You are on page 1of 28

Annual Report 2005-06

Thames Valley
Multi–Agency Public Protection
1 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
Foreword 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 4
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? 5
i. Background
ii Which offenders are covered by MAPPA
ii. Case studies

4. MAPPA key achievements within Thames Valley 17

i. ViSOR
ii. The Central MAPPA Public Protection Unit, including
key meetings and training

5. Strategic Management Board 18

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

6. Victim Work 20

7. MAPPA and the Media 20

8. Statistical information 22
Detailing all offenders covered by the MAPPA process in
Thames Valley between April 1, 2005 and March 31, 2006

9. Partnership agencies 24
Brief outline of partner agencies and contact details

Appendix 1: 25
MAPPA Flowchart

Abbreviations Checklist 26

Further Information 27

3 Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report

2 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
Introduction 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, Sara Thornton, Bruce Davison,

Chief Probation Officer, Acting Chief Constable, Head of Social Inclusion Strategy
Thames Valley Probation Area Thames Valley Police 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
Background 3
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
What is
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.

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

offenders 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
come under (see next page).
If you look at the statistical page of this report (page 22), you will see both the categories
MAPPA? 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:
● 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);
Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report 6
● a sentence of detention under section 228 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003; Which
● 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 come under
● found not guilty by a court in England or Wales by reason of insanity; or was MAPPA?
● found to be under a disability and to have done the act charged against him/her in
respect of such an offence.
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 Sharing a common understanding of MAPPA Management Levels
(Thames Valley Area)
levels of
MARMMs and MAPPP are for coordinating multi-agency plans and
MAPPA identifying gaps.


Involvement of Senior
Imminent risk of serious harm*/additional
Managers V.high/ resources or media attention.

High risk of serious harm* cases that have

Level 2 – MARMM High – Risk
active or significant risk management** by
indicators exist
Involvement of managers more than one agency.
and offence
likely to happen.
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,
Medium - Complex - High vulnerable victims, DV, substance misuse.

Level 1 – High risk of serious harm – with single

agency active management
sharing. Medium risk cases that offending is not
Managed by Medium – Risk Indicators exist considered to pose Serious Harm to
but require a CHANGE in specific victim e.g. Non-contact sex
circumstances offence, S47 assault, some
robberies, not vulnerable victims.
Low – no current indicators of Risk 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 MAPPA
(usually probation or police)
Level 1 is used in cases in which the risk posed by the offender can be managed by one
Level 1
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.

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 MAPPA

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.
Level 2
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

Multi-Agency Public Protection Panels (MAPPPs) MAPPA

This level is used for the ‘critical few’. Cases are defined by the following criteria:
Level 3 -
(i) the offender is assessed as at high or very high risk of causing serious harm;
‘the critical few’
(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;
(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 9 Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report
MAPPA A typical Level 2 MAPPA meeting (MARMM)

Level 2 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
Multi-Agency Risk accordingly. Risk management and sentence planning, whether the offender is in custody
Management 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, Senior police officer

with responsibility for MAPPA cases within With responsibility for policing MAPPA
their BCU (Basic Command Unit) offenders in their BCU
(Co-chair of the panel) (Co-chair of the panel)

Minute taker Education representative

(police or probation) (from the Local Education Authority)

Local Approved Premises Probation Officer

manager (probation). (if the offender is under probation
Responsible for day-to-day supervision and/or licence, then this
management of people in their person is the day-to-day
Approved Premises (previously known
’offender manager’)
as probation hostels)

Police Public Protection Officer

Prison representative (if a violent or sex offender in
(if a custody case) the community)

Social Services Health representative

(working in one of the following areas: (Only if necessary). This person may be a
child protection, vulnerable adults, mental health professional, a GP, a nurse,
families, learning disabilities) psychiatrist or psychologist

Local housing provider Victim Liaison Officer

(Usually local authority or those with (probation-led). Only attends if there is an
private contract for local provision) 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) MAPPA
*offenders (usually violent, dangerous or serious sex offenders) who may pose a serious Level 3
risk of harm to the public.
Multi-Agency Public
Some of the professionals who attend are also core members of MAPPA at local Level 2 Protection Panel
meetings. They share valuable information on offenders whose level has been raised, or ‘the critical few’
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:

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

Health representative Assistant Chief Probation Officer, Senior police officer (crime support)
(Only if necessary). This person will be the with strategic responsibility Strategic lead on specialist operations
decision-maker for resources/decisions (Co-chair of the panel) (Co-chair of the panel)
relating to mental health, disability,
general health etc
Communications Manager
(police or probation). Only attends if
Prison representative media issues for victim or offender have
(if a custody case) been identified

Police Public Protection Officer Victim Liaison Unit Manager

(if a violent or sex offender in (probation-led). Only attends if there is an
the community) identified victim and the panel needs
more information
Social Services
A senior manager (representing one of
the following areas: child protection,
Approved Premises’ senior
vulnerable adults, families, manager (probation).
learning disabilities) 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, Senior Probation Officer
if necessary) (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 Local housing manager
is the day-to-day ’offender 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 For offenders subject to statutory supervision, which can include Community Orders or
post-release licence, there are National Standards stipulating minimum supervision
the Risk 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 post-
release 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 short-
term 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 Managing
Thames Valley Probation Area runs a sex offender programme, which is Home Office
the Risk
The National Probation Service has two principle aims in its work with sex offenders:
● 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: Situation
Prison Case This prisoner was initially remanded in custody, then sentenced to 6 months 17 days
‘Larry’ 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
Level 2 (MARMM) 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 Case study:
Circles of Support and Accountability is a Home Office funded project that has been Circles of Support
operating in the Thames Valley for the past four years. Its objective is to work in and Accountability
partnership with both police and probation in the management of MAPPA’s high risk
sexual offenders.
Level 3 (MAPPP)
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

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
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: grateful that they did, as this had prevented him from re-offending and spending years
in prison serving a new sentence.
Circles of Support
Harry has now been released and asked to continue to be part of the Circles project.
and Accountability He now has a new Circle and has not re-offended.
Level 3 (MAPPP)
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: Situation

Approved Premises 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
(probation hostel)
Offences Prevention Order (SOPO).
case ‘Barry’
Based upon his past behaviour of repeated offending, characterised by more than 50
Level 3 (MAPPP) 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
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 Achievements
notification requirements as defined by the Sexual Offences Act 2003.
within Thames
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 Valley
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.

The Central MAPPA Public Protection Unit

For some time Thames Valley MAPPA has been aware of the need for a centralised co-
ordination 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 ● understanding MAPPA levels
● understanding risk assessment tools and their use
● understanding female sex offenders.
within Thames
Valley 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

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 i. An overview of SMB achievements in 2005-06

MAPPA in the Thames Valley is overseen by a Strategic Management Board (SMB) made up
Management of senior managers from all of the agencies involved in the MAPPA process locally along
Board 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 5 Strategic
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. Board
Here’s what one of the Lay Advisers on the SMB had to say:

‘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.

A comprehensive protocol for the handling of sensitive MAPPA cases and serious incidents
7 MAPPA and was widely used during 2005-06.
the Media 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
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
7 MAPPA and
neighbourhoods. the Media
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.

21 Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report

8 Statistical The figures – an explanation
In 2004-05, Thames Valley MAPPA managed 1,382 offenders. For 2005-06, this figure
Information 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. 936
a) The number of RSOs per 100,000 head of population. 44
b) The number of RSOs living in each BCU (Basic Command Unit)
on March 31, 2006.
Oxfordshire BCU 306
West Berkshire BCU 224
East Berkshire BCU 141
Milton Keynes BCU 129
Buckinghamshire BCU 136

ii) The number of sex offenders having a registration requirement who were 10
either cautioned or convicted for breaches of the requirement,
between 1st April 2005 and 31st March 2006

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) 17
(b) 1
(c) 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) 0
(b) 0
(c) 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) 0
(b) 0
Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report 22
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 142
Criminal Justice Act (2003)) between 1st April 2005 and 31st March 2006.

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 11
– Level 2 189
(2) – Level 3 11
– Level 2 148
(3) – Level 3 6
– Level 2 120

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

23 Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report

9 Partnership Agency Contact List
Thames Valley Police 0845 8 505 505
agencies in Thames Valley Probation Area 01869 255300
the Thames
Valley For Social Services and Housing issues contact:
Oxfordshire County Council 01865 792422
Milton Keynes Council 01908 691691
Buckinghamshire County Council 01296 395000
Slough Borough Council 01753 552288
Royal Borough Windsor & Maidenhead 01628 798888
Bracknell Forest Council 01344 424642
Wokingham District Unitary Authority 0118 974 6000
Reading Borough Council 0118 939 0900
West Berkshire Council 01635 42400

Victim Support:
Aylesbury 01296 397618
Bracknell 01344 411411
Chiltern 01494 732788
High Wycombe 01494 436486
Maidenhead/Windsor 01628 636367
Milton Keynes 01908 607989
North Oxfordshire 01295 277990
Oxford & District 01865 751511/2
Reading 0118 958 6166
Slough 01753 535266
South Oxfordshire 01235 516840

Youth Offending Teams:

Bracknell Forest YOT 01344 354300
Buckinghamshire YOT 01296 434624
Maidenhead YOT 01628 683280
Milton Keynes YOT 01908 391000
Oxfordshire YOT 01865 721212
Reading & Wokingham YOT 0118 9390420
Slough YOT 01753 522702
West Berkshire YOT 01635 264800

Prison Service:
Aylesbury YOI 01296 444000
HMP Bullingdon 01869 353100
HMP Grendon 01296 443000
Reading YOI 0118 9085000
HMP Springhill 01296 443000
HMP Woodhill 01908 722000
Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report 24

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 Risk Category Risk Category

Level One Level Two Level Three
Risk Management by Risk Management of Risk Management
individual agency high risk cases requiring requiring senior manager
requiring usual agency the significant/active involvement of several
resources involvement of other agencies due to
agencies imminence of risk
assessed, resource
implications or
particularly sensitive

Agency Risk Multi-Agency Risk MAPPP – Multi-Agency

Management Management Public Protection Panel
Procedures Meetings Requiring the involvement of
(MARMMs) a wide range of agencies at
Involvement of senior level to manage the
multi-agency support to ‘critical few’ very dangerous
manage the risk or unusual cases.
presented by individual Registration with Home
offender Office Public Protection Unit
where necessary

Review by Case Review cycle set at Quarterly review or more

Manager MARMM frequently if required.
Referral to Senior Probation Review cycle set at
for action if risk MAPPP
levels change

25 Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report

Abbreviations DV Domestic Violence
LCJB Local Criminal Justice Board
Checklist MAPPA Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements
MAPPP Multi-Agency Public Protection Panel (for Level 3 high, very high
or complex cases)
MARMM Multi-Agency Risk Management Meeting (for Level 2)
NPS National Probation Service
OASys Offender Assessment System
PPO Public Protection Officer
RANSG Responsible Authority National Steering Group
SMB Strategic Management Board
TVP Thames Valley Police
TVPA Thames Valley Probation Area

Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report 26

Further information

27 Thames Valley MAPPA Annual Report