MPA update on the MPA youth scrutiny recommendations

Report: 8
Date: 21 May 2009
By: Chief Executive

Summary

The MPA youth scrutiny report, ‘Seen and Heard – Young People, Policing and Crime’ (2008) contained recommendations for both the MPS and other agencies. The following update provides a summary on how the non-MPS recommendations have been taken forward to date.

A. Recommendation

That Members take note the content of this report.

B. Supporting information

1. The MPA youth scrutiny report, ‘Seen and Heard – Young People, Policing and Crime’ (2008) was discussed at the June and July 2008 Full Authority meetings. At these meetings, Members endorsed findings and requested that the MPA work in partnership with the MPS to implement the report’s recommendations.

2. The report had two sets of recommendations, those pertaining to the work of the MPS and a second set which were aimed at a number of partner agencies and strategic partnerships. Whilst recognising that the MPA has no mandate over any agency other than the MPS, it was felt that advice for partners had to be included in the report. Firstly, because the youth scrutiny consultation highlighted that the responsibility for tackling youth crime and supporting young victims and young perpetrators did not lie with the police alone. Therefore secondly, in order to develop long term sustainable solutions to youth crime, a joined up response involving all the necessary agencies was required.

3. The final report was distributed to a wide range of agencies and individuals, both regional and borough based including the following:

• Directors of Children Services;
• Lead council members for community safety and children’s services;
• Newspaper editors; and finally,
• Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships.

4. Below is a sample of the responses that the MPA has received from partner agencies to date.

5. A full list of all 52 recommendations can be found in Appendix 1 of this report:

• Recommendations 10, 11 and 22 pertained to the work of the London Criminal Justice Board (LCJB). All three have been incorporated into the LCJB youth strategy, ‘Making youth justice work better.’ A Lewisham youth victim pilot is currently being developed by the LCJB in partnership with Victim Support. The Lewisham project will focus on developing effective ways of improving support for young people who have been victimised. Recommendation 22 requested the LCJB address young people’s myths of/increase understanding of the Criminal Justice System. This issue had already been recognised as a concern by the LCJB and as part of its youth engagement work a ‘buddying scheme’ to raise awareness and understanding of court proceedings was developed between local schools and Camberwell Youth Court.
• The Youth Justice Board also provided information relating Recommendation 11. Greenwich and Lewisham were the first two London boroughs to trial the Triage approach. The aim of Triage is to prevent the unnecessary entry of young people into the criminal justice system. Triage takes place at the point that a young person enters police custody. The concept adopted from the hospital triage model, seeks to act as a gateway whereby all young people entering custody can be rapidly assessed to ensure that they are dealt with swiftly and effectively. An impact and process evaluation undertaken by Matrix consultancy, from August 2008 – March 2009, found that the process had worked well in the two boroughs. Practitioners in both boroughs, cite a reduction in First Time Entrants as proof of its positive impact. As part of the cross governmental Youth Crime Action Plan (YCAP) 13 London boroughs [1] have been given additional funds to address youth crime and will be adopting the Triage approach.
• Recommendation 12 requested Victim Support London ensure that youth specific support services are available in every London borough. In response, Victim Support London informed the MPA that almost a half of London boroughs have youth specific services in place and where this service is not currently available, specialist training has been provided to volunteers to ensure that young victims and their families receive the appropriate level of support
• Recommendation 34 of the report highlighted the need for the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) to continue raising awareness amongst young people on how they could make a complaint about the police. At the time of the youth scrutiny, the IPCC were conducting a stock take to determine how well the current police complaints system was delivering against its original objectives. The stock take resulted in ten proposals which aim to improve access to and information about the police complaints system and what individuals making complaints can expect of the IPCC.
• A number of recommendations in the report pertained to the work of local authorities. This group of recommendations focused on partnership working; early/early years intervention and information sharing. The MPA is a member of the newly formed London Serious Youth Violence Board which is the likely vehicle to take forward the concerns highlighted in this group of recommendations. The MPA has not formally approached the Chair of this Board regarding the MPA recommendations; however, this has not been an immediate priority as a number of the new board’s work streams [2] have close links to this group of recommendations.
• Recommendations were also targeted at the MPA. Of particular significance were Recommendations 4 and 5 which requested that the Authority build on and sustain its consultation and engagement with young people. A few Community Police Engagement Groups [3] provided feedback to the MPA on the community engagement recommendations, highlighting how they are ensuring at a borough level that young people’s voices are being heard. For example, Haringey Community Police Consultative Group has formed a youth engagement project called HYPE with a remit to build and strengthen relations between young people and the police across the borough.

6. In a recently completed internal review of the community engagement work undertaken by the MPA, the need to have regular contact with young people was highlighted. This review provides advice to Members on how to improve and enhance the community engagement work of the authority. In particular it recommends the MPA uses creative and innovative methodologies to hear from those Londoners, including young people, who are particularly vulnerable to crime.

7. As stated in the November 2008 youth scrutiny update report, the youth crime field is a crowded one and therefore it will not be possible for the MPA to determine whether youth crime successes are linked to the scrutiny recommendations. However, as the scrutiny recommendations tally with the plans of partner agencies and have synergy with proposals outlined in action plans such as the cross governmental Youth Crime Action Plan and the Mayoral ‘Time for Action’ proposals, it is clear that the Authority is part of a growing movement for change.

8. The MPA will continue to work with partners through the various pan London strategic partnerships and via CDRPs ensuring that learning from the youth scrutiny consultation and other similar consultations is not lost and continues to inform youth crime responses.

C. Race and equality impact

Through its involvement in pan London strategic partnerships and through its role on CDRPs, the MPA will ensure that its equality and diversity agenda is championed. Through the MPA’s participation on these partnerships and boards it has become clear there is an increasing recognition amongst regional and borough partners that in developing responses to youth crime, the needs of young victims and young black men, as both victims and perpetrators, need particular consideration. The MPA is a partner of the London Serious Youth Violence Board and the issue of disproportionality is a key theme of this board. Recommendations and advice on how this issue can be tackled will be bought back to the MPA for comment and consideration.

D. Financial implications

There are no financial implications for the MPA. The MPA will continue its involvement in various strategic partnerships and boards in taking forward the youth crime agenda. Resources to support this involvement will be met through existing costs.

E. Background papers

None

F. Contact details

Report author(s): Hamera Asfa Davey, Oversight and Review officer, MPA

For information contact:

MPA general: 020 7202 0202
Media enquiries: 020 7202 0217/18

Appendix 1

‘Seen and Heard – Young People, Policing and Crime.’ recommendations

Recommendation for Local Authorities

Recommendation 1: Local Authorities should:

1.  involve young people in devising services to reduce and prevent crime;
2.  ensure that workers supporting young people and young people themselves are provided with relevant training and support so that they can contribute effectively;
3.  make use of intergenerational projects that bring young people together with adults in positive interactions.

Recommendations for the Metropolitan Police Service

Recommendation 2: In taking forward the Safer Neighbourhoods young people’s priority, Safer Neighbourhoods Teams should:

1. use Safer Neighbourhoods Panels and Young People’s Panels to develop positive interactions between adults and young people;
2.  ensure young people’s priorities inform the local priority-setting process;
3.  ensure that all Safer Neighbourhoods Panel priorities are informed by accurate data on youth crime and do not unintentionally criminalise young people.

Recommendation 3: Safer Schools Officers and Safer Neighbourhoods Teams should develop links with providers of youth provision to be able to signpost young people to positive activities.

Recommendations for the Metropolitan Police Authority

Recommendation 4: (Via the MPA borough link members) The MPA should ensure that the Community Police Engagement Groups, which it funds, actively engage young people in their activities.

Recommendation 5: The MPA should mainstream the engagement and participation of young people throughout its work.

Recommendations for the Metropolitan Police Service

Recommendation 6: The MPS should increase the visible police presence in areas surrounding schools and colleges at the end of the school and college day.

Recommendation 7: The MPS should increase the visibility of Safer Transport Teams at busy transport hubs and at identified crime hot spots on transport networks, in particular those that are used by large numbers of young people.

Recommendation 8: In partnership with relevant agencies the MPS should improve reporting mechanisms for young people. This should include:

1. developing and promoting a range of young people- specific reporting mechanisms;
2.  considering how Safer Neighbourhoods Teams and Safer Schools Officers can receive crime reports and information directly from young people;
3.  carrying out a specific audit to identify good and promising practice concerning youth friendly reporting mechanisms and ensuring that examples of good practice are shared corporately and with relevant agencies.

Recommendation 9: Recognising the importance of early intervention, the MPS Youth Strategy Board should consider how information collected via Merlin could be used to refer young people at risk to other relevant statutory service providers.

Recommendations for the Metropolitan Police Service, the London Criminal Justice Board and the Youth Justice Board

Recommendation 10: In questioning young people who have been coerced into crime, MPS officers and the Criminal Justice System (CJS) should take into account the causes and context of the offending behaviour in order to provide measured responses.

Recommendation 11: The Metropolitan Police Service, the London Criminal Justice Board and the Youth Justice Board should expand and develop current interventions for young people at risk of offending behaviour in order to support those young people who are at risk of victimisation.

Recommendation for London Victim Support

Recommendation 12: London Victim Support should develop and promote youth-specific victim support services in every London borough.

Recommendation for Local Authorities

Recommendation 13: Recognising that early intervention approaches are cost-effective in the long term, statutory service providers should consider how current resources could be reallocated to focus on early intervention projects.

Recommendations for the Department for Children, Schools and Families and the Department of Health

Recommendation 14: The Department for Children, Schools and Families and the Department of Health should research national and international early intervention programmes to assess what good practice exists and ensure that this information is disseminated.

Recommendation for Local Authorities

Recommendation 15: Encourage and fund detached youth work, recognising that:

1. building positive, life-changing relationships with socially excluded young people in their terms and on their turf is time-intensive and requires sustained input; and,
2.  detached youth workers, such as Camden Youth Disorder Engagement Team, can provide a positive reactive response to youth disorder, as they are able to signpost the young people at hand to diversionary projects and relevant service providers.

Recommendations for Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships

Recommendation 16: The Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership in each London borough should agree a uniform approach to identifying young people at risk in order to agree the allocation of resource and service provision.

Recommendation 17: As part of their strategic assessment process, Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships should utilise MPS data on serious youth violence in order to ensure that resources are appropriately focused.

Recommendations for the Metropolitan Police Service

Recommendation 18: The MPS Youth Strategy Board should disseminate the corporate MPS definition for the term ‘gang’. This definition should be understood corporately and communicated consistently.

Recommendation 19: In order to achieve a reduction in the number of young people carrying weapons, the MPS Youth Strategy Board should, in addition to Operation Blunt 2 and other short-term measures, understand and address the reasons why young people carry weapons - including fear of crime – whilst continuing to develop and promote anti-weapon messages.

Recommendation 20: The MPS Youth Strategy Board should acknowledge that young people in gangs are at risk both of further offending and of victimisation. Consequently MPS responses to meet the needs of these young people should take this risk into account.

Recommendation 21: The MPS should develop the role of engagement and prevention in taking forward the critical performance area of reducing young people’s involvement in serious violence.

Recommendation for the London Criminal Justice Board

Recommendation 22: The London Criminal Justice Board should recognise the concerns young people have regarding the CJS and:

1. provide youth-friendly information on youth justice; and,
2.  tackle the myths that some young people have of custodial and community sentencing.

Recommendation for the Department for Children, Schools and Families

Recommendation 23: It is evident that laws relating to alcohol and drug use and abuse confuse young people and therefore existing and upcoming awareness campaigns should seek to address this confusion.

Recommendations for the Metropolitan Police Service

Recommendation 24: The MPS should consider how young people and youth organisations could provide input into initial police probation training and ongoing training for officers.

Recommendation 25: As part of Safer Neighbourhoods Teams young people’s priority:

1. officers should engage with youth workers in their wards and use this as a hook to develop positive relationships with young people;
2.  where possible, officers should be encouraged to take part in local diversionary and prevention programmes with young people, thereby allowing officers to develop positive relationships with young people.

Recommendation 26: The Central Safer Neighbourhoods Team should corporately share examples of positive engagement of young people by particular Safer Neighbourhoods Teams with all Safer Neighbourhoods Teams.

Recommendation 27: Where possible Safer Neighbourhoods Teams and Safer Schools Officers should engage and participate in extended school programmes.

Recommendation 28: The MPS Youth Strategy Board should ensure that all MPS officers and staff are familiar with the corporate MPS messages regarding young people.

Recommendation 29: MPS officers should follow relevant Standard Operating Procedures and ensure that they display courtesy and consideration when stopping and searching young people.

Recommendation 30: The MPS should provide clear information to young people on police tactics and operations that are taking place in areas or spaces used by young people, for example: the introduction of knife arches or the implementation of a Dispersal Order.

Recommendation 31: The MPS should provide information to Londoners regularly on the progress of cases and arrests, especially where young people are involved as victims or perpetrators. Consideration should be given to using language and utilising information mechanisms that are young-people-friendly.

Recommendation 32: Safer Neighbourhoods Teams should develop links with private schools in their areas.

Recommendation 33: In order to improve the confidence of young people, Safer Neighbourhoods Teams and Safer Schools Officers should consider how young people could provide feedback to officers on positive and negative experiences that they have had with the police.

Recommendation for the Independent Police Complaints Commission

Recommendation 34: In order to improve young people’s confidence in the complaints system, the Independent Police Complaints Commission should continue to ensure that the system is accessible to young people and should continue to highlight and promote outcomes of complaints.

Recommendation for the Association of Police Authorities

Recommendation 35: The Association of Police Authorities should continue to build on existing marketing campaigns to improve young people’s understanding of stop and search and should identify additional communication and information mechanisms to raise awareness of young people’s rights in regards to stop and search.

Recommendation for the Metropolitan Police Service and the Metropolitan Police Authority

Recommendation 36: The MPA and the MPS should provide clear information to Londoners on how regional and borough-wide policing priorities are developed and set.

Recommendations for Local Authorities

Recommendation 37: The key responsibilities of every agency involved in a crime and community safety partnership should be made available to all partner agencies.

Recommendation 38: Local Authorities should:

1. undertake a review of existing youth provision to ensure that it meets the needs of young people;
2. proactively involve young people in the development of local youth provision to ensure take-up of activities;
3. promote existing youth provision, using a variety of young-people-friendly communication mechanisms;
4.  ensure that youth provision is available at relevant times of the day and year and that it provides opportunities for skills development.

Recommendations for the Metropolitan Police Service

Recommendation 39: MPS officers working with child victims of rape and sexual exploitation should ensure that young people are signposted to specialist agencies to prevent further victimisation.

Recommendation 40: In regards to young people who are at risk of further victimisation, MPS officers should ensure that information collated via Merlin is shared with relevant partner agencies.

Recommendation 41: MPS should outline and promote the role of Safer Schools Officers to young people, teachers and other agencies in the school environment.

Recommendation 42: Safer Schools Officers should work in partnership with other agencies that are based in schools to ensure that a joined up response is provided to vulnerable young people in these settings.

Recommendation 43: Frontline officers should be provided with an understanding of the communities and geographical areas that they are responsible for policing. Relevant community and voluntary groups can provide information on both.

Recommendation for the Department for Children, Schools and Families

Recommendation 44: The Department for Children, Schools and Families should consider how the extended school programme could be used to address the crime prevention agenda and in particular how youth projects providing crime prevention and intervention programmes can support vulnerable young people in schools.

Recommendations for the Department of Health and the Department for Children, Schools and Families

Recommendation 45: The Department of Health and the Department for Children, Schools and Families should encourage a proactive involvement of borough Health and Education agencies in borough crime reduction partnerships and should consider and develop guidelines on how these agencies can fully support the crime prevention agenda.

Recommendation 46: The Department of Health and the Department for Children, Schools and Families should encourage borough Health and Education agencies to proactively share information on young people in need and at risk with relevant partner agencies.

Recommendations for the London Community Safety Partnership

Recommendation 47: Recognising that currently there are a number of London-wide boards which consider issues relating to youth crime, the London Community Safety Partnership should critically assess the remit and role of these boards and consider how this work can be better aligned and streamlined.

Recommendation 48: The London Community Safety Partnership should consider the development of collocated multi-agency service provision for young people at risk.

Recommendations for Local Authorities

Recommendation 49: The ACPO approach of providing young people with media training and a monthly newspaper column to share views, concerns and needs should be adopted and rolled out across the capital. Young-people-specific magazines alongside mainstream national and local press should also consider including regular contributions from young people.

Recommendation 50: Counter negative portrayals of young people by promoting positive stories of young people in the local media.

Recommendations for the media

Recommendation 51: Consider how press, radio, television and digital media can be adapted to:

1.  provide a voice for young people;
2.  provide guidance and positively influence young people.

Recommendation for all organisations working with and providing services for young people

Recommendation 52: All service providers, including the media, should consider the language that they use when speaking to or about young people. Consideration should always be given to avoiding pejorative and offensive language as this impacts negatively on young people and exacerbates fear of crime.

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback