Thames Valley

Multi–Agency Public Protection Arrangements

Annual Report 2005-06

1 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 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

Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report 2

1. Foreword By Gerry Sutcliffe MP 2. Introduction
Gerry Marshall, Chief Probation Officer, Thames Valley Probation Area Sara Thornton, Acting Chief Constable, Thames Valley Police Bruce Davison, Head of Social Inclusion Strategy Unit for Thames Valley, Hampshire and the Isle of Wight, Her Majesty’s Prison Service




3. What is MAPPA?
i. Background ii Which offenders are covered by MAPPA ii. Case studies


4. MAPPA key achievements within Thames Valley
i. ViSOR ii. The Central MAPPA Public Protection Unit, including key meetings and training


5. Strategic Management Board
i. An overview of the year and links with other agencies ii. A Lay Adviser’s view


6. Victim Work


7. MAPPA and the Media 8. Statistical information
Detailing all offenders covered by the MAPPA process in Thames Valley between April 1, 2005 and March 31, 2006

20 22

9. Partnership agencies
Brief outline of partner agencies and contact details


Appendix 1:
MAPPA Flowchart


Abbreviations Checklist Further Information

26 27

3 Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report

2 Introduction

We welcome the opportunity to jointly introduce the fifth annual MAPPA report for Thames Valley. We commend it to you as an acknowledgement of the hard work and professionalism of all the staff involved. Protecting the public is one of the highest priorities of law enforcement agencies. This publication outlines work that has been carried out in Thames Valley to protect communities from potentially dangerous sex and violent offenders. In Thames Valley, 28 offenders were managed at the highest level of MAPPA, a further 457 at the middle level and 1,298 at the lowest level. This adds up to 1,755 offenders, of whom 936 are Registered Sex Offenders. The very fact that we can give you these figures means we know who these offenders are and we have assessed their level of risk and planned how to manage that risk. In fact we returned 67 people to prison for breaching their licence or orders before they could commit a further offence. In context, all these offenders are part of a community of almost 2.2 million people who live in the Thames Valley. Of the offenders managed at the highest two levels (485 of them) two committed serious further offences during 2005/06. We know that this is two too many but we can never eliminate risk altogether. What we can do is demonstrate to the public that we are working together to reduce that risk as much as possible. We acknowledge that we still have some way to go to make MAPPA more effective, but this work is in hand. We are building upon good practice, we have identified areas in need of development and we are addressing these. On a national level, MAPPA is co-ordinated by RANSG, the Responsible Authority National Steering Group. This group issues every area with guidelines for business plans against which all progress can be measured. RANSG’s overview of the first 5 years of MAPPA makes encouraging reading on the progress we have all made.* In Thames Valley, we appreciate the public’s concerns about the idea of potentially dangerous people living in local communities. After all, we are members of society too. We cannot eliminate the risk that certain individuals may pose but, as these figures demonstrate, we can manage these risks through joint working, careful assessment, supervision and monitoring. In doing this, we are contributing towards making Thames Valley a safer place to live. The success of this work so far is reflected in this report.

Gerry Marshall,
Chief Probation Officer, Thames Valley Probation Area

Sara Thornton,
Acting Chief Constable, Thames Valley Police

Bruce Davison,
Head of Social Inclusion Strategy Unit for Thames Valley, Hampshire and the Isle of Wight, Her Majesty’s Prison Service

Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report 4

* This overview can be seen at: in the Public Protection secti

Sexual and violent offences can affect deeply the lives of victims and their families. Their impact can be profound and long-lasting, leaving victims feeling unsafe, even in their own homes. For these reasons, plus an overriding determination to protect the public at large, MAPPA was introduced in all 42 police and probation areas in England and Wales in 2001. MAPPA stands for Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements. It provides a legal basis for the work police, probation and the prison services undertake together to protect the public from such offenders. Under the arrangements, we identify, assess and risk manage relevant offenders and, using the multi-agency approach, exchange and share information to help us manage risk as successfully as possible. Public safety is the focus of all decision-making and the term ‘public’ is used to include both children and victims of domestic violence. The victims of serious crime are represented at MAPPA meetings by a victim liaison officer from the Probation Service Victim Liaison Unit. MAPPA operates under a shared protocol (which revises previous local arrangements) following publication of national guidance by the Home Secretary in March 2003 and subsequent review of local practice. It takes full account of the legislative requirements of the Sexual Offences Act 2003, Criminal Justice Act 2003, Criminal and Courts Services Act 2000, the Human Rights Act 1998, the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and the Data Protection Act 1998.

3 What is MAPPA?

The purpose of MAPPA is to:
a. Agree the nature and level of risk posed by persons meeting the notification criteria through the sharing of relevant information and assessments; b. Share and co-ordinate risk management plans; c. Identify gaps in either the risk assessment or risk management process; d. Monitor and review multi agency risk management; e. Encourage and support the involvement of all agencies and individuals (statutory and voluntary) involved in management plans; f. Provide information and protection for past and potential victims; g. Decide what information should be shared with whom and by whom.

5 Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report

Who is involved in MAPPA in Thames Valley?

A Public Protection Unit
The Central Public Protection Unit is based at Thames Valley Police HQ. Situated in the Unit is the Thames Valley MAPPA Manager (a Senior Probation Officer was seconded to this role for 2005-06), the central ViSOR Administration and MAPPA Data and Quality Management. All public protection arrangements are co-ordinated by this central unit.

Responsible Authority
The work is led by the ‘Responsible Authority’, which means police, probation and prison services. Various staff from all three of these organisations are heavily involved in MAPPA work. If it needs to, the ‘Responsible Authority’ will bring other agencies into MAPPA, such as education, social and health care, housing and youth offending teams under a legal ‘Duty to Co-operate’. All these partner agencies sign up to a confidential information sharing protocol.

Strategic Management Board
The work of Thames Valley MAPPA is overseen by a Strategic Management Board, which has senior representatives from police, probation and prison services, plus local authorities, the youth offending service and community safety partnerships. It also includes two lay advisers from the local community. The Board meets quarterly to support and steer the work of the unit and the MAPPA teams by advising and reviewing the work undertaken.

Which offenders come under MAPPA?

MAPPA Categories
In order to meet the MAPPA criteria, an offender has to fall within one of three specific categories. They are then managed at any one of three different MAPPA levels (see next page). If you look at the statistical page of this report (page 22), you will see both the categories of offenders and the MAPPA levels mentioned. An offender from any of the three categories can be managed at any of the three levels of MAPPA, depending on the risk they pose. The level will be determined by the professionals working together under MAPPA (but mostly by probation officers).

MAPPA Category 1 – Registered Sex Offender
All Registered Sex Offenders (RSOs) are subject to MAPPA. Part 2 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 defines registered sex offenders as those offenders having been convicted or cautioned since 1st September 1997 of a sexual offence listed in Schedule 3 of that Act, or who at that point were serving a sentence for a like offence. RSOs remain subject to MAPPA for the period they are required to register. This is determined by the sentence or by the presence of a civil order attracting a requirement to register, for example, a Sexual Offences Prevention Order (SOPO).

MAPPA Category 2 – Violent/Other Sex Offenders
This category is for offenders who have committed an offence within Schedule 15 of Criminal Justice Act 2003 (CJA 2003) and who received one or more of the following:
● ● ● ●
Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report 6

12 months or more imprisonment; 12 months or more detention in a young offenders’ institution; a sentence of detention at Her Majesty’s pleasure; a sentence of detention for public protection under section 91 of the Sentencing Act (offenders under 18 convicted of certain serious offences);

● ● ●

a sentence of detention under section 228 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003; a detention and training order of 12 months or more; a hospital or guardianship order within the meaning of the Mental Health Act 1983 (c.20); or was found not guilty by a court in England or Wales by reason of insanity; or was found to be under a disability and to have done the act charged against him/her in respect of such an offence.

● ●

Which offenders come under MAPPA?

Category 2 only applies to offenders who are currently subject to statutory supervision/licence conditions and who were sentenced after April 1, 2001 or who were at that point serving a sentence for a qualifying offence. This category is not retrospective (pre April 1, 2001). Offenders remain in this category until the end of their statutory supervision/licence for the qualifying offence. At this point the offender should be reviewed under MAPPA and, if a significant risk of harm remains, they should be transferred to MAPPA Category 3. If there is no longer a risk of serious harm the offender should be de-registered from MAPPA.

MAPPA Category 3 – Other Offenders
These are offenders who are not included in Categories 1 or 2 but who are considered to pose a risk of causing serious harm to the public or an individual. This category is not defined by specific offences. The identification of these offenders is dependent on, and determined by, the judgement of and the risk assessment undertaken by the agency involved in agreement with the Responsible Authority (police, probation and prison services). To be included in this category the offender must have been convicted of an offence that indicates they are capable of causing serious harm to the public AND the Responsible Authority must have reasonable and identifiable concerns that the offender may cause serious harm to the public or specific individuals in the future. An offender will remain subject to MAPPA in this category until the Responsible Authority determines the risk of causing serious harm has diminished. At this point the offender should be de-registered from MAPPA.

MAPPA Levels of Management:
There are three levels of MAPPA management. The structure of risk management is designed so that resources follow risk. This helps us to manage identified risk in the most efficient and effective way. The levels of management do not always equate directly to levels of risk but normally the higher the assessed level of risk, the higher the level of management needed. The level at which a case is managed is dependent upon the nature of the risk and how it can be managed – not all high risk cases will need to be managed at Level 3 and the complexities of managing a medium risk offender at Level 1 might justify a Level 2 referral. The risk management structure is based on the principle that cases should be managed at the lowest level consistent with providing a defensible risk management plan. In order to establish the level of management, probation officers need to consider: a) What is the level of risk of serious harm presented by the offender? Definition of serious harm: life threatening or traumatic from which recovery whether physical or psychological is difficult or impossible. b) How many agencies are actively/significantly involved in the management of risk? Definition of Active/Significant management of risk: regular meaningful contact as part of an action plan to reduce risk.

7 Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report

The three levels of MAPPA

Sharing a common understanding of MAPPA Management Levels (Thames Valley Area)
MARMMs and MAPPP are for coordinating multi-agency plans and identifying gaps.

Level 3 – MAPPP
Involvement of Senior Managers
V.high/ Media High – Risk indicators exist and offence likely to happen.

Imminent risk of serious harm*/additional resources or media attention.

Level 2 – MARMM
Involvement of managers

High risk of serious harm* cases that have active or significant risk management** by more than one agency. Active Multi Agency Management on difficult cases. Be vigilant to identify changes in circumstances: Consider offence + victim type + serious harm + stability e.g. contact sex offence, vulnerable victims, DV, substance misuse. High risk of serious harm – with single agency active management

Medium - Complex - High

Level 1 –
Information sharing. Managed by practitioners.
Medium – Risk Indicators exist but require a CHANGE in circumstances Low – no current indicators of Risk

Medium risk cases that offending is not considered to pose Serious Harm to specific victim e.g. Non-contact sex offence, S47 assault, some robberies, not vulnerable victims. All low risk cases


*Definition of Serious Harm = life threatening or traumatic from which recovery whether physical or psychological is difficult or impossible **Definition of Active/Significant management of risk = regular meaningful contact as part of an action plan to reduce risk In each police and probation command area within Thames Valley, there are multi-agency meetings, using MAPPA legislation, to ensure the proper and effective management of MAPPA offenders. These five MAPPA areas are:

Oxfordshire West Berkshire East Berkshire Buckinghamshire Milton Keynes

It is the joint responsibility of the police, prison and probation services to convene and chair the meetings in each of these areas. The meetings deal with the top two levels of risk, but all three levels are explained opposite:

Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report 8

Ordinary Risk Management by practitioners (usually probation or police)
Level 1 is used in cases in which the risk posed by the offender can be managed by one agency without actively or significantly involving other agencies. Generally, offenders managed at Level 1 will be assessed as presenting a low or medium risk; and the large proportion of all MAPPA offenders are likely to be managed at this level.

MAPPA Level 1

Relevant information about these offenders is shared with partnership agencies to identify if any other agency has some information that could affect the assessed level of risk.

If the supervising agency believes risk is escalating further they contact the police and/or refer to Level 2 or 3. During 2005-06 the Thames Valley MAPPA managed 1,270 offenders at Level 1

Local Inter-agency Risk Management involving Manager/Supervisors
Level 2 risk management is used where the active involvement of more than one agency is needed and either the level of risk is high or there is some complexity in managing the risk. The purpose of Level 2 meetings is to consider the risk assessment and identify any gaps before co-ordinating the cross-agency multi-agency management plan. Staff referring cases into Level 2 are expected to produce as much of the plan as possible prior to the meetings following consultation with other key agencies identified as working with the offender. The main distinction between Level 1 and Level 2 is the need for management oversight of Level 2 cases due to risk/complexity and to monitor the cross-agency intervention. MAPPA Level 2 meetings are held monthly and are called Multi-Agency Risk Management Meetings (MARMMs). Meetings will be chaired by either a manager from the probation service of at least Senior Probation Officer grade or a manager from the police of at least Chief Inspector rank. During 2005-06 the Thames Valley MAPPA managed 457 offenders at Level 2

MAPPA Level 2

Multi-Agency Public Protection Panels (MAPPPs)
This level is used for the ‘critical few’. Cases are defined by the following criteria: (i) the offender is assessed as at high or very high risk of causing serious harm; AND (ii) presents risks that can only be managed by a plan which requires close co-operation at a senior level owing to the complexity of the case and/or because of the unusual resource commitments it requires; OR (iii) although not assessed as 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. Meetings will be chaired by a Senior Manager from either the police or probation with the ability to call on additional financial or staff resources from other agencies. MAPPPs meet regularly, although they can be convened at short notice in response to events or receipt of information about risk which requires urgent attention. During 2005-06 the Thames Valley MAPPA managed 28 offenders at Level 3

MAPPA Level 3 ‘the critical few’

9 Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report

MAPPA Level 2
Multi-Agency Risk Management Meeting

A typical Level 2 MAPPA meeting (MARMM)
The professionals meet regularly to discuss all relevant cases. More than one case will be discussed at each meeting, with the ‘duty to co-operate’ professionals changing accordingly. Risk management and sentence planning, whether the offender is in custody or the community is co-ordinated at this level. The key aim is to:
● ● ●

Discuss existing risks and identify any new ones Share information Ensure joint co-ordination and co-operation with the current risk management plan

Senior Probation Officer,
with responsibility for MAPPA cases within their BCU (Basic Command Unit) (Co-chair of the panel)

Senior police officer
With responsibility for policing MAPPA offenders in their BCU (Co-chair of the panel)

Minute taker
(police or probation)

Education representative
(from the Local Education Authority)

Local Approved Premises manager (probation).
Responsible for day-to-day management of people in their Approved Premises (previously known as probation hostels)

Probation Officer (if the offender is under probation supervision and/or licence, then this person is the day-to-day ’offender manager’) Police Public Protection Officer

Prison representative
(if a custody case)

(if a violent or sex offender in the community)

Social Services
(working in one of the following areas: child protection, vulnerable adults, families, learning disabilities)

Health representative
(Only if necessary). This person may be a mental health professional, a GP, a nurse, psychiatrist or psychologist

Local housing provider
(Usually local authority or those with private contract for local provision)

Victim Liaison Officer
(probation-led). Only attends if there is an identified victim (who has been contacted and wants information). Represents the victim’s views and co-ordinates exclusion zones (area where offenders are banned) for consideration by the Parole Board

Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report 10

A typical Level 3 panel, for the ‘Critical Few’* (MAPPP)
*offenders (usually violent, dangerous or serious sex offenders) who may pose a serious risk of harm to the public. Some of the professionals who attend are also core members of MAPPA at local Level 2 meetings. They share valuable information on offenders whose level has been raised, or who are managed locally. Level 3 cases are invitation-only and often include senior strategic managers who can quickly authorise additional resources if needed. This illustration indicates those who may be at a Level 3 Panel meeting. Other professionals may be brought in too. The police, probation and prison services have a legal duty to convene and co-ordinate these meetings. Other agencies have a legal ‘duty to co-operate’ both with attendance and with the decisions made. The key aim is to:
● ● ●

MAPPA Level 3
Multi-Agency Public Protection Panel ‘the critical few’

Identify the risks Share information Co-ordinate the response and risk management plan

Health representative
(Only if necessary). This person will be the decision-maker for resources/decisions relating to mental health, disability, general health etc

Assistant Chief Probation Officer,
with strategic responsibility (Co-chair of the panel)

Senior police officer (crime support)
Strategic lead on specialist operations (Co-chair of the panel)

Communications Manager Prison representative
(if a custody case) (police or probation). Only attends if media issues for victim or offender have been identified

Police Public Protection Officer
(if a violent or sex offender in the community)

Victim Liaison Unit Manager
(probation-led). Only attends if there is an identified victim and the panel needs more information

Social Services
A senior manager (representing one of the following areas: child protection, vulnerable adults, families, learning disabilities)

Approved Premises’ senior manager (probation).
This person has strategic responsibility for decisions relating to Approved Premises (previously known as probation hostels)

Education representative
(strategic level, to arrange co-ordinated links with schools/ childcare providers, if necessary)

Senior Probation Officer
(in charge of day-to-day management of the local area’s MAPPA cases and line manager of the Probation Officer)

Probation Officer
(if the offender is under probation supervision and/or licence, then this person is the day-to-day ’offender manager’)

Local housing manager
(senior manager who can make allocation decisions for accommodation on release from prison or after a period of residency in an Approved Premises)

11 Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report

Managing the Risk

For offenders subject to statutory supervision, which can include Community Orders or post-release licence, there are National Standards stipulating minimum supervision contact levels and frequency of Risk Management Plan reviews, plus the opportunity to impose restrictive conditions, which are all rigorously enforced. A post-release licence may contain a variety of conditions tailored to manage the risk posed by that individual offender. An example of conditions often applied might be:

Requirement to live at a particular address, for example Approved Premises (formerly known as probation and bail hostels) and to observe a curfew with an electronic tag A ban on entering certain localities A ban on making contact with certain individuals or groups – particularly victims Restrictions on type of employment.

● ● ●

Failure to keep to any of the conditions will result in the probation service taking enforcement action and could result in the offender being returned to custody. The Thames Valley Probation Area manages Home Office Approved Premises (hostels). These premises provide enhanced supervision of offenders and bailees in order to protect the public and reduce risk. Within the Thames Valley there are five probation-run Approved Premises and one managed by a voluntary agency. These can all provide the additional level of monitoring and supervision needed for offenders who are subject to MAPPA. Offenders can be instructed to reside in Approved Premises through conditions imposed in Community Orders or a postrelease licence. In exceptional circumstances, cases can be referred to the National Probation Service’s Public Protection and Courts Unit, which can provide a national perspective and enlist the support of police and probation in other parts of the country. It can also provide additional shortterm resources where these are deemed necessary. In addition to statutory supervision (or instead of, when an offender deemed ‘relevant’ comes to the end of their licence) the police can take measures such as close monitoring and/or the application for a Sex Offences Prevention Order (SOPO). SOPOs replaced and combined the Sex Offender Order and the Restraining Order under the Sexual Offences Act 2003, which came into force on May 1, 2004. The SOPO contains conditions which prohibit an offender from engaging in certain activities, such as entering children’s playgrounds or visiting public swimming pools. Breach of a SOPO is punishable by a maximum of five years’ imprisonment. During 2005-06 Thames Valley MAPPA applied for 17 SOPOs, 1 was initially granted as an interim order until the full order came through. The courts eventually granted all 17 as full SOPOs.

Disclosure is another important tool used to manage the risk posed by these offenders. While every effort is made to reduce the need to disclose information about an offender, there are occasions when this must be done in the interest of public protection. Disclosure may be to an individual, an organisation or to the wider public. Each case is considered individually and the Home Office Guidelines are always followed. In addition, the Thames Valley Police Legal Department considers the legality and proportionality of disclosure in each case.

MAPPA should always be seen as the ‘means’ by which good public protection plans and outcomes are achieved and not the ‘end’ in itself.
Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report 12

Accredited Programmes
Thames Valley Probation Area runs a sex offender programme, which is Home Office accredited. The National Probation Service has two principle aims in its work with sex offenders:

Managing the Risk

To protect the public, particularly potential victims through the effective supervision of sex offenders To reduce the risk of re-offending

In order to contribute towards this, Thames Valley Probation Area, with the use of experienced and specialist probation officers and a principal forensic psychologist, is responsible for the delivery of the Thames Valley Sex Offender Groupwork Programme. The key elements of this work include:
● ● ●

Risk assessment and management Making sex offenders aware of the damage caused to their victims Challenging sex offender denial by encouraging the offenders to take full and active responsibility for their sexual offending behaviour Reducing social adequacy deficits associated with sexual offending Development of effective relapse prevention strategies Individual work and support by the offender (a probation officer) manager

● ● ●

In order to achieve the above, pre-programme work and rigorous assessment, together with psychometric testing, are used to identify what intervention/treatment is needed for each offender. This would normally include an initial intensive two week group treatment Foundation block, followed by semi-intensive treatment of two evenings a week for 14 weeks for Victim Empathy and Life Skills and then a further six months of once a week Relapse Prevention work. At the end of treatment a further assessment to evaluate individual risk and change is completed. The course is designed for offenders subject to a Community Order with a condition of attendance on the programme and for those who are subject to a post-custody licence with a condition of attendance.

Domestic Violence
An offender who presents a risk of serious harm in relation to domestic violence must be discussed at a MARMM (Level 2). If she/he fulfils the MAPPA categories (relevant conviction and poses high risk which require risk management involving more than one agency). If an offender is about to start the probation-run accredited Community Domestic Violence Programme (CDVP) a safety plan is put in place for the victim, prior to the programme starting. This is because there is evidence suggesting risk to the victim is increased at the start of the programme. An offender can only be managed at one of the above levels, however, s/he may move between levels depending on risk factors present at the time of the MAPPA meeting. The probation service offers a comprehensive treatment programme for domestic violence perpetrators and also offers help and support to victims. In addition, the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims (DVCV) Act 2004 has enhanced the support and services which can be offered to victims (for further information, see Section 6 on Victim Work).

New legislation
New public protection legislative powers were introduced in April 2005 to strengthen other statutory provisions. The most significant was the measure to introduce new sentences for ‘dangerous’ offenders (in the Criminal Justice Act 2003, from April 4 2005) which allows courts to place offenders in custody until they no longer pose a serious risk to the public.

13 Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report

Case study:
Prison Case ‘Larry’ Level 2 (MARMM)

This prisoner was initially remanded in custody, then sentenced to 6 months 17 days custody for offences of Drunk Driving, Harassment, and Possession of Offensive Weapons. He was known to be extremely obsessive and had a history of domestic violence with current and previous partners. He had previously served a sentence of 4 years for Wounding with Intent having shot a female (known to him), through a glass window. This man posed significant risk to his current partner and her children. Although there were a number of known incidents of assault, harassment and other disputes involving her, she did not wish to pursue these. The latest conviction related to a dispute which arose outside the house on the day he went to collect his belongings. He was later found driving with excess alcohol, ran away from the police, doused himself with petrol and threatened to light it. When searched, he was found to be in possession of a meat cleaver and a large knife. There were a number of concerns about the attention-seeking behaviour of the children although there was no evidence of abuse towards them. Their mother had had mental health issues and there was a suggestion that she liked the attention gained from the risks that this man posed to her and the children. The matter was discussed at the Multi Agency Risk Management Meeting (MARMM) on a number of occasions, having initially been brought to the meeting by the Domestic Violence Unit. The risks were considered to be posed to his partner, the family as a whole, the public due to his reckless behaviour, and himself.

The Domestic Violence Unit fitted alarms into the house and a Restraining Order was put in place. Arrangements were made by the school/Education Welfare Officer for the children and their mother to have a 6-week assessment with a view to putting in place any therapy or other intervention to meet their needs.

The school agreed to continue monitoring the children. The prison maintained liaison with the domestic violence unit and the Public Protection Officers, in regard to his behaviour and particularly advising of (changing) release dates. As he was not due to be on licence on release, he did not have to give a release address, consequently, no one knew where he would go on release. The arrangements made were therefore directly for the long-term safety and well-being of the family.

This case illustrates the need for the MAPPA process to look at the whole picture and to action its responsibility to protect previous victims. Although everything which could be done was done to monitor the offender, within the law, the safety of his former partner and her children, was paramount.

Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report 14

An introduction
Circles of Support and Accountability is a Home Office funded project that has been operating in the Thames Valley for the past four years. Its objective is to work in partnership with both police and probation in the management of MAPPA’s high risk sexual offenders. It achieves this by training volunteers, recruited from local communities, to work together as a team. The volunteers create a supportive relationship with the offender through which they can hold him/her accountable for past offending behaviour and monitor future risk. All information relating to recidivist behaviours is then passed directly to the local MAPPP. This objective is achieved through the volunteer’s knowledge of the offender’s relapse prevention plan, a plan that is the culmination of an extensive and intensive treatment programme (run in prisons and by probation) that will have identified both the offender’s modus operandi and their coping strategies for future risk. This situation is always dynamic and will therefore change over a period of time and it needs to be shared with ‘significant others’. A Circle of Support and Accountability provides that network of ‘significant others’. Over the past four years, Circles of Support and Accountability in the Thames Valley area has recruited, selected, screened and trained 74 members of the community to volunteer for the project. This has resulted in 23 Circles. Within these Circles, four offenders have been recalled to prison (due to behaviour spotted by the Circle members). The members have reported these behaviours to police and probation. In all four cases, the recall to prison has happened before an offence was committed.

Case study:
Circles of Support and Accountability ‘Harry’ Level 3 (MAPPP)

Harry is an entrenched 55-year-old paedophile who has served two separate prison sentences for sexual abuse of young boys. He had heard about Circles of Support and Accountability while serving his second sentence and requested a Circle prior to his release. His Circle worked with him for a period of 18 months and, in that time, ensured that he adhered to his relapse prevention plan. They also helped him access further education courses and helped him to develop an appropriate local social network. Harry responded well to the volunteers and was always grateful for their time. The Circle volunteers also supported him when he was re-housed and continued to visit him in his new home. It was after being re-housed that Harry began to develop a relationship with a disabled neighbour. The neighbour had an 11-year-old nephew who would often visit. Harry shared this information with his Circle volunteers, assuring them he was using his relapse prevention strategies.

The volunteers, who were very concerned, increased their input and monitored the situation carefully, on behalf of the MAPPP. Evidence came to light that Harry was not following his relapse prevention plan and that the risk of re-offending was escalating. The situation was reported to the police by the Circle volunteers and Harry was recalled to prison.

The volunteers remained in contact with Harry while he served the remainder of his sentence. He has not only understood why they reported him but stated he was
15 Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report

Case study:
Circles of Support and Accountability ‘Harry’ Level 3 (MAPPP)

grateful that they did, as this had prevented him from re-offending and spending years in prison serving a new sentence. Harry has now been released and asked to continue to be part of the Circles project. He now has a new Circle and has not re-offended.

As much as the police and probation service would want to, we can’t supervise offenders released into the community 24 hours a day. This case illustrates how a unique partnership has extended the supervision this offender already had under MAPPA and helped us protect the public.

Case study:
Approved Premises (probation hostel) case ‘Barry’ Level 3 (MAPPP)

Barry arrived at a Thames Valley Approved Premises in August 2005. He was subject to a post-release licence following a recent spell in custody imposed for breach of his Sex Offences Prevention Order (SOPO). Based upon his past behaviour of repeated offending, characterised by more than 50 convictions for 100 offences, there was a very high risk of further offence-related behaviour. If he abused alcohol and became intoxicated, this risk increased. The concerns related to past serious sexual offences committed by the offender, but in addition, there had been numerous breaches relating to the Sex Offences Prevention Order. The breach behaviour had related mainly to unauthorised use of alcohol and drunkenness as well as abusive behaviour towards members of the public. The public was potentially at risk because when he drank, Barry would become aggressive and argumentative. Likewise, the Approved Premises staff (probation staff) were likely to be at risk under the same circumstances (he had previously made threats to kill members of staff at other Approved Premises).

The risk management plan included:
● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Appropriate licence conditions. Residence and close supervision within Approved Premises. Curfew between the hours of 19.00 – 07.00. To abstain from alcohol and illicit substances, including solvents. To abide by Approved Premises rules. Not to enter licensed premises. To attend appointments in order to address alcohol dependency. Using additional waking night cover in the Approved Premises. A special code number was set up with the Police Command & Control system. Active Public Protection Unit involvement. Established media protocol in place. Regular reviews at MAPPP meetings & emergency meetings held when necessary. A contract covering the above was drawn up with the offender upon arrival at the Approved Premises. Two members of staff were assigned as his ‘key workers’ (normal allocation is one to each resident). There was close liaison with both the supervising officer (probation) and the police.

Additional staff had to be employed, due to the necessity for very close monitoring and supervision.
Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report 16

Barry completed his period of licence satisfactorily. The outcome was that he was arrested in the local town centre within 7 days of the licence expiry date for yet another breach of the Sex Offences Prevention Order, and was returned to custody.

This case illustrates how well Barry was managed in the Approved Premises. Unfortunately, it also highlights the difficulties faced by the MAPPA when a statutory control (ie the post-release licence) comes to an end. It shows the difficulty of working with offenders who cannot change, but who can only be controlled. Luckily, the SOPO that Barry is subject to will mean he will come out of prison on another licence, so he can be managed effectively.

ViSOR is a confidential secure system, which is actively used in the Thames Valley by the police to manage and collate information on sex offenders who are subject to the notification requirements as defined by the Sexual Offences Act 2003. Thames Valley Police has used the national version of ViSOR throughout the period covered in this report (April 1, 2005 to March 31, 2006), which has greatly contributed to the MAPPA process. This database will eventually be used by the probation service and the prison service and will provide relevant details of all offenders covered by the MAPPA process. The data stored on ViSOR is detailed and instantly available to all trained users anywhere in the UK. Any police force or agency with access can add relevant information to an offender’s records regardless of where that offender is currently living. This system currently allows the police to monitor and manage sex offenders more effectively both within our own force and across forces. It also includes a comprehensive search facility which will be a vital tool for any future investigations.

4 MAPPA Key Achievements within Thames Valley

The Central MAPPA Public Protection Unit
For some time Thames Valley MAPPA has been aware of the need for a centralised coordination unit for MAPPA across the three counties. In response to this (and to the publication of the joint (national) HM Inspectorates of Probation and Constabulary thematic inspection ‘Managing Sex Offenders in the Community’) a central unit was set up in Thames Valley during 2005. One of the key roles in this unit is that of the MAPPA Manager. This manager, who is a Senior Probation Officer, has established a firm foundation for the future, both in this role and in her previous role as MAPPA Co-ordinator for Thames Valley Probation Area. Some of her achievements include: 1) Reviewing Thames Valley’s MAPPA. This has highlighted gaps and deficits which are now being addressed 2) Writing the Strategic Management Board Business Plan 2005-06. This was four months ahead of the National MAPPA Business Plan 2005-08, which requested all areas to have business plans in place for 2006-07. 3) Writing, delivering or organising bespoke training on
● ● ● ●

risk of harm assessment, how to chair a MAPPA meeting what it means to have a ‘Duty to Co-operate’ for MAPPA how MAPPA works
17 Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report

4 MAPPA Key Achievements within Thames Valley

● ● ●

understanding MAPPA levels understanding risk assessment tools and their use understanding female sex offenders.

The following groups of people have benefited from MAPPA training during 2005-06: Thames Valley Probation offender managers (probation officers), police public protection officers, police superintendents, all Chairs of MAPPA meetings, prison public protection managers, representatives from housing, social and healthcare and education throughout Berkshire (this training will be extended during 2006 to Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire)

4) Organising training for 2006 on:
● ●

Use of police intelligence Understanding the work of the probation-led Victim Liaison Unit

● Understanding the Criminal Justice Act (2003) public protection sentences, the Harassment Act and the Sexual Offences Act (2003)

Developing a MAPPA Memorandum of Understanding for all co-opted agencies on the Strategic Management Board.

5 Strategic Management Board

i. An overview of SMB achievements in 2005-06
MAPPA in the Thames Valley is overseen by a Strategic Management Board (SMB) made up of senior managers from all of the agencies involved in the MAPPA process locally along with Lay Advisers appointed by the Home Secretary. The SMB ensures that the MAPPA process is working effectively and sets the objectives for the year ahead. During 2005-06, as part of the long-term development, SMB considered ways to improve monitoring and evaluation activities and to improve co-ordination of MAPPA throughout Thames Valley. Part of the business plan was to create a joint police and probation MAPPA manager post and create a central MAPPA Public Protection Unit. Another key achievement for the SMB was a breakfast meeting, attended by senior representatives from the ‘Responsible Authority’ (police, probation and prison service) and key ‘Duty to Co-operate’ partner organisations that are part of the SMB. This meeting was intended to develop everyone’s understanding of the importance of MAPPA in relation to public protection. In addition to comprehensive training offered to partner and co-opted agencies throughout the year, the SMB has also spent time this year planning next year’s activities. These include increased links with Safeguarding Children Boards, other children’s trusts, Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships and the Thames Valley Local Criminal Justice Boards. Communication is a key feature for the SMB. Keeping partner agencies informed and trained in all aspects of MAPPA is vital, as are links with local communities and the general public. This year, in addition to the annual report and briefings for the media, the SMB has overseen the production of a MAPPA leaflet ‘Keeping Communities Safe in Thames Valley’ and posters which outline the work of the MAPPA. A comprehensive media protocol for the handling of sensitive MAPPA cases and serious incidents in the Thames Valley already exists and this has been strengthened with a joint police/probation communication strategy, written in early 2006, for dealing with all enquiries.

Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report 18

ii. Lay Advisers
2005-06 has been the first full year with two Lay Advisers on the Strategic Management Board. These are members of the public who add an extra check and public scrutiny to the work of MAPPA in Thames Valley. Here’s what one of the Lay Advisers on the SMB had to say:

5 Strategic Management Board

‘It is almost a year since my appointment to the role of Lay Adviser to SMB MAPPA. As with any new role there has been much to learn to enable an understanding of this role. ‘The other Lay Adviser and I have been fortunate to have had specific support from the MAPPA Manager Kilvinder Vigurs, without which I certainly would be struggling to understand the whole process of Public Protection. ‘I wanted to be able to link the role of all contributory agencies and to better understand their participation in the process. Kilvinder discussed the agency roles and made arrangements for us to visit various agencies to observe and discuss with them their part in public protection. ‘My first visit after attending a MAPPA SMB was to Bullingdon Prison, where I spent the morning with Public Protection Manager Kay Winter and her team, which gave me an in depth overview of the work involved for the probation service in a prison, and the preparations necessary before release of some of the prisoners. ‘I was able to understand the programmes undertaken by prisoners who have committed sexual offences to help prevent re-offending. The workload of the team seemed to me overwhelming and wide-reaching. ‘The next link in the chain for me was to understand how an Approved Premises (hostel) functioned so that there was continuation in the monitoring process of offenders and I visited an Approved Premises in Oxford. Again I was impressed by the commitment and professionalism of the staff in their contribution to public protection. ‘The link between prison/hostel-release and monitoring became clear when I attended two MARMM meetings in Milton Keynes. The police public protection officer spent time with me and explained areas I was not clear about. ‘My overall feelings about the post are that, as yet, I have made little contribution to the SMB. As the Board meets every 3 months, it has taken time to familiarise myself with those attending and their roles. ‘I have noticed gaps in the agencies attending and hope that the Breakfast Meeting has gone someway to enabling these to be filled. ‘I look forward to next year in the knowledge that I now have a greater understanding of public protection and the role of the SMB. As a lay person I must say it is comforting to me to know how much emphasis is placed by the contributing agencies in keeping the public protected.’

19 Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report

6 Victim Work

Thames Valley Probation Area set up its Victim Liaison Unit in 2001 in response to section 69 of the Criminal Justice Act 2000, which imposed a statutory duty upon the probation service to undertake victim contact work with the victims of sexual and violent offenders sentenced to 12 months or more in custody. This includes the families/partners of murder victims. The unit’s victim liaison officers play an essential role within MAPPA. They contribute at multi-agency meetings and work with probation supervising officers, police public protection officers and prison staff to ensure named victims are safeguarded from offenders. The service offered to victims can range from correspondence by telephone or letter to face-to-face contact. We can often learn more about an offender’s behaviour by talking directly to a victim, especially in domestic violence cases. The work focuses on providing information to the victim about how the criminal justice system works after the offender has been sentenced. It also provides them with a voice at certain key points of a prisoner’s sentence, or ensures that preventative steps are taken to protect the victim from re-victimisation, including psychological distress. This can be in the form of ‘no contact requirements’ or ‘exclusion zones’ being part of a prisoner’s post-release licence conditions. The work carried out during an offender’s prison licence period is an important part of their prison sentence, as it allows for a period of time when the offender is subject to monitoring and necessary intervention, which ultimately works towards reducing the risk of further harm to the victim. During 2005-06, the work of the Victim Liaison Unit was extended, as a result of changes to the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004. These changes came into effect on July 1, 2005. The Victim Liaison Unit now liaise and work with victims of serious violent or sexual crime where the perpetrator was convicted and then made subject to a hospital order with a restriction order, a hospital direction and limitation direction or those prisoners who have been transferred from prison to hospital under a transfer direction and restriction direction. This means that victims’ views can be put forward at mental health review tribunals.

7 MAPPA and the Media

A comprehensive protocol for the handling of sensitive MAPPA cases and serious incidents was widely used during 2005-06. The protocol covers two key aspects:

The timely sharing of information between agencies before a high profile offender or a media-sensitive offender is released from prison A co-ordinated approach to all media enquiries about sensitive, high profile or serious cases.

In addition to this, during 2005-06, a joint MAPPA media strategy was developed. This ensures the media can be given appropriate and up-to-date information, where relevant, and means they can access spokespersons from all related MAPPA agencies. It gives wider coverage to the valuable contributions made by many agencies in the interest of public protection. In October 2005, the Registered Sex Offender figures, and all other MAPPA statistics for 2004-05 were released nationally. In Thames Valley, building on previous years’ experience, we held a joint press launch at Thames Valley Police’s headquarters in Kidlington. We put up spokesmen from police, probation and the prison service and, on the whole, coverage was an accurate reflection of the Thames Valley picture. Nationally, however, MAPPA across England and Wales came under fire from sensational stories in the press.
Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report 20

Although no Thames Valley Approved Premises appeared in these articles, they were visited by reporters and photographers, who also approached local schools and residents in the neighbourhoods. None of the agencies involved in MAPPA would dispute the need for public accountability of the work we do, nor the need for errors in the way public protection is managed to be highlighted. But we do believe the publication of stories designed to sell newspapers rather than inform, is not helpful. In fact some of these stories may actually drive offenders who are not subject to any form of statutory supervision underground, which then poses a far greater risk to the public. In the Thames Valley, not one offender who was resident at one of the probation service’s Approved Premises committed a serious further offence during 2005-06.

7 MAPPA and the Media

21 Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report

8 Statistical Information

The figures – an explanation
In 2004-05, Thames Valley MAPPA managed 1,382 offenders. For 2005-06, this figure was 1,755. The increase is not wholly due to more offences being committed. Some of the increase can be put down to a new computer system, which has meant better recording arrangements. The number of Registered Sex Offenders increased by 114 over the same period. This is due to more people being added to the register, either because they have committed offences or have been transferred in from another area. The number of RSOs on the register will grow with every new offence. This is because the minimum number of years an offender will stay on the register is five years and some will stay on it for life. Both of the serious further offences committed by offenders under MAPPA have been subject to reviews and recommendations have been put to the Strategic Management Board.

1. Category 1 MAPPA offenders: Registered Sex Offenders (RSO)
i) The number of RSOs living in your Area on 31st March 2006. a) The number of RSOs per 100,000 head of population. b) The number of RSOs living in each BCU (Basic Command Unit) on March 31, 2006. Oxfordshire BCU West Berkshire BCU East Berkshire BCU Milton Keynes BCU Buckinghamshire BCU TOTAL 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 936 44

306 224 141 129 136 936 10

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 (a) (b) (c) 17 1 17

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 (a) (b) (c) 0 0 0

v) The number of Foreign Travel Orders (a) applied for and (b) imposed by the courts in your Area between 1st April 2005 and 31st March 2006 (a) (b)
Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report 22

0 0

2. Category 2 MAPPA offenders: Violent offenders and Other Sexual offenders (V&OS)
vi) The number of violent and other sexual offenders (as defined by Section 327 (3), 677 (4) and (5) of the Criminal Justice Act (2003)) living in your Area between 1st April 2005 and 31st March 2006

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. 142

4. Offenders managed though Level 3 (MAPPP) & Level 2 (local inter-agency management)
(viii) Identify how many MAPPA offenders in each of the three Categories (i.e. (1)- RSOs, (2)- V&O and (3)- OthO above) have been managed through the MAPPP (level 3) and through local inter-agency risk management (level 2) between 1st April 2005 and 31st March 2006. (1) – Level 3 – Level 2 (2) – Level 3 – Level 2 (3) – Level 3 – Level 2 11 189 11 148 6 120

(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: Were returned to custody for a breach of licence? a) - Level 3 - Level 2 Were returned to custody for a breach of a restraining order or sexual offences prevention order? b) - Level 3 - Level 2 Were charged with a serious sexual or violent offence? (c) - Level 3 - Level 2 0 2 0 2 5 60

23 Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report

9 Partnership agencies in the Thames Valley

Agency Contact List
Thames Valley Police Thames Valley Probation Area For Social Services and Housing issues contact: Oxfordshire County Council Milton Keynes Council Buckinghamshire County Council Slough Borough Council Royal Borough Windsor & Maidenhead Bracknell Forest Council Wokingham District Unitary Authority Reading Borough Council West Berkshire Council Victim Support: Aylesbury Bracknell Chiltern High Wycombe Maidenhead/Windsor Milton Keynes North Oxfordshire Oxford & District Reading Slough South Oxfordshire Youth Offending Teams: Bracknell Forest YOT Buckinghamshire YOT Maidenhead YOT Milton Keynes YOT Oxfordshire YOT Reading & Wokingham YOT Slough YOT West Berkshire YOT Prison Service: Aylesbury YOI HMP Bullingdon HMP Grendon Reading YOI HMP Springhill HMP Woodhill 01296 444000 01869 353100 01296 443000 0118 9085000 01296 443000 01908 722000 01344 354300 01296 434624 01628 683280 01908 391000 01865 721212 0118 9390420 01753 522702 01635 264800 01296 397618 01344 411411 01494 732788 01494 436486 01628 636367 01908 607989 01295 277990 01865 751511/2 0118 958 6166 01753 535266 01235 516840 01865 792422 01908 691691 01296 395000 01753 552288 01628 798888 01344 424642 0118 974 6000 0118 939 0900 01635 42400 0845 8 505 505 01869 255300

Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report 24


10 MAPPA flow chart

Notification of sexual & violent offenders
As a result of sex offender registration, length of sentence or agency referral

Agency Risk Assessment
By the lead agency

Risk Category Level One
Risk Management by individual agency requiring usual agency resources

Risk Category Level Two
Risk Management of high risk cases requiring the significant/active involvement of other agencies

Risk Category Level Three
Risk Management requiring senior manager involvement of several agencies due to imminence of risk assessed, resource implications or particularly sensitive issues

Agency Risk Management Procedures

Multi-Agency Risk Management Meetings (MARMMs)
Involvement of multi-agency support to manage the risk presented by individual offender

MAPPP – Multi-Agency Public Protection Panel
Requiring the involvement of a wide range of agencies at senior level to manage the ‘critical few’ very dangerous or unusual cases. Registration with Home Office Public Protection Unit where necessary

Review by Case Manager
Referral to Senior Probation for action if risk levels change

Review cycle set at MARMM

Quarterly review or more frequently if required. Review cycle set at MAPPP

25 Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report

Abbreviations Checklist


Domestic Violence Local Criminal Justice Board Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements Multi-Agency Public Protection Panel (for Level 3 high, very high or complex cases) Multi-Agency Risk Management Meeting (for Level 2) National Probation Service Offender Assessment System Public Protection Officer Responsible Authority National Steering Group Strategic Management Board Thames Valley Police Thames Valley Probation Area

Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report 26

Further information

27 Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report