House keeping

1. AssetPlus Practice Changes and JudgementsDelivered to YOTs and secure establishments inSeptember 2014

2. House keeping • Fire Alarms / Exits • Venue specifics • Refreshments • Questions throughout

3. Agenda • 1. Project Update and Framework Overview - 20 mins • 2. Information Gathering - 45 mins • 3. Professional Judgement - 15 mins • 4. Explanations and Conclusions 1 - 75 mins • 5. Explanations and Conclusions 2 - 30 mins • 6. Pathways and Planning - 30 mins • 7. AssetPlus Framework Detail - 15 mins • 8. Questions and Close - 15 mins - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - BREAK - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- 15 mins - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - LUNCH - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 45 mins

4. Objectives • Provide an update on current project status • To continue the familiarisation process with the key areas of change that the AssetPlus framework introduces • To convey the details of how AssetPlus judgements differ from Asset • To explain how the assessment links to planning • To provide attendees the opportunity to ask questions to gain an understanding of the key areas of change

5. Project status update (as at Oct ’14) • Business Change • The earliest start of deployment to tranche 1 YOTs will commence in June 2015 with business change engagement starting in December 2014/January 2015 • Deployment planning for tranches 2 and 3 is in progress – project has emailed HoS and Change Leads with allocations to confirm • The AssetPlus framework questions were released to Change Leads in July, AssetPlus Guidance document was released in August • Business change activities are ongoing • Identifying the secure estate points of contact by end of October prior to YOT tranche 1 direct engagement • Future releases of early practice changes are being considered • Requested local trainer nominations from YOTs • Technical • Second round of technical readiness calls nearing completion • Assessment of impact of AssetPlus on eAsset, YJMIS and Connectivity has been conducted and high-level design work is now underway • CMS suppliers have begun AssetPlus user interface development work • Envisage last set of requirements was baselined and released at the end of September

6. LOCAL PREPARATION LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION • Month 1 • Month 2 • Month 3 • Month 4 • Month 5 • Month 6 • Month 7 Business Change: Local Implementation Plan Initial planning briefing Plan agreed and signed off by HoS Checkpoint Mtg Checkpoint Mtg Checkpoint Mtg Key Milestones Initial briefing with Mgmt Board Assessment and Planning Training Resource completed Benefits baselined Training completed Working practice changes agreed Go Live Train the Trainer completed Complete local AssetPlus plan Early Practice Changes Working practice changes Business Change activities Complete local TNA Complete Training Plan Foundation Training Train the Trainer Cascade Training Comms planning Comms development & distribution Benefits management Regular Fortnightly conference calls will be held between Business Advisor and Change Lead

7. Training • Development of Foundation Training and other training modules ongoing with internal and external reviewers • LPAs are working with all YOTs to help address any assessment skills gaps within YOTs that were identified in their Training Needs Analysis

13. INFORMATION GATHERINGPersonal, Family and Social Factors • What’s Changed from the ‘Core Profile’ Asset? • Further exploration triggers need to answer certain questions rather than all being required and less open questions • Identify areas throughout that may need further action later on • Specific questions are included to assess the young person as a parent and young people’s gambling habits • Information for Core Profile is now covered in three separate sections: Personal, Family & Social Factors, Offending & Anti-Social Behaviour and Foundations for Change • Domain scores for each ‘Asset’ are not captured at the end of each section (analysis now done in the Explanations & Conclusions section) • Incorporates screening tools to identify potential requirement for specialist assessments: Physical and Mental Health Screening Questions AUDIT Speech, Language and Communication Needs (SLCN)

14. Family and wider networks – Gang associations Xxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxx Mother Mother’s partner Xxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxx Grandfather Xxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxx Sister Xxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx Yes Please select x x Xxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxxxx No School class Xxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxx Xxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxx Yes Sister’s friends Xxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxx

15. Key indicators for sexual exploitation and trafficking: - going missing for periods of time - disengagement from education - appearing with unexplained gifts or new possessions - sexual health issues - changes in temperament/depression Barnardos (2011) How the young person relates to others Sexual Exploitation Living arrangements, housing and financial considerations ‘Repeat missing’ young people can be at significant risk of sexual exploitation (Barnardos, 2007) and this possibility should also be considered as part of the assessment.

16. INFORMATION GATHERINGSelf-Assessment • What’s Changed from the ‘What do you think’ Asset and ‘Over to you’ (Onset)? • Option to use a version in a first person ORthird person format • Questions in a more young person friendly style • Addition of questions relating to: • How the young person feels about working with the YOT/Probation • Specific self-assessment questions (bail, custody, review, custody review & end of intervention), which will appear/not appear depending on the where the young person is in the youth justice system and their case type • Inclusion of a parent/carer self-assessment • Can be completed online or completed offline and attached to the assessment

17. Some new areas in the young personself-assessment

18. INFORMATION GATHERINGOffending and Anti-Social Behaviour • What’s Changed from the ‘Core Profile’ Asset? • Offence details are grouped into episodes • Offence details and attitudes considered together • Different questions/sub-sections shown if case is prevention vs. statutory • Previous offences are displayed in graphical form to identify patterns and behaviour changes: o o o o o o o o o o Seriousness Seriousness Seriousness Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Time Time Time Offences are increasing in seriousness although there was a period of primary desistance. There are no obvious timing patterns. Offences are decreasing in seriousness although there was a period of primary desistance. There are no obvious timing patterns. Offences are at a consistent level of seriousness but always at the same time of year. There have been no sustained periods of desistance.

19. Offence Category • Offence Type • Offence Start Date • Offence End Date • Seriousness • Specified offence? Offending- details, location, characteristics Details:

20. INFORMATION GATHERINGFoundations for Change • What’s Changed from the ‘Core Profile’ Asset? • ‘Asset Core Profile Positive Factors’ section is replaced, strengths are now captured throughout information gathering and have a significant input to analysis and ratings • Starts to consider Resilience and Goals, Opportunities, Engagement and Participation • Opportunity to Identify factors (for and against) in the desistance matrix prior to analysis: FACTORS FOR DESISTANCE FACTORS AGAINST DESISTANCE Positive relationship with grandfather Regular cocaine usage

21. Foundations for Change- desistance table Desistance = ceasing and/or refraining from offending or other antisocial behaviour

22. Professional Judgement Professional Judgement is not new Professional Judgement is weighing up information gathered to come to a conclusion Conclusions Supporting Evidence Where to gather additional info? How does the information match up with what I observed? Theory Research What are the reasons for the young person’s behaviour? Practice What are they likely to do next? How to address their behaviour? A key part of professional judgement is recognising patterns and meanings in complex information.

23. Replacement of Asset scores • The new framework no longer has domain scores individually or has an overall young person Asset score for a number of reasons: • To remove the over-reliance on a single score for a wide range of purposes • To remove the current inconsistency in Asset scoring within and across YOTs • To ensure Assessment ratings reflect factors that promote desistance in addition to factors that lead to re-offending • To ensure referrals based on welfare related needs are captured more effectively • To increase the ability to evidence Professional Judgement

24. AssetPlus instead introduces a number of new measures and young person ratings: AssetPlus ratings • Factors for and against Desistance • YOGRS (Youth Offender Group Reconviction Scale) Score • Likelihood of Reoffending Judgement • Matrices for Future Behaviour and Safety and Well-being • Risk of Serious Harm Judgement • Overall Level of Concern for the young person’s Safety and Well-being

25. Explanations and ConclusionsOverview • A distinct area to enable practitioners to pull together and analyse elements collected in the Information Gathering section • Three sub-sections: • Understanding Offending Behaviour • Future Behaviour • Safety and Well-being • Tables and diagrams to help practitioners understand the relationship between key life events and offending/ASB • Matrices to rate the likelihood and impact of harmful behaviour in relation to the young person’s offending and for the young persons safety and wellbeing both in the community and custody. • Make Judgements on Future Behaviour and the overall level of concern regarding safety and well-being • Management countersignature

26. FIP involvement Referral order OOCD YISP Met girlfriend Broke up with Granddad died 5 girlfriend Burglary Homeless 4 3 Violence 2 Theft 1 Bullying 0 13 13 13 14 14 14 14 12 12 13 13 14 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 12 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Oct Dec Oct Jan Apr Nov Feb Jul Dec Jul Feb Feb Mar May Jan Apr Jun Jan Mar Apr Jun Sep Mar Sep Aug Nov Aug May May Explanations and ConclusionsIdentifying patterns May 2012 Met girlfriend March 13 Broke up with girlfriend February 13 July 13 Homeless November 13 Granddad died

27. Explanations and ConclusionsIdentifying patterns

28. Explanations and ConclusionsFactors affecting desistance

29. Explanations and ConclusionsDesistance Matrix - Categories and Ratings Potential: this covers factors which haven’t necessarily been associated with previous offending /desistance and are not yet currently occurring but might feasibly happen Weak: this covers factors which have a slight or occasional link to offending (‘against’) or desistance (‘for’) Moderate: factors which are sometimes associated with either offending (‘against’) or desistance (‘for’); and/or factors which are influential in conjunction with the occurrence of other factors Strong: factors which are clearly and directly associated with each occurrence of either offending (‘against’) or desistance (‘for’).

30. Explanations and Conclusions – desistance table

31. Explanations and ConclusionsPredicting Future Behaviour

32. Explanations and ConclusionsExploring harm/ Predicting Future Behaviour

33. Future behaviours / offence Explanations and ConclusionsExploring harm/ Predicting Future Behaviour

34. Context for behaviour, likelihood and imminence When might the behaviour occur and in what circumstances? Please consider the following: Circumstances; Context; Capacity; Creating opportunities; Imminence Bullying/Aggression toward others - L uses bullying tactics to try and get decisions to go in his favour and to gain money from family members. The home have put in place strategies to support the boys by using reward charts and penalties which L and OT have responded well to - this has therefore reduced in likelihood at this time. L looks bigger than his age and uses his height and build to intimidate people - to date this his been people he knows and has a relationship with. Mum struggles to put in boundaries and feels guilty he is in care, she eventually gives in to demands. He has never been in custody and is nervous at the prospect he has said he has heard that the best thing to do would be to hit someone so no one will start on him. He is not known to have physically harmed anyone to date even under provocation. (L was punched in the arm in his previous home by another boy). L has tried these tactics with Residential staff - they have said that this soon stopped once he realised this tactic wasn't going to work. Please now rate the likelihood of these behaviours occurring: Victim Impact on others Likelihood Community/custody Behaviour / offence Medium Almost certain/Certain Community and custody Bullying Family members Bullying Peers Medium Very likely Community Minor Possible Community and custody Bullying Residential staff Major Very likely Community Arson/Fire setting Public Aggression towards others Peers Medium Likely Community and custody Medium Possible Custody Bullying Peers Explanations and ConclusionsExploring harm

35. Explanations and Conclusions Summary section Summary section Click to add priority for Intervention: Matrix of impact / likelihood judgements: Community Likelihood Unlikely Possible Likely Very likely Almost certain/Certain Slight Bullying - Residential Staff Minor Impact Bullying - Family Medium Aggression toward others - Peers Bullying - Peers Major Arson/Fire setting - Public Critical Matrix of impact/likelihood judgements: Custody Unlikely Possible Likely Very likely Almost certain/Certain Slight Bullying - Residential Staff Minor Aggression toward others - Peers Impact Bullying - Family Medium Bullying - Peers Major Critical Assessed as risk No ROSH judgement: High to children? YOGRS 67% Indicative Likelihood of Reoffending: Medium Likelihood of Reoffending: High How do your own judgements compare with the YOGRS indicator and indicative Likelihood of Reoffending above? If different, consider the reasons why (e.g. recent change in dynamic factors) and whether, based on your assessment, the indicative Likelihood of Reoffending is correct Whilst YOGRS has indicated that L is a Medium LoR, I am concerned that L appears preoccupied with fire setting and has now been convicted of 2 offences in a three month period. The police are also investigating a recent spate of garage fires in the area which L is a suspect.

36. YOGRS (Youth Offender Group Reconviction Scale) • What is YOGRS? • Static predictor • Indicative likelihood of reoffending rating • Based on a sample of young people • Calculated using 10 factors • Counts previous sanctions including OOCD’s • Rating expressed as a percentage • Why YOGRS • Actuarial predictions have a high level of accuracy in predicting outcomes • OGRS is robustly tested and used by NOMS and including it in AssetPlus helps with youth to adult transition • The Juvenile Cohort Study (JCS) validated the use of OGRS3

37. YOGRS and Indicative LoRHow are they calculated? Behaviour 2 Behaviour 3 Impact Behaviour 1 Likelihood YOGRS provides an estimate for: The probability of reconviction between this period Vs. Start of non-custodial sentence or date of release from custody + 2 years The percentage likelihood translates into an indicative LoR as below: It is the reconviction rate of a sample group with similar factors/offending histories to the young person, including: • Gender • Offence category • Offending history status • Age at time of actual/earliest release/start of order • Age at time of sentence • A variable rate Likelihood of Reoffending – How is it determined? You will decide whether you agree with the indicative LoR percentage or not. Based on consideration of the dynamic factors you identify in your assessment and risks highest on the ‘likelihood’ scale (in custody or community) You will then need to provide your own rating and explain why it agrees or disagrees with the indicative LoR. High

38. Risk of Serious Harm Whilst your analysis should identify all future risks associated with harmful behaviour you will also need to identify whether the young person poses any risk of serious harm (RoSH), defined as: This is crucial to inform the intervention level required to protect the public. Your assessment of RoSH should consider: ‘Death or injury (either physical or psychological) which is life threatening and/or traumatic and from which recovery is expected to be difficult, incomplete or impossible’ The dynamic factors and ratings you identified in your analysis The future behaviours you identified with particular reference to those with highest ‘impact’ Behaviour 1 Behaviour 3 Behaviour 2 Risk of Serious Harm The likely victims and the young person’s accessibility/opportunity to target them (should be reflected in the likelihood scale) The context and expected imminence of the harmful behaviour

39. Explanations and Conclusions MAPPA

40. Future behaviours / offence Explanations and ConclusionsExploring harm/ Predicting Future Behaviour

41. Young person’s Future Behaviour Handout

42. Explanations and Conclusions Young person’s Safety and Well-being Explanations & Conclusions Identify Patterns of Offending & Connections with Life Events FOR Rate Desistance Factors Based on Influence on Offending AGAINST Predict Future Behaviour based on balance of factors & past events. Make ROSH, LoR Judgements Predict Future adverse outcomes based on balance of factors & past events. Make safety & wellbeing judgements

43. Young person’s Safety and Well-being

44. Adverse outcomes, impacts Safety and Well-being assessment

45. Context, likelihood and imminence When might the problem occur and in what circumstances? • Possible trigger events/other significant changes in circumstance looming • Current constraints on others who might hurt him/her will be imposed / removed in near future • Likely to get into situations where could experience harm T is currently in Custody and is being verbally bullied at night by other young people (TU, KN, LD) taunting him to self harm, T regularly self harms, in the community he does this by cutting usually with glass to his arms and legs. In custody he head bangs - staff are aware and he is currently on a ACCT - and he is being monitored throughout the day and at 15 minute intervals at night, which has seemed to make things better for T, and the bulling at this time is said to have stopped. T has a history of sexual abuse which continues to affect his emotional wellbeing - he no longer has contact with his abusers however the effects of this abuse are still present and he still has Impact Adverse Outcome Likelihood Community/custody** Bullying Major Almost certain/Certain Community and custody Community and custody Physical Harm Critical Almost certain/Certain Emotional harm Major Likely Community and custody Community and custody Homelessness Medium Possible Community Sexual Abuse Major Possible Young person’s Safety and Well-being

46. Young person’s Safety and Well-being Summary section Custody Matrix of impact / Likelihood likelihood judgements: Unlikely Possible Likely Very likely Almost certain/Certain Slight Minor Impact Medium Homelessness Major Sexual abuse Emotional Harm Bullying Critical Physiscal Harm Community Matrix of impact / Likelihood likelihood judgements: Unlikely Possible Likely Very likely Almost certain/Certain Slight Minor Impact Medium Homelessness Major Sexual abuse Emotional Harm Bullying Critical Physiscal Harm Overall safety and wellbeing judgement: Very High

47. Pathways and Planning • What’s Changed from the ‘Core Profile’ Asset? • One single plan directly linked to the assessment • Judgements made in the Explanations and Conclusions are pulled through • A young person friendly plan • Subsections of Pathways and Planning: • Intervention Indicators • Key Areas of Intervention • Resources and Proposals • Tailoring Interventions • Overall Progress • Our Intervention Plan • Additional External Controls/Actions • Mobility and ROTL (custody cases only) • Dealing with Changing Circumstances • Managerial Countersignature

48. Integrated planning in AssetPlus Sentence Plan Vulnerability Management Plan (VMP) AssetPlus Single Integrated Plan Risk Management Plan (RMP) Intervention Plan Remand Plan

49. Intervention indicators

50. Key areas of intervention