
schools and with other key people concerned with
organisations which look after the needs of children and
vulnerable groups. He also attends all local ward
Welcome to this
meetings. Further the
details fifth
of the annualand
management
report of the North Yorkshire
operation of the hostel are detailed andin this
elsewhere
report.
City of York Multi Agency Public
MAPPA procedures, when operating well, can be effective
Protection Arrangements (MAPPA).
in reducing the likelihood of further serious offences
being committed by those subject to MAPPA. In North
Yorkshire, the MAPPA agencies have undertaken regular
Protecting
qualitythe Public
audits from theofmost
of samples theirserious
MAPPA cases, the
offenders living
findings in ouraudits
of these communities
are that in continues
the greattomajority
be our of
highest priority and last year the Responsible Authority
cases, MAPPA procedures are shown to have significantly for
MAPPA was strengthened by the inclusion of the
increased the degree of protection afforded to the public.Prison Public attention has also focussed in the past year on the
Service
Theandcasethe appointment
examples in thisatreport
Strategic
showManagement
some of the ways provision of suitable accommodation for offenders
Board
in level
whichofthese
two lay advisors.can
procedures These new developments
operate. returning to live in the community. The probation service
mark another step in the increasingly collaborative and and its partner agencies manage a national network of
joined up workingit of
Realistically, criminal
must justice
be borne organisations
in mind that whilst and
the level approved premises, or hostels, which provide
key partner
of risk inagencies andcases
individual have may
increased the
be reduced, it can never accommodation for those age 18+ who are on bail,
accountability
be entirelyofremoved.
MAPPA Locking
in this challenging
people up area of
and throwing subject to probation supervision or to a statutory licence
public protection.
away the key, is not a practical solution for all but the on release from prison.
highly dangerous few. The vast majority of violent and
Managing offenders
dangerous and balancing
offenders thestage
will at some needsbeofreleased into the public. The case examples in this report show some
victims, families and the communities in
the community, and it is the responsibilitywhichofthey
the live of the ways in which these procedures can operate.
is notprobation
an easy task and agencies need to work together.
service, in conjunction with the other MAPPA
The implementation
agencies, to work ofwith
the Criminal Justice to
these offenders Acthelp
2003reduce the Realistically, it must be borne in mind that whilst the level
introduced a new duty to
likelihood of them committing further serious offences. of risk in individual cases may be reduced, it can never
co-operate agreement and we applaud the be entirely removed. Locking people up and throwing
commitment
The MAPPA thatagencies
key agencies such as Housing,
are crucially importantSocial
in this vital away the key, is not a practical solution for all but the
Services, Education, Health and the Youth Offending way it is
work, as by working together in a co-ordinated high-
Teams have made
possible towards
to share increasing
information public
about protection
an offender andin ly
our Area.
prepare co-ordinated risk management plans that should dan-
reduce the chances of further serious offences being ger-
Nationally 2005/6 has seen a considerable increase in
committed. ous
public interest in the operations of MAPPA. The HM few.
Inspectorate
In Northof Probation’s
Yorkshire reportMAPPA
the three into theResponsible The
murder of Mr Monkton by two known
Authorities, Police, Probation & Prisonoffenders
serviceHanson
have been vast
& White attracted widespread media
developing closer ways of working. Since February 2006,
coverage and a nationwide
the Probation review by
Public Protection responsible
Manager author-
has been
ities co-located
of their MAPPA
with the Police Public Protection Unit at&
procedures. Significantly, Hanson
White had not been
Police HQ in Newby madeWiske.
the subject of MAPPA
This has proce-
greatly improved
dures, but improved exchange
communication risk assessment and
and the identification
day to day
would have ensured
management that they
of violent andwere.
sex offenders subject to
MAPPA in North Yorkshire.
The probation service in North Yorkshire has
undertaken a thorough
This report reviewhow
demonstrates of itstherisk and process of
MAPPA
public protection procedures which were
identification, assessment and management revisedofand re- and
sexual
issued in November 2005. An action plan is in place
violent offenders is achieved by applying a structured to majority of violent and dangerous offenders will at some
address lessonsfrom
approach, learned as arelease
prison result of the Hanson
through & Whiteand
to supervision stage be released into the community, and it is the
monitoring in the community. We hope that you find it
both informative and reassuring.
4
3. What is MAPPA?
responsibility of the
p

The legislation behind MAPPA places a duty on the Level 1- Normal Risk Management
Probation, Police and Prison Services, acting together as
the “Responsible Authority”, to assess and manage the This is the level for cases in which risks posed by the
risk posed by sexual and violent offenders in the offender can be managed by one agency without actively
community. To do this the Responsible Authority works in or significantly involving other agencies. Level 1 should
partnership with other agencies who have a legal duty to be applied only to Category 1 and 2 offenders because by
co-operate with MAPPA. These are the Health Service, definition Category 3 offenders present a degree of risk of
local authority Housing, Education, & Social Services serious harm which requires active, inter-agency
Departments, Registered Social Landlords who management. Level 1 management will generally involve
accommodate MAPPA offenders, Job Centre Plus, the Probation, or Police, Prison or Youth Offending Teams
Electronic Monitoring Providers, and Youth Offending taking single responsibility.
Teams.
Generally offenders managed at Level 1 will be assessed
The legal authority for MAPPA is contained in the as presenting a Low or Medium risk of harm.
Criminal Justice Act 2003. The Act allows the To share information about an offender and prepare
Responsible Authority and the duty to cooperate partners co-ordinated risk management plans that should reduce
to work together and to share information. The Act the chances of further serious offences being committed.
defines the categories of offenders who are the subject of
MAPPA. These are:

Category 1:
Registered sex offenders.

Category 2:
Violent and sex offenders who receive a
sentence of imprisonment of 12 months or more.
Mentally disordered offenders who have been
transferred from prison to hospital, under a transfer
direction and restriction order.
Those convicted of a sexual or violent offence, who are
then made subject of a hospital direction and
limitation direction.
Those convicted of a sexual or violence offence, who
are then made subject of a hospital order with a
restriction order, and those found unfit to plead who
have committed the act as charged or not guilty by
reason of insanity, under the Criminal Procedure
(insanity) Act 1964 in respect of sexual or violent
offences and then admitted to hospital with
restrictions.

Category 3:
Other offenders: those who are not in Category 1 or 2
but who are considered by the Responsible Authority
to pose a risk of serious harm to the public.

The MAPPA framework identifies three separate but


connected levels at which risk is assessed and managed.

5
What is MAPPA?
responsibility of the
p

Level 2- Local inter-agency risk management


(RMM)

Level 2 (in North Yorkshire known as Risk Management


Meetings but also known by the City of York YOT as Risk
Strategy Meetings - RMMs) are applicable where either
the level of risk is not so high nor the complexity of
managing the risks so great as to require referral to Level
3 Mult-Agency Public Protection Panels (MAPPPs). Cases
may be referred to an RMM for review after having been
managed at MAPPPs when the seriousness of risk has
diminished or where the complex multi-agency
management of the risks have been brokered and firmly
established by the MAPPPs.

All RMMs held on MAPPA offenders must have Police


and Probation attendance for the meeting to have the
authority of the legislation. Staff from Prisons and other
duty to cooperate agencies should be invited as
appropriate.

Generally offenders managed at RMM (level 2) will be


assessed as presenting a High Risk.

Level 3 – Multi-agency Public Protection Panels


(MAPPPs)

MAPPPs are responsible for the management of the


“critical few” cases. The criteria for referring a case for
MAPPP consideration are where the offender:

is assessed as being a Very High risk of causing serious


harm
· presents risks (whether assessed as High or Very High)
that can only be managed through close
multi-agency co-operation at a senior level, because of
the complexity of the case, or because of the unusual
resource commitments it requires
· is likely to attract strong media scrutiny
· 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

Whilst most will be offenders being released from prison,


they may also include:

· offenders discharged from detention under a hospital


order
· offenders returning from overseas (following release
from custody or not)
· offenders previously managed as a Medium or even a
Low risk in the community who come to present a
High or Very High risk as a result of significant changes
of circumstances.

6
4. Operation in Yorkshire
responsibility of the

Multi-agency public protection arrangements have been Members of staff working in any national or local
in place in North Yorkshire area since 2001. The government agency can and do refer offenders who are
arrangements involve Police, Probation and the Prison causing a concern to North Yorkshire area MAPPA via the
Service acting together as the “Responsible Authority” in Public Protection Unit. They are assessed by the Police
partnership with other agencies. and Probation Public Protection Managers. However,
within North Yorkshire area, the majority of offenders are
Under MAPPA, North Yorkshire area Responsible referred through Probation or Police officers, Youth
Authority and duty to cooperate agencies work together Offending Teams or the Prison Service.
to share information about offenders who pose risks to These referrals are identified by respective agency
others, assess those risks, agree plans to manage them, involvement with offenders. (The Probation Service
and keep the offender under review, through regular case supervises all adult offenders released from prison on
conferences. licence. Youth Offending Teams supervise youth offenders
under the age of 18. The Police have responsibility for
Since 2001, senior managers within North Yorkshire managing Registered Sex Offenders).
Police and the Probation Service have placed significant
priority towards ensuring that robust and effective All MAPPA meetings and related records are confidential.
arrangements are in place to comply with legislation and An accurate record is kept of information shared, risks
safeguarding the well being of the public within North identified, decisions made and responsibilities for tasks
Yorkshire. This is evidenced, in the Strategic Management allocated with appropriate timescales. Due to the
Board creating an annual audit procedure to review sensitive nature of the information discussed any request
operating practices and ensure that any recommendations for access to meetings or records is carefully considered
are implemented. North Yorkshire area MAPPA continues by North Yorkshire area MAPPA legal advisors.
to develop and in January 2006 the creation of a North
Yorkshire Police and Probation Public Protection Unit was Robust risk management requires effective risk assessment
realised. This has ensured that Police and Probation and a variety of validated assessment tools are used by
Public Protection Managers are jointly responsible for Probation, Youth Offending Teams, Police and the Prison
effectively managing the North Yorkshire area MAPPA Service. Probation and the Prison Service use the
operational procedures including, reviewing and Offender Assessment System (OASys) to assess all
actioning MAPPA referrals and sharing agency offenders sentenced or under supervision. Additionally
information regarding MAPPA offenders. Probation and Police staff use ‘Risk Matrix 2000’ when
assessing the risk of re-offending with sex offenders. For
MAPPA offenders considered to represent the “critical offenders who have committed acts of domestic abuse,
few” (Level 3) are reviewed at the Area-wide Multi- Probation use the Spousal Abuse Risk Assessment (SARA)
Agency Public Protection Panel (MAPPP) which meets to identify risk factors. The use of these tools helps in
centrally every month. The panel meetings are chaired by building up a picture of the offender so that a
a senior representative of the Responsible Authority. comprehensive assessment can be made about the risk of
Both Police and Probation Public Protection Managers are harm and the risk of re-offending. Specific risk factors
involved, together with senior police representation from can then be targeted as part of the plan to manage the
the Area in which the offender resides. A core group of risks posed by that offender.
senior managers from the duty to cooperate agencies
attend and participate in all meetings.

MAPPA offenders identified as representing a lesser level


of risk and where the complexity of managing the risks is
not so great as to require referral to Level 3 (MAPPP) are
reviewed at locally based Risk Management Meetings.
These locally based meetings are also chaired by a senior
representative of the Responsible Authority. The meetings
are attended by Police Public Protection Officers and
relevant key Probation staff. Relevant staff from duty to
cooperate agencies additionally attend and participate in
meetings.

7
a. Strategic Management Board

responsibility of the

Multi Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA)


are managed in North Yorkshire by a Strategic
Management Board (SMB). The SMB is chaired, in turn,
Strategic Management Board by one of the senior managers from the Responsible
Members Authorities (Police, Probation and Prison services) and
members include senior managers from duty to cooperate
Roz Brown Agencies (Youth Offending Teams, local Education
(Current Chair) Authorities, registered social landlords, Social Services,
North Yorkshire Probation Strategic Health Authorities, Care Trusts and NHS Trusts,
Jobcentre Plus and electronic monitoring providers). It
ACC Peter Bagshaw
also includes two Lay Advisors appointed by the Secretary
North Yorkshire Police
of State.
Lindsey Hall
North Yorkshire Police The SMB has produced its first 3 year Business Plan
which covers the financial years from 1st April 2006 to
Alan Jenks 31st March 2009. It has been drawn up in line with
Representing Housing guidance issued by the Responsible Authority National
Steering Group (RANSG). The key priorities for the
Paul Farrimond
coming year can be summarised as follows:
NHS Trust
· Ensuring the high quality of MAPPA work
Steve Twynham (including quality audits; shared practice; lessons learned
Victim Support from best practice)
· Maintaining public confidence in MAPPA
Tony Campbell (including production of annual report; victim awareness
Social Services · Demonstrating high performance (including monitoring
and evaluation and development of new database)
Simon Goulding
Lay Adviser
The successful implementation of this business plan will
Hugh ONeill provide evidence of the level of activity and performance
Lay Adviser of MAPPA and direct and drive improvements in the
coming years. It will increase transparency and
Pete Dwyer accountability and should provide valuable information
York Community Services and research data to enhance public confidence in
MAPPA in North Yorkshire and the City of York.
Jill Holbert
North Yorkshire YOT

Alan Critchlow
NYCC Education Services

Norman Griffin
HM Prison Service

Paul Nixon
Children’s and Family Services

8
b. Key Achievements -2005-2006

responsibility of the

The Strategic Management Board (SMB) has drawn up the · In July 2006, North Yorkshire Police are
first formal 3 year Business Plan to cover the years introducing Community Protection Units (CPUs),
2006-9. The plan fits within the national RANSG plan. consisting of a Detective Sergeant and four Detective
The progress of the Business Plan will be monitored Constables covering each of the three areas of NYP
through SMB meetings. (Central - York, Western - Harrogate, Eastern -
· The SMB continues to operate in close partnership Scarborough). Each CPU will investigate offences of hate
with the Local Criminal Justice Board and with crime and domestic violence, and manage missing person
Safeguarding Childrens’ Boards to provide a cohesive and enquiries. Each CPU will also incorporate the work of the
consistent framework for action across the full spectrum existing Vulnerable Person Unit and domestic violence
of partnership agencies. co-ordinator roles. The key objectives are to improve
The 3rd Annual MAPPA audit of Level 3 cases (the quality of investigation, reduce the number of repeat
most serious) showed continuous improvement in the victims and increase the number of offenders arrested and
management and operation of MAPPA. The report convicted of such crime.
highlighted a high standard of inter-agency information · A North Yorkshire Area MAPPA case identified
sharing, identification of risk and defensible risk concerns regarding convicted sex offenders associating
management plans contained within cases subject to with a voluntary group working with vulnerable people.
review. The North Yorkshire audit tool was supplied to The case was locally managed and resolved, however,
the National Public Protection Unit and recognised as the case highlighted concerns with national practice that
good practice. are now subject of review.
· The 1st Annual audit of Level 2 MAPPA cases showed The rollout of ViSOR across the North Yorkshire Police
that MAPPA was having a significant improvement in the area. ViSOR is the national IT system for managing
management of risk. violent and sex offenders and during 2006/7 will be
· The establishment, in January 2006, of a joint, expanded to include operation by the probation and
centrally co-ordinated Police and Probation Public prison services.
Protection Unit. (The Unit comprises of Police and · North Yorkshire area MAPPA agencies have
Probation Public Protection Managers and administrative provided information to all schools throughout the area
support). The co-location of inter-agency managers has regarding the purpose and function of MAPPA and the
assisted in increased information sharing, early role Southview Approved Premise has in the protection of
identification of MAPPA sexual and violent offenders and the public from harm.
potentially dangerous individuals within the North · All YOT and relevant Probation staff who have
Yorkshire area. The Unit manages the registration responsibility for Chairing MAPPA meetings have
requirements of all Registered Sex Offenders resident attended external training, together with administrators
within the North Yorkshire area, monitoring compliance with responsibility for recording minutes of MAPPA
with legislation. Any identified breaches in registration meetings. Further training is planned in 2006/7.
requirements are robustly managed by Unit staff).
· During July 05, a further three full-time Police Public
Protection Officers were appointed (bringing the force
total to six – two in each of the three areas of the force).
This role involves supervision and management of
Registered Sex Offenders within their area and Police
representatives at area based Risk Management Meetings
(Level Two) in respect of Sexual and Violent offenders. All
North Yorkshire Police Police Public Protection Officers
have received nationally accredited training in respect of
sexual offender management.

9
c. Victim Work

responsibility of the

In respect of every MAPPA offender, there has to be at


least one victim. They will undoubtedly have been
traumatised by the offence(s) and have a level of fear of
those who have offended against them.
Contact Numbers
The Code of Practice for Victims of Crime (October 2005)
governs the services provided by agencies including the responsibility of the
Police, Crown Prosecution Service, Her Majesty’s Court Victim Care Unit
Services, Prison Service, Parole Board, Youth Offending Tel - 0845 0710871
Teams and Probation Service. This code, implemented on Fax - 01904 476257
the 1 April 2006, ensures that Victims of Crime receive
appropriate support – from reporting a crime to the York Crown Court
police, through the criminal justice process, and beyond. Tel/Fax - 01904 655497
The code further directs that an enhanced service is
provided in respect of vulnerable or intimidated victims. York Crown Court
Tel/Fax 01904 637778
The Probation Service supervises all adult offenders
released from prison on licence. The Probation Service York Magistrates’ Court
also has a statutory responsibility for contact with the Tel/Fax -01904 637778
victims of serious sexual and violent crimes. Contact
enables victims and their families to be informed of key Scarborough Magistrates’ Court
sentencing stages and of the offenders proposed release Witness Support
plans. Tel/Fax - 01723 503366
North Yorkshire Area MAPPA considers victim safety and
reassurance to be a primary concern and is therefore a
high priority of any risk management plan at a MAPPP or
RMM meeting. Safety measures that can, and are used,
are assistance with relocation, licence conditions
preventing the offender returning to the area for part or
the duration of their licence, licence exclusion zones,
alarms for a victims residence with police response
prioritisation, and in serious cases the offender may be
subject to covert police methods.

It is important to consider the welfare of previous victims,


but additionally equally so to identify and protect
individuals who may be at a future risk of harm.
Safety measures, such as disclosure to organisations or
specific individuals may be considered appropriate.

10
d. MAPPA Offenders

responsibility of the

Registered Sex Offencer


Management
The Sex Offenders Act 1997 - introduced a requirement All registered sex offenders are managed and monitored
for all relevant Sex Offenders to register details with their on a regular basis by the police to ensure that any
local Police. The Act identified a duty on the Police to potential risks are identified and dealt with accordingly.
monitor and manage persons on the Register. Since this Additionally the police monitor offender compliance with
time, there has been considerable updates to this the relevant legislation, in respect of notification
legislation: requirements. Risk assessments are undertaken on all
registered sex offenders to identify the risk of re-offending
The Crime and Disorder Act 1998 - introduced and risk of harm, using the categories of low, medium,
powers to assist Police in monitoring convicted sex high and very high. Any identified risk is assessed and a
offenders. The Police were given the ability to apply to risk management plan is agreed, this can include referrals
a Court for a Sex Offender Order placing prohibitive to MAPPA meetings, disclosure requests, and applications
restrictions and obligations on the activities of individual for Sexual Offences Prevention Orders (SOPOs) or Risk of
sex offenders, allowing more effective management of Sexual Harm Order. Any identified breach of registration
offenders within the community. requirements or Sexual Offences Orders are proactively
investigated and dealt with.
The Criminal Justice and Court Services Act 2000 –
strengthened legislation in dealing with registration
requirements of sex offenders. It placed additional
requirements relating to notifying the police of overseas
Case Example - pseudonyms have been used in
travel. Section 67 and 68 placed a duty on the Police
and Probation to make joint arrangements for the all case examples contained within the report
assessment and management of risks posed by relevant
sexual and violent offenders, and other offenders who Nigel is a serial sex offender who has convictions for
may cause serious harm to the public (MAPPA). indecent assault on young adolescent boys. He is subject
to a Sexual Offences Prevention Order prohibiting him
The Sexual Offences Act 2003 – legislation radically from associating with boys under the age of 16 years.
reviewed and updated all sexual offence legislation. Nigel was managed under North Yorkshire MAPPA during
Introduced new offences to combat grooming and the use which time it was identified he had breached his Order
of technology to access vulnerable victims (i.e. internet by communicating with a young boy. He was arrested
crime). It further strengthened existing sexual offender and imprisoned for the breach. When finally due for
requirements. This now includes new court orders that release from custody he was not subject to any licence
can be applied for at the time of conviction for a relevant conditions, having served his full term of imprisonment.
sexual or violent crime. A Risk of Sexual Harm Order It was identified he intended to leave prison and travel to
can be applied for by the police to restrict the grooming an area where he was not known. North Yorkshire
behaviour of those who are identified as having a sexual MAPPA instigated national alerts to all police forces and
interest in children but have no convictions. probation services. As a consequence a police force in
another area of the country were able to identify him on
North Yorkshire Police (NYP) have adapted policing arrival and were in a position to arrest him for further
methods to keep abreast of changing legislation. In 2004, breaches of his Order when he communicated with a
NYPcreated the post of a Police Public Protection young boy. Proactive monitoring of Nigel, by MAPPA
Manager and dedicated Public Protection Officers. The agencies, and early intervention when breaches of the
Police Public Protection Manager has responsibility to Order were identified, have meant that the police were in
review police compliance with MAPPA legislation and a position to arrest Nigel, prior to any contact offences
oversee police management of MAPPA offenders (relevant taking place. On both occasions, the enforcement of
sexual and violent offenders) on behalf of the force. In Order prohibitions has ensured that serious harm to
2004, the Police Public Protection Officers were young boys has been prevented from occurring.
dedicated to Registered Sexual Offender management
within their respective areas. In 2005 NYP doubled the
number of officers performing the role to encapsulate
violent offender management under MAPPA, in addition
to sexual offender work.

11
d. MAPPA Offenders

responsibility of the

Just as programme facilitators can identify those who are


Case Example - pseudonyms have been used in benefiting from the programme they can also identify
all case examples contained within the report those who continue to cause concern, and take action.
James was convicted of several counts of taking indecent
photographs of children and sentenced to a term of
imprisonment over 8 years ago. On his release James Case Example - pseudonyms have been used in
was required to notify the police and register as a sex all case examples contained within the report
offender. He was released on licence. He complied with Pete was sentenced to 6 years imprisonment for rape of
registration requirements and abided by licence an adult female - his first sexual offence but he has
conditions. James maintained voluntary contact with his numerous convictions for burglary, theft and violence
Probation Officer for a period of time. James’s registration including domestic violence. He was released on Parole
is managed by North Yorkshire Police Public Protection licence to an Approved Premise – the licence included
Officers and he therefore has regular contact. During one conditions to address Sexual Offending, domestic
such contact James identified to the officer a concern he violence issues, drug and alcohol use. He was registered
had regarding sexual thoughts he was having involving as High Risk and managed at MAPPA level 2. Whilst in
children. James had acknowledged the increased risk of custody Pete had undertaken the prison based Enhanced
re-offending and was seeking help. He had not Thinking Skills Course, Core Sex Offender Programme,
committed further offences and therefore could not be Better Lives Booster Programme and drug and alcohol
dealt with through any criminal process. As a result of awareness courses. Prison reports indicated he had made
the contact, the Police Public Protection Officer liaised good progress. During the Sex Offender Programme he
with Probation and through joint funding by Police and demonstrated a good understanding of the underlying
Probation a place for James was found on a Sex Offender reasons for his offence such as his distorted belief that he
Treatment Programme on a voluntary basis. This is an was entitled to sex with the victim. He accepted full
unusual step as Treatment Programme places are usually responsibility for his behaviour, developed good victim
taken up by offenders subject to licence, however both empathy skills and greater recognition of the impact of his
Probation and Police staff were concerned at the level of offending on the victim and her family. He also showed
risk that James posed. James is continually monitored by understanding of how his use of alcohol and drugs had
Police and Probation staff and the feedback from the acted as disinhibitors at the time of the index offence.
programme is positive. Following release Pete was referred to a Sex Offender
Programme and commenced the Relapse Prevention
Group. This is a nine week Group work programme in
which participants in North Yorkshire attend one day per
week. The key issues and risks identified for him were
The Probation Service in North Yorkshire has been anger and violence, sexual attitudes towards women and
running an accredited sex offender programme since his use of drugs and alcohol. Pete successfully completed
2003. The programme, which is demanding and the Relapse Prevention Programme. He made good
challenging, is delivered in the context of an overall risk progress in the following areas. Ability to identify risky
management strategy. The majority of sex offenders come areas in his life such as low self esteem, feeling he is
from the victim’s family or circle of acquaintances. being lied to, feeling envious or isolated also an
They often have distorted ways of thinking, which can awareness of the enormous impact that use of drugs and
include blaming the victim, denying their own level of alcohol have on his thinking and behaviour. Pete
responsibility and minimising the harm they have caused. developed a good understanding of how he needed to
The aim of the Sex Offender Programme is to teach new continue to be vigilant in managing his own risky
attitudes and behaviour so that the offender can recognise thoughts and feelings. Pete had a good awareness of the
and start to self manage the risk he poses. Each sex areas of his life that needed to be managed. This includes
offender undergoes a battery of psychometric tests in managing his emotions, relationships and avoiding drug
order to assess his level of deviancy and which of the two and alcohol use. He took a positive approach to drawing
programmes (individual or group) is the most effective up his New Life Plan which is to be used for future
intervention for him. The programmes are long and reference now he has completed group work. Whilst Pete
intensive, consisting of four modules (144 hours in total) has now completed the Relapse Prevention Programme in
followed by a relapse prevention programme (36 hours). the community he remains subject to licence and will
Throughout the programme there are regular and continue to build on the work he has undertaken with his
structured communication and liaison arrangements supervising officer.
between the programme facilitators and probation officer
supervising the offender.
12
d. MAPPA Offenders

responsibility of the

Case Example - pseudonyms have been used in


all case examples contained within the report
Michael was sentenced to 4½ years imprisonment for
offences against children. He had no previous convic-
tions. He was subject to post custody licence, registered
as high risk to children and managed at MAPPA level 2.
Whilst in custody Michael was assessed as suitable to
undertake the prison based core sex offender treatment
programme but he declined to do this as he had concerns
with regard to confidentiality issues within the prison. He
was refused parole and his non-parole licence included
conditions to comply with requirements to address his
sexual offending, not to use the internet and not to own
camera or photography equipment. Identified risks were
his sexual attraction to children, inability to take
responsibility for his offending, minimisation of his
offences and access to the internet. Following release
Michael was referred to a Sex Offender Programme.
His targets were:
To develop a sense of personal responsibility for his
sexual offending.
Increase victim empathy and recognition of the harm
caused to victim.
Increase awareness of the role of his thoughts and feelings
and how this impacted upon his behaviour.
Develop an understanding of his emotional and sexual
interest in children. Michael is continuing in treatment
and attends group work one day per week.
The first part of the programme seeks to encourage him to
take full responsibility for his sexual offending and begin
to understand his own distorted attitudes and how he
justified his sexual offending behaviour. Progress reports
indicate that he is making progress and a shift in his
attitude, in that he takes full responsibility for his
behaviour and does not blame the victim or his co-defen-
dant. It is recognised that he needs to continue to explore
his sexual attraction towards the victim and his own
thoughts and feelings. Despite his reservations and fears
about commencing group work Michael is able to use the
experience to examine his own offending and he has
been both challenging and supportive towards other
group members. Michael is in the early stages of
treatment but the work will be ongoing and his progress
in treatment will be regularly reviewed at MAPPA level 2
meetings.

13
d. MAPPA Offenders

responsibility of the

Violent Offender Management The victims themselves often have an important part to
play in their partner’s rehabilitation, and the victim’s
needs are always supported first and foremost. If the
Although the MAPPA definition of this category is often
victim and the offender are still in contact the victim is
summarised as violent offenders who receive a sentence
asked to give regular feedback to help shape the
of imprisonment of 12 months or more, the legislation is
offender’s supervision. The safety of any women or
considerably more complex and includes those detained
children involved is paramount and the success of IDAP
under hospital or guardianship orders and those who
is judged on how far they are protected.
have committed specific offences against children.
IDAP is based on a co-ordinated effort by a number of
Whilst these offences do not attract any requirement to
agencies, including Probation and Police, and requires
register with police, all offenders will be under the
co-operation between all the Criminal Justice agencies.
statutory supervision of the probation service, with the
Often, women’s groups and charities (eg Victim Support)
exception of a small number of offenders sentenced prior
are also involved – this partnership approach allows us to
to the Criminal Justice Act 1991.
build up a comprehensive picture of the offender’s
behaviour, and decide on the most suitable kinds of
Within the North Yorkshire area, the Probation Service or
intervention.
where appropriate, Youth Offending Team, has primary
responsibility for identifying Category 2 offenders.
The Police and Probation Public Protection Unit has
developed a good working relationship with the relevant Case Example - pseudonyms have been used in
health care trusts responsible for managing the area’s all case examples contained within the report
special hospitals and local secure units in order to
Richard has numerous serious convictions relating to
identify offenders who are relevant MAPPA offenders.
Domestic Violence. Prior to his last prison sentence, he
had developed a new relationship which continued
Domestic Violence during his prison sentence. Richard indicated that upon
release, he intended to develop the relationship. Whilst
Tackling domestic abuse requires all agencies to work in prison, he was subject to a MAPPA Level Three
together. In the North Yorkshire area an Integrated meeting. Information regarding the level of violence from
Domestic Abuse Programme (IDAP) was introduced in Richard’s previous offences was considered. During the
April 2005. The programme requires close working meeting action plans were put in place to ensure the
arrangements between the Police, Probation and other safety of previous victims and to ensure the safety of his
agencies to ensure victim safety, and aims to help men new partner and her family. A decision to disclose the
risk he posed to his new partner was made and supported
understand and change their behaviour and thereby
by an Assistant Chief Constable. As a result a joint
reduce the risk they present. The overall purpose of IDAP
Probation and Police meeting took place and safety plans
is to prevent re-offending and promote the safety of
were agreed. This included, with the consent of the new
women and children. North Yorkshire Police provides
partner, and with Richard’s knowledge, an alarm being
information to the programme facilitators of any call out installed at her home. Licence conditions included
information on any of the perpetrators involved. This attendance on an Integrated Domestic Abuse Programme
information, together with reports from the partner/victim IDAP. Whilst Richard had no direct convictions relating
will assess the progress the offender is making and will to violence towards children a Child Protection Case
form the basis for risk management plans that are Conference was held to consider and manage any risk
developed and reviewed regularly. The creation of the that Richard posed towards children within the family.
Police Community Protection Units will be key in Both Richard and his new partner agreed to co-operate
developing information sharing between agencies in fully MAPPA agencies. Regular MAPPP meetings were
respect of offender management. held to monitor Richard’s behaviour and the risk that he
posed to his family. Through close liaison between all
IDAP is a group programme for convicted offenders agencies and continual contact both with Richard and his
which focuses on concepts like control and misuse of partner, potential risks were identified early and action
power. Offenders are expected to talk openly about their taken to prevent any re-offending.Richard has had his
violence to the group, and listen to others’ experiences – highs and lows, one factor that had triggered Richard to
this, along with the educational content of the course has offend was alcohol misuse, he is now engaging with a
been proven to help violent men recognise the impact of support group and it would appear that he has not had a
their violence, take responsibility for their actions and drink for a considerable period of time. With this support
eventually stop their violent behaviour. It addresses both and that of his family, Richard appears to be putting his
physical and psychological violence. life back in order and there have been no reported
incidents for over 6 months.
14
d. MAPPA Offenders

responsibility of the

What is meant by 'domestic violence'?


The following helpline offers women and children help
Domestic violence is any incident of threatening and practical advice including:·
behaviour, violence or abuse of any kind between adults
who are or have been in a relationship together, or emergency refuge accommodation
between family members, regardless of gender or safety planning
sexuality. advice
translation facilities
Facts & figures
English National Domestic Violence helpline
(Taken from the Home Office Website) 0808 2000 247
Although domestic violence is chronically under
reported, research estimates that it: If you are a man experiencing domestic violence or you
accounts for 16% of all violent crime (Source: Crime want to call on behalf of a male friend or relative, you
in England and Wales 2004/2005 report) can contact the Male Advice & Enquiry Line 0845 064
has more repeat victims than any other crime (on 6800
average there will have been 35 assaults before a
victim calls the police)
claims the lives of two women each week and 30 men
per year
is the largest cause of morbidity worldwide in women
aged 19-44, greater than war, cancer or motor vehicle
accidents will affect 1 in 4 women and 1 in 6 men in
their lifetime.

Whatever form it takes, domestic violence is rarely a


one-off incident. More usually it's a pattern of abusive
and controlling behaviour through which the abuser seeks
power over their victim. Domestic violence occurs across
society, regardless of age, gender, race, sexuality, wealth
and geography. The figures show, however, that it
consists mainly of violence by men against women.
Victims of domestic violence suffer on many levels -
health, housing, education - and lose the freedom to live
their lives how they want, and without fear.

The Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004 was


introduced to increase the protection, support and rights
of victims and witnesses. It also gives the police and
other agencies the tools to get to the heart of domestic
violence crimes. The Act is a key part of our aim of
putting victims at the heart of the criminal justice system.

15
e. Approved Premises

responsibility of the

An Approved Premis offers an enhanced level of


supervision. The hostel imposes a night time curfew,
provides 24 hour staff, undertakes ongoing assessment of
attitudes and behaviour, ensures ongoing supervision,
support and monitoring, reinforces compliance with bail
or licence conditions and encourages attendance on and
supports learning through accredited programmes.

There is one approved premise (hostel) in North Yorkshire


area, established at Southview in York in 1995. Managed
by the Probation Service, the hostel houses up to 22
residents who are on bail, subject to probation
supervision or to a statutory licence on release from
prison.

Potential hostel residents are generally referred by


probation, by the prisons or by the courts. In all cases
they have to undergo a process of assessment to
determine whether or not they are suitable. Any MAPPA
individual will additionally be assessed by a MAPPP or
RMM meeting to ensure that the risk of harm has been
identified and that there are satisfactory public protection
arrangements in place to manage that risk.

The hostel is intended primarily to accommodate


residents from the North Yorkshire area. Hostels in
Yorkshire and Humberside also operate a regional policy
whereby they will consider accommodating residents
from across the region, if there are no vacancies locally.

Occasionally it may be impossible for someone released


from prison to return to their home area, perhaps, for
example, to protect a victim of a previous crime who still
resides in the area. If a suitable alternative is not available
within that region then other areas of the country may be
approached. This is a reciprocal arrangement that
operates nationwide. In the North Yorkshire area any
request under this arrangement would result in MAPPA
agency involvement in the assessment process.

The hostel manager keeps in close personal contact with


the heads of local schools and with other key people
concerned with organisations that look after the needs of
children and vulnerable groups within the area.
The manager attends all local ward meetings and staff at
the hostel are always willing to meet with and discuss any
concerns with local residents. There is no evidence that
the presence of the hostel has raised the incidents of
crime in the area during the past 11 years.

16
f. Potentially Dangerous Individuals

responsibility of the

Under the Criminal Justice Act 2003, Multi-agency Public


Protection Arrangements were established. However, the
Case Example - pseudonyms have been used in
2003 Act is clear that these arrangements only apply to all case examples contained within the report
sexual offenders, violent offenders, and other persons A North Yorkshire Police Detective contacted the Police
who, because of offences they have committed, are con Public Protection Manager highlighting concerns
sidered to be persons who may cause serious harm to the regarding an individual he had dealt with. Andy had
public. been investigated for an offence of indecent assault on a
young girl and had been found not guilty at court. During
Within North Yorkshire area it was identified that the the investigation the officer had identified that over a 4
legislation was extremely effective at drawing agencies year period, there were a number of complaints of sexual
together, identifying and managing risk through offending towards young children. In all cases, either the
multi-agency co-operation. However, the legislation reporting party declined to pursue the matter to criminal
specifies that this relates to those who have a relevant court, or there was insufficient evidence to proceed.
conviction. MAPPA legislation therefore, does not Upon investigation of his previous background, it was
provide for dealing with individuals who may present a identified that Social Services and the Mental Health
danger to the public but have no relevant conviction. Services had had involvement with the individual.
He had no previous convictions. A referral for an
Sadly, recent high profile cases, identify that individuals information sharing meeting was made in order to share
who have no convictions but are known to agencies, can police concern and identify knowledge of him within
pose a significant threat of harm. MAPPA agencies. Andy was known to other agencies.
It was identified that a complaint had been received by
In order to “close the gap” North Yorkshire MAPPA Social Services and a further complaint by the Mental
agencies have developed a protocol to hold meetings and Health Team of sexualised behaviour by him towards
share information, following the principles of MAPPA, for children but that in both cases, the reporting party had
individuals who may present a danger to the public but refused involvement with the police. As a result of the
who have no relevant conviction. "North Yorkshire Area information sharing meeting a risk management plan was
Public Protection Information Sharing meetings are held documented. This included, a request for all relevant
where one or more of the MAPPA agencies have grounds information received by any agency regarding Andy to be
to believe that an individual, who has not been convicted referred to the police. All known victims were identified
of any relevant offence, is believed to pose a serious risk to Social Services and risk strategy meetings held to
of harm to the public. Referrals are made by either ensure future risk to specified individuals was dealt with.
responsible authority agencies (Police, Probation or A briefing item was created for local police officers,
Prison) or North Yorkshire MAPPA duty to cooperate highlighting all known incidents, concerns and ensuring
agencies to the Police and Probation Public Protection all information relating to Andy was sought and fully
Unit. Information Sharing meetings are attended by the investigated. Within a matter of months, a complaint
core group of MAPPA representatives that deal with was made to local police regarding a sexual assault.
MAPPA Level three cases. Police were quickly able to establish from information
available that the Andy was a suspect. He was arrested
and charged with the offence.

17
g. Disclosure

responsibility of the

Everyone living in a democratic and civilised society has


Case Example - pseudonyms have been used in
individual rights, and civil liberties. These include the
right to privacy and the right to live as one chooses, all case examples contained within the report
without interference from others. These rights are Kevin was identified as a Very High Risk sexual offender.
important, and are safeguarded by domestic legislation He had historic offences of rape and indecent assault on
and the European Convention on Human Rights. vulnerable women and children. He was sentenced prior
They can be infringed only where it is necessary to do to the Sexual Offenders Act 1998 and therefore not sub-
so to protect the rights of others. ject to registration requirements. However, as a result of
MAPPA agency concern, Kevin was subject to regular
Sometimes in cases considered through MAPPA, the need Level 3 MAPPP meetings. MAPPA agency information
to exchange information between agencies is essential to identified that Kevin was known to have befriended a
the risk management process and it may be necessary to female, who had a similar lifestyle to a previous victim.
disclose highly sensitive information regarding a sexual or Police development of the information identified that she
violent offender to a third party. had daughters and grandchildren and Kevin was known
to have been introduced to family members. An emer-
Disclosing information has to be balanced against the gency MAPPP meeting was held and it was identified that
rights of all individuals, including convicted offenders, the female and female family members were at consider-
to have their privacy and confidentiality respected. able risk of harm. The MAPPP meeting recommended
Sometimes however, the need to protect others conflicts that limited disclosure to her should take place so she
with that right. Protection of the public is paramount and could assess the risk he posed to her and her family and
information about an offender is then disclosed in order be in a position to consider precautionary action.
to protect those at risk. Decisions to disclose are never The disclosure request was supported by a North
taken lightly and only taken as part of a carefully Yorkshire Police Assistant Chief Constable and a trained
managed process which would involve authorisation by and experienced Detective Sergeant met with her. She
an Assistant Chief Constable of North Yorkshire. was advised of Kevin’s sexual offending and that whilst,
there was no specific known risk to her or her family, that
In the North Yorkshire area, except for urgent cases, all MAPPA agencies had considered her welfare and
disclosure considerations to a third party, are dealt with identified that she should be advised in order that she
by referral to a MAPPP meeting. North Yorkshire Police could make an informed decision regarding continued
legal services are involved in the MAPPP process to contact with Kevin. She elected to cease contact with
ensure that all disclosure issues are carefully considered him. She was given constructive advice regarding
and decisions taken are lawful, fair reasonable and progression of this and provided with support throughout.
proportionate to the risks the offender presents. Kevin continued to be monitored throughout this period
and no further offences were reported.

18
5. Frequently asked
Questions
responsibility of the
p

Who checks MAPPA is working?


What sort of people pose a risk of harm to others?
The Strategic Management Board monitors and reviews
Sexual and violent offenders live in all communities and
how these public protection arrangements are working in
are of no single age, gender, ethnicity or position in
each local area. The Board has two members of the
society. What is common is that the offences they
public appointed by the Secretary of State to act as lay
commit are unacceptable, often resulting in significant
advisers in the review and monitoring of the arrangements
physical and emotional damage. Their identification and
and to help improve links with communities.
conviction is therefore a priority. Once convicted not all
offenders go on to commit further offences. However,
What should I do if I have particular concerns?
some do. We therefore need to identify those offenders
The number of offenders in our communities who pose a
who pose a high and very high risk of further serious
risk of serious harm to others is thankfully very small.
harm and to take action to prevent them ruining the lives
However, the thought that a known offender may pose a
of others.
risk of serious harm to you or someone you care about
can be very distressing. It may be difficult to know who
Who needs protection?
to speak to. If you believe that you have specific
Sexual and violent offenders often target those within our
evidence that a serious offence has been or is about to be
communities whom they perceive are vulnerable because
committed it is important that you share this information
of their age, gender or social circumstances. The vast
by either contacting the Police or Crimestoppers.
majority of sexual offending is committed by people who
are known to the victim, either as family members,
North Yorkshire Police 0845 6060247 or in cases of
friends or acquaintances.
emergency by dialling 999
Why do high risk individuals live within the Crimestoppers 0800 555111
community?
Few people, however serious their crime, can be How can I find out more?
imprisoned indefinitely. Prison sentences are laid down Local and national contact details for Victim Support,
by law and at the end of the sentence most offenders will Domestic Violence Helplines and Police and Probation
be released back into the community. MAPPA agencies contact details are contained within this report. You can
have considerable influence on ensuring that proactive also access helpful information through the Stop it Now!
measures are taken to reduce the risk an offender poses. Website. Stop it Now! Aims to prevent child sexual
These include applications for court orders to assist in abuse by challenging all adults to take responsibility to
managing sex offenders, considered disclosure in specific protect children.
circumstances, licence conditions and careful Helpline 0808 1000 900, www.stopitnow.org.uk
management of where the offender will reside.

19
6. Statistical Information

1. Category 1 MAPPA Offenders - 338

Central Area - 140


Western Area - 83
Eastern Area - 115

1.1 Number of Registered Sex Offenders per 100,000 head of population - 45

1.2 Number of Registered Sex Offenders cautioned or convicted for breach - 10

1.3 Number of :
Sexual Offences Prevention Orders (SOPOs) applied for - 7
Interim SOPOs granted - 2
Full SOPOSs imposed - 5

1.4 Number of :
Notification orders applied for - 0
Interim Notification orders granted - 0
Full Notification orders granted - 0

1.5 Number of Foreign Travel Orders :


Applied for - 0
Imposed - 0

2. Category 2 MAPPA Offenders - 145

3. Category 3 MAPPA Offenders - 7

4. Offenders managed through Level 3, Level 2 & Level 1 :


(living in North Yorkshire & York between April 05 & March 06)

Level 3 Level 2 Level 1

Registered Sex Offenders 8 37 293


Violent and Other Offenders 3 43 99
Other 6 1 0

4.2 Offenders who breached:

Breach of Licence 4 17
Breach of restraining order or SOPOs 1 1
Serious sexual or violent offence 0 1

20
7. Contacts
responsibility of the
p

North Yorkshire Probation Area North Yorkshire Police and Probation


Public Protection Unit
Chief Officer
National Probation Service
Force Headquarters
Thurston House
Newby Wiske Hall
6 Standard Way
Northallerton
Northallerton
DL7 9HA
DL6 2XQ
Telephone Number: 0845 60 60 24 7
Telephone Number: 01609 778644

Public Relations & Communications Officer


MAPPA Strategic Management Board
National Probation Service Lay Members
Head Office (York)
Amy Johnson Way The Venerable Simon Goulding
Clifton Moor c/o North Yorkshire Police
York Newby Wiske Hall
YO30 4XT Northallerton
DL7 9HA
Telephone Number: 01904 698920
Telephone Number: 0845 60 60 24 7
North Yorkshire Police

Chief Constable
Force Headquarters
Newby Wiske Hall
Northallerton
DL7 9HA

Telephone Number: 0845 60 60 24 7

21
MAPPA – the First Five Years : A National Overview of the Multi-
Agency Public Protection Arrangements 2001 - 2006

Introduction
It is now just over 5 years since the implementation of the Criminal Justice and Courts’
Services Act 2000 that led to the formation of the Multi-Agency Public Protection
Arrangements, commonly known as MAPPA. As the national strategic body overseeing
the implementation and development of these arrangements it is important for us to
review the progress made, to identify the challenges ahead and set out the national plans
for improvement. It is also an opportunity for the first time to provide a national
commentary on the MAPPA annual statistics and to explain what they are telling us about
the growth and complexity of these arrangements.

Much has been achieved in terms of enhancing public safety in the last 5 years and the
arrangements are rightly described as world leading. Yet we are acutely conscious that a
number of serious case reviews and other reports published this year indicate there is still
much to do to ensure that the arrangements are fit for purpose and apply consistently
across England and Wales. Unless those operating these arrangements ensure that all
reasonable action is taken to reduce the harm caused by sexual and violent offenders they
will have failed. While we recognise that it is never possible to eliminate risk entirely the
public are entitled to expect the authorities to do their job properly. Making our
communities safer and reducing 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
MAPPA have ensured that more high risk sexual and violent offenders have been
identified and proactively managed this year than ever before.

22
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 Sex 21513 24572 28994 29973
Offenders (RSO) 14.22% 18% 3.38%
2. Violent Offenders and 29594 12754* 12662 14317
other sex offenders -56.9% -0.72% 13.07%
3. Other offenders 1802 2166 2936 3363
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.

23
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.

24
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.

25
Table 2. Breakdown of Level 2 and Level 3 MAPPA Offenders for 2005/6

Category of Level 2 (% of Level 3 (% of Total per Category


Offender 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%
offenders
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
Offender
1. Registered Sex 5381 6014 626 580
Offenders (RSO) 11.76% -7.35%
2. Violent offenders 3615 4280 547 506
and other sex 18.39% -7.49%
offenders
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

26
population from 79 (0.6%) to 61 (0.44%) cases this year. And the biggest impact was
where you would want and expect it – with the more intensively managed Level 3 cases.
On the face of it the figures are encouraging but they should be treated with caution for 2
reasons. Firstly, we have only collected the data for 2 years; secondly, with such small
numbers any change can trigger a wholly disproportionate, misleading percentage
variation. What is apparent, however, is that the figure is low and whilst any serious re-
offending is a matter of great concern, such a low serious re-offending rate for this
particular group of offenders is to be welcomed and supports the view that MAPPA is
making a real contribution to the management of dangerousness in communities.

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

Table 4. Outcome measures: Level 2 and Level 3 activity for 2005/6 (% Change)

Level 2 Level 3 Total of Level 2


& 3
Category of 2004/05 2005/06 2004/05 2005/06 2004/05 2005/06
MAPPA Offender
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 Number of Offenders


(04/05) (05/06)
1. Registered sex offenders 993 1295
(RSO’s) charged/cautioned 30.41%

27
Sex Offences Act Orders Number of Orders (04/05) Number of Orders (05/06)
2. Sexual offences 503 933
prevention orders (SOPOs) 85.49%
granted
3. Notification Orders 22 39
(NOs) granted 77.27%
4. Foreign Travel Orders 1 1
(FTOs) granted 0%
Total Number of Orders 526 973
84.98%

A Year of Challenges
The raw data provided in the national statistics is helpful but necessarily quantitative. In
order to get a better feel for the quality of MAPPA business it is necessary to work with
other forms of analysis and, during the course of this year, a number of inspection reports
and a small number of management reviews of specific cases have been published which
have both detailed shortcomings in practice and highlighted many positive developments
in public protection practice.

It is essential that the product of these, and future, reviews and reports shape the
development of MAPPA through central guidance and local practice and it is instructive
to set out the lessons learned this year.

Strengthening Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (Published in October 2005


and available on www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pubsintro1.html)

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.

28
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
http://inspectorates.homeoffice.gov.uk/hmiprobation )

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
http://inspectorates.homeoffice.gov.uk/hmiprobation )

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 http://inspectorates.homeoffice.gov.uk/hmiprobation )

This report was completed following the murder of Naomi Bryant in August 2005. The
independent review was requested by the Responsible Authority for MAPPA in
Hampshire who were concerned by a number of issues that had contributed to the risk
management failure.

The report details principal findings and recommendations for a range of agencies within
and outside MAPPA. Each of which is being taken forward. Importantly it revealed the
failure to manage the offender’s risk of harm to the public was not due to any single act
of negligence or deficiency. Rather it was a cumulative failure of processes and actions

29
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
http://inspectorates.homeoffice.gov.uk/hmiprobation

This report found that much had been achieved, including that planned interventions were
generally effective in containing offending behaviour. There were also many areas for
improvement and the report makes recommendations for the more consistent use of
MAPPA and sharing of MAPPA good practice, improved risk of harm assessments and
sentence planning and greater victim awareness.

It is important to note that the fieldwork to support the inspection concluded in the
autumn of 2005, prior to the launch of the Risk of Harm Improvement Action plan and
other actions referred to in this overview. Nevertheless, the report has been welcomed
and will be considered in further detail by the National Offender Management Service
(NOMS) Risk of Harm Improvement Board as well as the Responsible Authority
National Steering Group (RANSG).

Actions to develop MAPPA


Effecting change to these public protection arrangements requires concerted action from
a range of agencies and key stakeholders. MAPPA is not an agency but a set of national
arrangements that requires each contributor to ensure that their own agency’s practice is
fit for purpose and that the manner of their collaboration is effective in assessing and
managing the risk posed by sexual and violent offenders.

It is important to note that MAPPA has benefited significantly this year from the work
undertaken by individual agencies; work that has a direct bearing on how dangerous
offenders are assessed and managed. This includes the OASys Quality Assurance
Programme implemented from July 2005; implementation of the offender management
model from April 2006; the launch of the NOMS Risk of harm Guidance and Training
resource pack June 2006; and the planned roll-out of the Police Public Protection Manual.

30
MAPPA will increasingly benefit from the expansion of ViSOR (the Violent and Sex
Offenders Register). ViSOR is an integral part of plans to strengthen public protection
through improved risk assessment and management and will provide electronic support
for MAPPA allowing efficient data sharing between Police, Probation and Prisons. The
police have been using ViSOR since April 2005 and the system will be implemented into
the prison and the probation service during 2006/7. For the first time the Responsible
Authorities will be working together on the same I.T system to Reduce Re-offending.

The National MAPPA Business Plan

As the national coordinating body for the Responsible Authority, the RANSG, is tasked
with exercising oversight of MAPPA and ensuring its continued development. To help
meet these aims the RANSG published, in November 2005, a three year National
MAPPA Business Plan 2005-8. The plan identifies four broad areas of MAPPA where
significant and consistent improvement is necessary. These include the following;

MAPPA Development Strategy


• Achieve dedicated MAPPA coordination and administration capacity in all areas
during 2006/7 (underway)
• Develop RANSG to include national representation of Duty to cooperate agencies
(achieved)
• Revise and publish MAPPA Guidance (by April 2007 – see existing Guidance at:
http://www.probation.homeoffice.gov.uk/output/page30.asp)

Monitoring and Evaluation


• Areas to implement a MAPPA Business Plan for 2006/7 (achieved – see area
annual reports)
• Development of multi-agency public protection performance indicators
(underway)
• Improve the recording and collation of data (underway)
• Develop guidance for a serious case review process (planned for consultation
later this year)

Communication and Strategic Partnerships


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

Training
• Delivery of lay adviser national training (delivered but also developing so far)
• National coordinators conference (delivered – May 2006)
• Collate core training material (underway)

31
• 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.

Conclusion

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

32