You are on page 1of 18

West Mercia

Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements


Annual Report 2002-3
Foreword

By Paul Goggins, Parliamentary Under-Secretary for


Community and Custodial provision in the Home Office

As the recently appointed Minister with responsibility for


the MAPPA, I am pleased to introduce this, the second,
annual MAPPA report. It is clear that in the last year
(2002/3) the multi-agency public protection
arrangements (the MAPPA) continued to play an
important role in what remains one of this government’s
highest priorities – the protection of the public from
dangerous offenders.

As someone with many years experience of working in


the field of child protection, I am particularly impressed
with the important contribution the MAPPA are making
to strengthen collaboration between agencies at a local
level where the focus is on the dangerous offender.
These improvements must, however, impact on the
protection of children. As the tragic death of Victoria
Climbie showed, an effective multi-agency partnership
is crucial and the MAPPA are an important element.

To ensure greater consistency in the MAPPA across


the 42 areas of England and Wales, and to prepare for
the implementation of measures contained in the
Criminal Justice Bill, we published the MAPPA
guidance in April. Building on good practice, that
Guidance clarified the structure of the operational
arrangements as well as the importance of formal
review and monitoring – of which this annual report is a
vital part. The Criminal Justice Bill will strengthen the
MAPPA in two ways. First, it will make the involvement
of other agencies part of the statutory framework.
Second, it will introduce the involvement of lay people –
those unconnected with day-to-day operation of the
MAPPA – in reviewing and monitoring the MAPPA.
Annual reports and this new lay involvement show the
Government’s commitment to explaining how the often
sensitive and complex work of public protection is
undertaken.

The Government is also strengthening the protection of


the public with other measures in the Criminal Justice
Bill. They include new sentences for dangerous
offenders to prevent their release if they continue to be
dangerous. Additionally, the Sexual Offences Bill will
tighten up sex offender registration, introduce a new
offence of “grooming”, and enable sex offender orders
to be imposed on violent offenders who pose a risk of
causing serious sexual harm – thereby extending sex
offender registration to them.

I commend this report to you and congratulate all the


agencies and individuals who have contributed to the
achievement of the MAPPA locally in your local area.
The National Picture

This section of the report draws attention to the wider


context of the operation and development of the Multi-
Agency Public Protection Arrangements
(the MAPPA).

The most important work undertaken within the MAPPA


is done locally, led by the police and probation – who
act jointly as the “Responsible Authority” in your area –
and in each of the 42 Areas of England and Wales.
The experience and good practice upon which this work
is based began in the 1990s – most significantly as a
result of the closer working relationship required by the
Sex Offender Act (1997). The Criminal Justice and
Court Services Act (2000) formalised that relationship
and built on the existing experience by requiring the
police and probation services to establish
arrangements (the MAPPA) for assessing and
manageng the risks posed by sexual and violent
offenders.
The Act also required the Responsible Authority to
publish an annual report on the operation of those
arrangements. This report, covering April 2002 to
March 2003, is the second annual report.

The importance of partnership

Key to the development of the MAPPA in the past year


has been the closer involvement of other agencies,
such as housing, health and social services, working
alongside police and probation. The truly multi-agency
nature of the MAPPA and the collaboration which
underpins it is to be strengthened further by the
Criminal Justice Bill. The Bill will place a “duty to co-
operate” on a wide range of organisations including
local health authorities and trusts; housing authorities
and registered social landlords; social services
departments; Jobcentres; Youth Offending teams; and
local education authorities. In addition, the Prison
Service will join the police and probation services and
become part of the MAPPA “Responsible Authority”.

Supporting and co-ordinating the development of the


MAPPA throughout the 42 areas of England and
Wales, is the National Probation Directorate’s Public
Protection Unit (PPU). Ths Unit acts as a central point
for advice and, increasingly, involvement in the
management of difficult cases. These include, for
example, UK citizens who have committed serious
offences abroad and return to this country without
anywhere to live. The Unit is able to provide financial
support when the risk management plans make
exceptional demands upon local resources.

Involving the public

MAPPA developments in the next 18 months will also


include the appointment by the Home Secretary of two
“lay advisors” to each Area. The eight Areas of
England and Wales which have been piloting these
arrangements since January (Cumbria, Greater
Manchester, Durham, South Wales, Dorset,
Hampshire, Surrey and West Midlands) report that they
add real value. Lay advisors will contribute to the
review and monitoring of the MAPPA which is
undertaken by each Area’s Strategic Management
Board – the work of which you can read more in this
report.

The purpose of appointing “lay advisors” is to ensure


that communities understand more of what is done to
protect them and that those involved professionally with
the MAPPA are aware of the views of the community.
The lay advisors will not “represent” the community in
the way, for example, that local councillors do, nor will
they be involved in operational decision-making. And,
given the sensitivity of much of what MAPPA does,
especially with the few offenders who pose a very high
risk of serious harm to the public, it is not practicable for
the general public to be involved. Lay advisors will,
however, ensure an appropriate and a practical level of
community involvement.

MAPPA offenders

This year the annual report provides a more detailed


breakdown of the number of sexual and violent
offenders who are covered by the MAPPA in your area.
As last year, the figures include the number of
registered sex offenders. Because sex offender
registration is for a minimum of 5 years
(and generally for much longer) the figures are
cumulative. This is why they have increased – by 16
per cent in England and Wales. Only a very small
proportion (about 6 per cent throughout England and
Wales) are considered to pose such a high risk or
management difficulty that they are referred to the
highest level of the MAPPA – the Multi-Agency Public
Protection Panels (the MAPPP).

Figures alone do not, of course, tell the whole story.


The anonymised case studies illustrate the practical
work of the MAPPA, and demonstrate the preventive
action which can be taken. Prior to the MAPPA, action
of this kind was mainly taken by one agency alone, with
the effect that on occasion offenders’ behaviour which
might have triggered preventative action went
unnoticed. The multi-agency approach of the MAPPA
helps ensure that if an offender does breach the
condition of the licence under which they were released
from prison or a court order prohibiting certain activities,
then action to enforce the condition or order and protect
the public can be taken more swiftly.
If you are interested in reading the reports of other
Areas, they will be published on the National Probation
Service’s website www.probation.homeoffice.gov.uk
(under the public protection section) with all of them
being available once the last Area has published its
annual report in September.
1. Area Summary

This is the second annual report provided by the


Responsible Authority for West Mercia region, which
incorporates Herefordshire, Worcestershire, and
Shropshire. The management group has changed its
title to help achieve consistency nationally, as advised,
and is now known as the West Mercia Multi-Agency
Public Protection Steering Group. Use of the previous
management title (West Mercia Potentially Dangerous
Offender and Mentally Disordered Offender Steering
Group) has been discontinued. This document is
prepared in accordance with the requirement placed
upon the Police and Probation Services by the Criminal
Justice and Court Services Act 2000 to report annually
on the arrangements made locally for the management
of dangerous offenders, including registered sex
offenders. It follows the guidance issued by the Home
Office.

Local arrangements for the joint assessment of high-


risk offenders were first developed within West Mercia
during 1998. We have built on these arrangements in
the past years in response to the introduction of specific
legislation, and now have multi-agency protocols
established including the police, probation, social
services, prisons, and youth offending teams.

The arrangements are overseen by the Steering Group,


consisting of 18 representatives of the agencies
mentioned above, plus health and specialist mental
health services, housing, education, and more recently
the National Care Standards Commission.

There are very real challenges in assessing and


managing the most dangerous offenders, and the
Steering Group and the MAPPPs are mindful of the
need to balance the clear first priority, which is to
protect the public, with human rights/civil liberties
issues.
It is the responsibility of the agencies that comprise the
MAPPP to decide, for the most dangerous offenders,
the correct balance of “treatment” – where this is
deemed possible, - and control. These two aspects of
risk management are sometimes referred to as
“internal” and “external” controls. There are offender
treatment programmes that are proven to reduce
reoffending, and it is in everyone’s interest that
maximum use is made of these. It must also be
recognised, however, that in some circumstances it will
not be possible to make offenders exercise control over
their own behaviour. In these cases, and within legal
constraints, it is necessary to impose additional and
effective controls by those charged with this
responsibility in our area.

We are confident that West Mercia is moving towards a


system of effective management of the target
population of offenders. It is not possible to remove
risk completely. It is a fact that of offenders convicted
of murder and serious sexual offences in recent years,
32% and 36% (respectively) had no previous
convictions. (Police Research Series Paper 144,
2002). However, as more consistency is achieved, and
a wider range of contributing agencies is secured, we
are dealing with cases in the best way possible. It is
tragic that in the last year we have had to read of
failings in communication and cooperation evident from
Lord Laming’s report into the death of Victoria Climbie.
It reinforces the lessons that we must all learn when
working with the highest risk cases. Agencies have to
cooperate, share, and act on key information if they are
to maintain an efficient and effective approach to the
management of potentially dangerous individuals
residing in the community.
2. Roles and Responsibilities
There is appropriate representation Where a case is listed for In MAPPPs and MARCs the police
of relevant agencies at the strategic consideration by a MAPPP, or a typically provide intelligence and
level in this area of work. All “Level MARC (Multi- Agency Risk evidence, probation and youth
One” agencies (Police, Probation, Conference) an appropriate officer offending staff provide information
Prisons, Social Services and Youth from the referring agency is about supervision of offenders.
Offending Services) are fully responsible for presenting the case. Social Services staff provide a link
involved. There is also now Whilst over time the assessment of with statutory child protection
representation from “Level Two” risk in a case may change, the measures. Other agencies provide
agencies as listed above (Education, arrangements target (in the first their own specialist input. There are
Health and Specialist Mental Health, instance) very high risk cases for often variations to these typical
Housing). Together, these manage MAPPPs, and high risk cases for inputs, where, for instance, social
the MAPPA for West Mercia through MARCs. Meetings of MAPPPs have services may have unique family or
the West Mercia Multi-Agency Public been chaired and administered by background information giving links
Protection Steering Group, with probation or police. In future more that would otherwise be unknown to
chairing of the group on a revolving consistency will be achieved with the participants. It is often the process
two-year basis. chairing of all MAPPPs by the MAPP of sharing information that may be
Co-ordinator. MARCs are routine to one organisation, for
Each agency is responsible for administered and chaired by local example call-outs for Domestic
assessing, in the first instance, the arrangements, although they follow Violence Units, that suggests
risk that its own clients represent, the MAPPPs in having a standard valuable links for assessing and
but is charged with the responsibility notes structure. The extent to which managing risk in the multi-agency
to invoke a multi-agency approach, senior management may alone have setting.
and use the MAPPA, when the the authority to make resourcing or
defining criteria for risk of serious flexible decisions may determine the
harmare met. The definitions used level at which a cases is managed.
in this process are those required by Some agenies, e.g. housing
OASys (Offender Assessment authorities, have unique control over
System) devised and introduced by key resources: before the MAPPA
the National Probation Directorate The fixed membership of MAPPPs were in place, they would often not
(although the systems used to are Police, Probation, Social know the potential significance of
measure risk differ between Services, and Youth Offending Team some of their decisions, e.g.
agencies). OASys defines serious Manager. Occasional members placement of an applicant near a
harm as “Any harm which is life- include Prisons, Health/Mental school, - where the applicant is a
threatening and/or traumatic and Health, Education, and Leisure child sex offender. In truth, nobody
from which recovery, whether services. wants to have to make difficult
physical or psychological, can be decisions. But decision-making
expected to be difficult or The membership of the MARC is on needs to be informed, - and it is
impossible”. Those individuals who a case by case basis, but includes because public protection is such a
represent a high or very high risk of practitioner expertise from the high priority that each agency has to
causing serious harm should be agencies required in the case. be fully involved, fully informed, and
considered by the agency dealing fully supported by other agencies
with them for inclusion under Within each agency there is a working to minimise the risks. The
MAPPA arrangements. Specifically, designated Liaison Officer for decision-making is done with the
high risk offenders meet the MAPPP. Any practitioner or best possible information, and with
following crieteria: - “there are manager within the organisation can public protection the main priority of
identifiable indicators of risk of consult the Liaison Officer for the process.
serious harm. The potential event guidance about which multi-agency
could happen at any time and the forum would be appropriate for the The Steering group recognises that
impact would be serious”. Very high case. The MAPP Co-ordinator is to in some cases a wide variety of
risk cases meet the following: - provide a central back up point for organisations may have key
“there is an imminent risk of serious consultation if the Liaison Officer is contributions to make, and
harm. The potential event is more unable to help in any particular case, encourages their involvement on a
likely than not to happen imminently or if there is disagreement about the case-by-case basis.
and the impact would be serious”. appropriate level of consultation.
West Mercia Police are recruiting an dangerous offenders by liaising
additional 6 police staff as assistant between those agencies involved in
to the PDO (Potentially Dangerous this work, allowing the PDO Officer
Offender) Officer in each Division. to have a more dynamic approach to
The role will enhance the monitoring the management of individuals.
of registered sex offenders and other

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

3. The Operation of MAPPA


a) Regular MAPPP meetings take place monthly in each police division in West Mercia. Where necessary a MAPPP
can be convened at very short notice, enabling senior managers to consider imminent and sudden threats to public
safety. Cases are sometimes reviewed at subsequent MAPPPs, although the extent to which this occurs is
changing; a number of cases are moved away from MAPPP management because they have action plans that are
adequate and approporiate. It is always important to plan for review of cases, but this may be conducted at a
MARC, or perhaps within the supervising agency. The MAPPP agenda must be kept for the most risky cases to
ensure that proper consideration is given to their assessment and management. Most cases can be effectively
managed by those agencies dealing with their workloads in a professional way, and this includes multi-agency
work, such as MARCs. Serious attention must be given to the extent to which offender programmes can make a
difference to behaviour; proven and documented interventions can help offenders to control their behaviour, usually
combined with a package of appropriate supervision and support. In some cases, equally careful attention must be
given where there is evidence that external controls are required; - this can sometimes involve enforcement action,
such as parole licence recall, or, for instance, a decision to apply for a Sex Offender Order.

b) The multi-agency public protection arrangements (MAPPA) covers the full range of cases, from the highest to the
lowest risk cases. It is important that patterns and trends are identified in the behaviour of offenders, most
especially where they can be used to predict future behaviour. Some examples are given below of the local
operation of MAPPA:

c) A male registered sex offender was residing in the West Mercia area. The convicting court, on passing sentence,
ordered that the offender was not allowed to own or possess a mobile phone or any other phone with the capability
of accessing the internet. Information was later received that the offender had obtained two mobile phones, one of
which had the facility to access the internet. Further information was received that this facility was being used daily
for considerable periods of time. A local MARC was convened, and developed an action plan which was able to
retrieve evidence confirming this behaviour. It demonstrated excessive use of the internet facility incorporating
chat-room access. The MARC process then agreed that the correct action would be to return the offender to court,
which was done. At the time of writing the offender was awaiting sentence for breaching the order of the court. The
full cooperation of the agencies involved had combined to assess the situation, devise a way of testing the facts,
then based action to protect vulnerable children from the offender’s known offending behaviour pattern.

d) A man of 21 was convicted of sex offences, sentenced, and subject to sex offender registration requirements. He
had indecently assaulted and had unlawful sexual intercourse with girls under the age of 14. It was believed that he
was not supplying an accurate home address (as required under sex offender registration requirements) in order to
deflect attention from where he was spending most of his time. He was also seen in a public place, in the company
of a young woman with a baby. This, together with the other information, led to serious concerns about the contacts
he was developing, given his previous offending pattern. Police and probation convened a MARC, and with other
key agencies in the case, jointly assessed the risks that this information suggested. The offender was relocated,
with his full cooperation, and has subsequently complied with requirements for registration. Whilst it is not possible
to eliminate risk completely, his cooperation and the safeguards applied to ensure compliance by the MAPPA are
thought to have significantly reduced the risk of further serious sexual offending.
e) A man with previous convictions for indecent assault was noted by a police officer to be in a car parked beside a
school playground. Enquiries led to other agencies exchanging information, with the result that the man’s
relationship with a 15 year od girl was discovered. Further multi-agency work was then formally undertaken, and it
was established that the offender was in breach of his post-release licence conditions. He was recalled to prison,
and at time of writing, an application is being pursued to obtain a Sex Offender Order; if successful, this order will
give further powers to help monitor and control the offender.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

4. The Strategic Management of MAPPA


The West Mercia Multi-Agency others to the agency-managed level. Protection Committees and the
Public Protection Steering Group Additionally, more consistent MAPPA
has met on a regular basis over the monitoring of the work of the
year, managing the operation of MAPPPs and MARCs was identified There was a separate but related
MAPPP meetings, organising a as a possible improvement. Lastly, development near the end of the
review of the arrangements, and concerns were raised about the lack reporting period when the key
deciding on future development in of a clear mechanism for linking the agencies agreed joint funding, and
the light of the review findings. The management of high-risk mental appointed a MAPP Co-ordinator.
review started in July ’02 and health cases leaving special The key objective of this post is “To
reported in draft to the Steering hospitals or transferring into the area contribute towards the development,
group in Jan ’03. It found that to the local MAPPA. implementation, monitoring and
agencies attend meetings well, and review of effective systems for the
all display a commitment to multi- The review concluded that 5 main management of high-risk offenders
agency working. In general, points are to be addressed in in the community” . The roles and
agencies were able to bring the forward planning: responsibilities of the Co-ordiantor
cases that caused concern to the are as follows:
appropriate meeting, and active • Create consitency of practice for
multi-agency management of high- MAPPPs and MARCs • To ensure the implementation of
risk cases was effectively agreed policy and precedures for
undertaken across the area. There • Provide for individual agencies the functioning of MAPPPs
was encouraging progress in to continue to operate their own across West Mercia
increasing the representation of risk management systems and
agencies previously not included, deployment of their own risk • To contribute to the development
both in the management process, assessment tools of appropriate policies and
and in the MAPPP meetings. procedures
• Provide a referral point into the
Some of the areas noted for MAPPP/MARC for all agencies • To collate required information
improvement concerned achieving on a West Mercia wide basis
consistency of structures, referral • Put in place an effective plan for
mechanisms, terminology, level of the oversight and management • To produce half-yearly reports
representation, and the of the MAPPA, in order to secure on the running and effectiveness
administration (documentation and compliance with the Criminal of MAPPPs to the Steering
recording) of MAPPPs and MARCs Justice and Court Services Act group
across the area. Other areas for 2000, and to facilitate the
improvement concerned the lack of provision of the Annual Report • To produce the Annual Report
an effective mechanism for cases to on MAPPA, on behalf of the
be moved off the MAPPP list. In • There must be better Steering Group
some cases this would mean moving consultation and liaiason
the case to the MARC level, in between the four Area Child
• To undertake a review of
MAPPPs on a regular basis as
required (at least 3-yearly) by
the Steering Group, and to
report back on suggested
improvements and
developments

• To attend meetings and


conferences as required

• To undertake personal
development and training as
required

• To liaise directly with local


MAPPPs

• To deliver training and briefings


to staff within all the associated
agencies as required

• To chair MAPPPs as required

Another decision following the


review related to disseminating
information about the MAPPA.
Three multi-agency briefings were
organised across the area on the
new structures and procedures after
the review findings. Practitioners
and managers were, in this way,
given the opportunity to get to know
how the system meets their needs,
and how it assists them to work with
confidence within their own, and with
other agencies in managing some of
the most difficult situations they
encounter.

.
5. Victim Work
In West Mercia the Probation kept informed about developments necessary, ensures that there is
Service complies with the around the time of release of every chance that the information
requirement under Section 69 of the prisoners. Because the information used is accurate and current. Police
Criminal Justice and Court Services about victims is used very carefully and Victim Support also contribute
Act 2000 to provide a service to the in assessing the risk of serious harm information about victims into the
victims of serious crime, and an offender represents, - often the process. Sometimes the victims
information is routinely fed into both risk is to one individual in particular, - choose which support service they
MAPPPs and MARCs concerning potential victims are better protected want, sometimes they continue to
the rights of victims. Specifically, when accurate and up-to-date use the service that contacted them
this includes the victim’s views on information is used. The regularity of immediately after the offence was
licence conditions for released MAPPPs and MARCs, and the fact reported.
prisoners, and on their wishes to be that they can be called quickly where

_____________________________________________________________________________________________
6. Statistical Information No. of Offenders

i. The number of registered sex offenders on 31 March 2003 524

ii. The number of sex offenders having a registration requirement who were either 22
cautioned or convicted for breaches of the requirement, between 1 April 2002
and 31 March 2003

iii. The number of Sex Offenders Orders applied for and gained between 1 April
2002 and 31 March 2003

(a) The total number of Sex Offenders Orders applied for 3

(b) The total number pending 2

(c) The total number not granted 0

iv. The number of Restraining Orders issued by the courts between 1 April 2002 7
and 31 March 2003 for offenders currently managed within MAPPA

v. The number of violent and other sexual offenders considered under MAPPA 604
during the year 1 April 2002 and 31 March 2003 (as defined by section 68 [3],
[4] and [5])

vi. The number of "other offenders" dealt with under MAPPA during the year 1 65
April 2002 and 31 March 2003 as being assessed by the Responsible Authority
as posing a risk of serious harm to the public (but who did not fall within either
of the other two categories, as defined by s.67 [2b])

vii. For each of the three categories of offenders covered by the MAPPA
("registered sex offenders", "violent and other sex offenders" and "other
offenders"), identify the number of offenders that are or have been dealt with
by:

a) MAPPP - registered sex offenders 143

b) MAPPP - violent and other sex offenders 141

c) MAPPP - other offenders 42


viii. Of the cases managed by the MAPPP during the reporting year what was the
number of offenders:

a) who were returned to custody for breach of licence 32

b) who were returned to custody for breach of a Restraining Order or Sex 3


Offender Order

c) charged with a serious sexual or violent offence 2


Contacts

West Mercia Probation Area Address Phone

Julie Masters Stourbank House 01562 748375


Assistant Chief Office 90, Mill St
julie.masters@west-mercia.probation.gsx.gov.uk Kidderminster
DY11 6XA

West Mercia Police Address Phone

DI Shane Lewis West Mercia Constabulary Headquarters 01905 331635


shane.lewis@westmercia.police.uk Hindlip Hall
PO Box 55
Worcester WR3 8SP

Peter Clark West Mercia Police HQ 01905 331633


MAPP Co-ordinator CID Unit
peter.clark@westmercia.pnn.police.uk Hindlip Hall
PO Box 55
Worcester
WR3 8SP
Logo to go here Logo to go here

Imprint details to go here Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet,


consectetuer volutpat.