Integrated and Locality Working 1 st November 2007

1. Integrated and Locality Working 1st November 2007

2. Les Hossack Safer School Partnerships Consultant

3. Partnership between the police, school and other agencies Early intervention and prevention Different models Police Officer operationally focused Identifies, supports and works with C&YP at risk of victimisation, offending and social exclusion An SSP:

4. Reduce crime, anti-social behaviour & victimisation Provide a safe & secure school community Engage with young people, challenge unacceptable behaviour & develop a respect for their community Ensure that young people remain in education SSP Aims

5. Origins in United States Piloted by Thames Valley and Met Police Adopted by DfES in 2002 100 police officers in 100 schools in selected Street Crime Areas Four became ACPO/YJB fully funded projects National SSP Steering Group Ministerial support Background

6. Enforcement / holistic / school liaison FT or PT Police Officer / PCSO / Civilian One school or a cluster of schools including work with primary schools YJB/ACPO pilots – SSP Project Worker Linked into neighbourhood policing SSP Models

7. SSP – Wider Context LAAs YJB/YOT Prevention Strategies Every Child Matters Prevent & Deter School Standards Community Safety Strategy Children’s Trusts National Drugs Strategy SSP Children and Young People’s Services Crime Prevention Youth Matters Police Youth Crime Strategy School Prevention Initiatives Building Schools for the Future Police National Intelligence Model Individual School Improvement Plan Extended Schools Neighbourhood Policing Respect Action Plan

8. LAA (Local Area Agreement) SST (Specialist Support Team) Children & YP with behavioural problems SSP (Safer School Partnership) C&YP at risk of offending and victimisation Darlington LAA - SST/SSP

9. Local Area Agreements (LAAs) are made between central and local government in a local area. Their aim is to achieve local solutions that meet local needs, while also contributing to national priorities and the achievement of standards set by central government. Local Area Agreements

10. Seek to: provide intelligent and mature discussion between local and central government, based on a clear framework and shared understanding of national and local priorities improve local performance, by allowing a more flexible use of resources, to achieve better outcomes and devolve responsibility enhance efficiency by rationalising non-mainstream funding and reduce bureaucracy to help local partners to join up and enhance community leadership Local Area Agreements

11. Project Purpose – Multi-disciplinary team targeted at young people who are not succeeding within the education system and at risk of offending behaviour for whom outcomes may be poor if intensive support is not offered to the young person or their family. Intervention will be offered based on assessed need Darlington LAA – SST/SSP

12. Approach – It is envisaged that this approach will help to deliver and improve the identification of children and families requiring the service, streamline the response times for delivery of the service and ensure that the right service can be deployed at the right time without having to pass through numerous and complex routes that ultimately delay the support and intervention. Darlington LAA – SST/SSP

13. Performance – The drive to improve these support services will influence key performance targets throughout not only Children’s Services but also teenage pregnancy, NEETs, exclusions, attendance, attainment, ASB and health Darlington LAA – SST/SSP

14. Performance Target Areas – Core assessments within 35 days Reduction in half day absences Reduction in days lost to fixed term exclusions Reduction in permanent exclusions Pupils who are drug/alcohol users assessed by YPs’ substance misuse team Darlington LAA – SST/SSP

15. Performance Target Areas – Take up and engagement in parenting groups/classes/support Eligible pupils remain positively engaged in mainstream education PRU pupils reintegrated into mainstream education or acceptable alternative Reduction in First Time Entrants to Criminal Justice System Reduction in re-offending rates Perception of safety in and around the school Darlington LAA – SST/SSP

16. Team Manager SSP – Police Officer and Project Worker Education Welfare Officer Parent Support Officer Social Worker Peer Mentors Admin Support Worker Education Psychology School Nurse (PCT) Darlington SST/SSP

17. Close working relationships with: YOS CAMHS DAAT CONNEXIONS LOCALITY SERVICES particularly around parenting YOUTH SERVICE SUBSTANCE MISUSE SERVICES Darlington SST/SSP

18. Work of the team: YP at risk of offending behaviour Domestic violence Substance misuse Parental mental ill health Emotional and developmental problems Physical ill health within the family Poor literacy levels within the family Environmental difficulties Barriers to attendance Darlington SST/SSP

19. Concentrating on: YP permanently excluded YP at risk of permanent exclusion YP > 15 days fixed term exclusions YP at risk of offending behaviour YP at risk of victimisation Darlington SST/SSP

20. Darlington SSP/SST Primary Care Trust Pupil Referral Unit Ch Insp. Partnerships Durham Constabulary Asst Directors – CS (Partnerships and C&YP) Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership Team Leader Child Care Duty Team Strategic Steering Group Principal SSP School Feeder Primary Schools Head - Youth Offending Service Inspector NPT Durham Constabulary Head Youth Services Specialist Support Team Operational Management Group

21. Darlington SSP/SST Strategic Steering Group Sergeant NPT Durham Constabulary Specialist Support Team Team Leader Child Care Duty Team SSP Officer Education Psychologist SSP Project Worker Operational Management Group Education Welfare Officer Prevention Manager Youth Offending Service SchoolLink (SMT) SSP School Pupil Referral Unit Feeder Primary Schools

22. “Safer School Partnerships, where police are based in schools, take a joined-up approach to crime prevention, school safety, behaviour improvement and educational achievement.” (Staying Safe: A consultation document – DCSF 2007) Staying Safe

23. “The Government will support the police and services for children and young people in working more closely together. Safer Schools Partnerships (SSPs) are a good example: by building a close relationship between specific police teams and schools, SSPs have increased the trust and confidence that young people have in the police, and helped to tackle crime and disorder issues in the school and immediate neighbourhood. SSPs are already building close links with neighbourhood policing teams, where these have been rolled out. The Government is committed to supporting the development of SSPs and has written to Chief Constables asking them to consider a further push to develop SSP support for the schools in the communities which would most benefit from it.” (Cutting Crime – A new partnership 2008 – 2011 – Home Office 2007) A new partnership!

24. June 2007 – DfES and Home Office Ministers wrote to Chief Constables re SSPs Letter included a list of schools that would most benefit from an SSP input Schools identified by: Permanent exclusion rates Truancy rates (unauthorised absence) Attainment of GCSE A-C grades Free school meal eligibility (measure of socio-economic deprivation) Schools in Need

25. DfES analysts applied a weighting factor to the ranking scores All schools scoring less than 10000, were identified for each police force area The lower the score the higher the need of support The following table shows the scores for the East Midlands and the previously identified number of SSPs in each of those areas Schools in Need

26. East Mids - Targeted Schools (1) 2005/06

27. Significant ad hoc development No local strategic development framework Few SSPs with formal objectives and targets Established SSPs were changing the face of police/school relations – lack of recognition Positive evaluation from the University of York SSP Mainstreaming

28. Impact on educational outcomes: Truancy rates fell in 15 intervention schools by more than in 15 comparison schools Overall absence rates likewise Exam pass rates rose in YJB/ACPO schools relative to comparison schools Little systematic data on bullying, ASB or incidence of crime victimisation in schools SSP Evaluation – Key Findings

29. Impact on offending outcomes: YJB/ACPO schools reduced offending relative to comparison schools Problems getting good data from YOTs on offending at school level SSP Evaluation – Key Findings

30. From a police and schools perspective SSPs should pay for themselves Minimal prevention costs compared to high costs of CJS and support for young people not in education Schools do derive less tangible benefits from reduced absence and better exam results Matched funding arrangements and funding support from other benefiting agencies are worth exploring SSP Evaluation – Cost Benefit

31. Critical Success Factors Include: • Assessing school need and policing priorities • Overcoming the lack of co-terminosity of agency boundaries • Integrating SSPs with Neighbourhood Policing • Effective information sharing • Focused interventions targeted by the Police National Intelligence Model

32. Crime and ASB outcomes Number of first time entrants to youth justice system Number of ‘YJB Outcomes’ for pupils Proportion of pupils as victims of crime by other pupils Re-offending rates of pupils Educational engagement Proportion of pupils meeting minimal attendance standards Outcome Measures (1)

33. Educational achievement GCSE pass (5+ at GCSE) rate for school GCSE pass (5+ at GCSE) record for individual pupils at risk Absence Absence rate (authorised plus unauthorised) Absence records for individual pupils at risk Proportion of pupils self-reporting truancy Outcome Measures (2)

34. Bullying Proportion of pupils self-reporting being victims of bullying (school survey) Perceptions of Safety Proportions of staff, pupils and parents/carers identifying their perceptions of safety in and around the school, and on routes to the school (Surveys) Outcome Measures (3)

35. “I said I would leave if I had to have a police officer in my school. Now I would say it is probably the most successful initiative we have introduced.” (Head Teacher) “The problems in the school mirror neighbourhood problems, so need to be dealt with through local multi- agency strategies linked to Neighbourhood Policing.” (Police Officer) “There is no dividing line between estate life and school life. People in this area bring all the problems from the estate into the school”(Head Teacher - Notts School) Quotes

36. Policing in Schools Survey Nov 2007 - Delivering Effective Partnerships for Safer Schools training in London Nov 2007 – SSP Telegraph - 3rd edition Seminar - Strategic Development of SSPs Future Events

37. Les Hossack lhconsultancy 07739 885336 les.hossack@lhconsultancy.org.uk www.lhconsultancy.org.uk Contact