Agenda item

(i)            Report of the Corporate Director of Children and Young People Services.

(ii)           Presentation by the Head of Early Help, Inclusion and Vulnerable People / Chair of the County Durham Youth Justice Service Management Board and the Youth Justice Service Manager.

The Chair welcomed the Head of Early Help, Inclusion and Vulnerable Children, Martyn Stenton and the Youth Justice Service Manager, Dave Summers who were in attendance to provide the Committee with an overview presentation relating to the County Durham Youth Justice Service (CDYJS), their performance and Service Improvement Plan 2021/22 (for copy see file of minutes).

The Head of Early Help, Inclusion and Vulnerable Children explained that the CDYOS was statutory partnership, from the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and that the principal aim was to prevent offending by children and young people.  He noted there were a number of statutory partners, including the Police, Probation Service, Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) as well as non-statutory partners which included the Police. Crime and Victims’ Commissioner (PCVC), Public Health, Tees, Esk and Wear Valleys (TEWV) NHS Foundation Trust, North Tees and Hartlepool NHS Foundation Trust (NTHFT), HFT and Humankind.

The Head of Early Help, Inclusion and Vulnerable Children noted information relating to out of court disposals, diverting young people from the criminal justice system, and the work undertaken in supporting the victims of crime and their families.  Members were referred to governance arrangements, with a statutory, multiagency partnership board, with links to the Safe Durham Partnership (SDP), with the Head of Early Help, Inclusion and Vulnerable Children as the Chair of the CDYJS Management Board.  The Committee were reminded of the Youth Justice Plan, which had recently been presented to Council in July 2021.  It was explained there were 62 staff from the Council, alongside 12 staff seconded from partner organisations.  The Head of Early Help, Inclusion and Vulnerable Children noted that there were 42 volunteers that also helped and worked with children, young people and their families.

Councillors learned as regards the voice of young people, families, victims and communities, structured feedback from all groups on the services delivered.  Members were also informed as regards the national recognition the service had received, including Children and Young People Now awards for its Parenting Group and ‘With Youth in Mind’, and Investors in Children and Investors in Volunteers status.

The Youth Justice Service Manager referred Members to performance information and explained that it was pleasing to note the downward trend in relation to the rate of first time entrants to the Youth Justice System, with the Durham rate being lower than the England and North East regionally rates.  He explained that the trend since 2014 had been a result of the work of the Council and partners in diverting young people away from the criminal justice system and permitting offences.  He noted national measures, with the first time entrant rate being 179 per 100,000, the reoffending rate being 34.9 percent, down 8 percent year on year, and the custody rate per 1,000 being 0.24, up slightly and in line with the North East and national rates.  It was noted this represented a small cohort of young people, eight this year.

In terms of local performance measures, the Youth Justice Service Manager noted 137 victims had been engaged with and 67 young victims had been supported.  He explained that there had been 1,366 hours of reparations and with over £1,000 donated to charity though work such as garden ornaments, Christmas wreaths and “bling poppies” for the Royal British Legion.  Members noted that 52 parents had also been supported.

The Committee were informed of the work undertaken in terms of the assessment of young people who offend, noting that around 80 percent had some level of speech, language and communication need.  Members noted other issues included mental health and substance misuse.  The Youth Justice Service Manager noted the interventions and risk management and the work undertaken with partners to support the young people in the service, who often had a range of vulnerabilities.

The Youth Justice Service Manager noted while performance was encouraging, the service was not complacent and the service had a number of area as service improvement priorities for 2021/22, including: further improvements of assessments and plans; targeting resources on those offending the most; listening and responding to young people and their families; ensuring volunteering is a key component; and ensuring case management and administration provided the highest quality support for the work of the service, to the courts and for young people and our communities.

The Chair thanked the Head of Early Help, Inclusion and Vulnerable Children and the Youth Justice Service Manager and asked Members for their comments and questions.

Councillor D Boyes noted the positive report, however, he did not recognise the same in the streets within his ward.  He noted that out of court disposals and Checkpoint had been very successful in terms of petty crime, however, he noted a hardcore minority that believed they were immune.  He noted a large increase in incidents of arson, anti-social behaviour with off-road bikes, including drug/drink driving.  He noted several incidents and noted his disappointment that the hardcore element, where interventions were not working, were not being addressed.

The Youth Justice Service Manager noted there was a relatively, in comparison to other areas in the country, hardcore element that offended at a significant rate and noted there was an ‘enhanced programme’, both intervention and punishment based.  He noted that custody was an option, though seen as a last resort as it was evidenced that those that young people who had been in custody were much more likely to reoffend.  He reiterated that the service was fully committed to try and work with that hardcore of young people, adding that the service had been out and about throughout lockdown, continuing with their work, similar to colleagues from Police, Children’s Social Care and other organisations.

The Head of Early Help, Inclusion and Vulnerable Children noted the issues of anti-social behaviour and arson as raised by Councillor D Boyes and added there was ongoing work with Chief Superintendent A Green and Superintendent N Bickford from Durham Constabulary in that regard.  He noted that a workshop was being planned and organised for a future date to bring together colleagues from the Police and the Council, including Early Help from within the Children and Young People’s Service and from other areas of the Council dealing with community safety, looking at anti-social behaviour and also arson suppression.  He added those issues were recognised across the partnership.

The Chair noted the rise in anti-social behaviour during the pandemic and asked if there was any information as regards whether it was due to a perception from those engaged in anti-social behaviour that there would be no retribution.  The Youth Justice Service Manager noted there was a school of thought that the greater the impact of a punishment then the greater the likelihood they would be deterred from carrying out such activities.  He explained that the reality was very different, with many young people not considering that they would get caught.  He added that the greater communities and partners worked together to catch those young people early, the greater the chance of being able to tackle the levels of anti-social behaviour, having the greatest impact at that point.

Mr D Balls noted the report highlighted great improvements, however, in reference to reoffending rates, he felt that one in three young people going on to reoffend was not successful.  The Youth Justice Service Manager noted that, while the figure was good compared to other areas, it was not a figure he was happy with.  He added that Durham was one of the best areas in terms of preventing reoffending and the service was always looking to improve.  He explained that the figures did not mean that 34 percent of the young people who were sentenced went on to reoffend, the way in which the data was collated by the Ministry of Justice was on a quarterly basis.  He noted that if a young person reoffended in each quarter, that would count as four young people reoffending, rather than just one.  The Youth Justice Service Manager noted that therefore and estimate of reoffending would be around 26-27 percent, with persistent offenders skewing the figures.  He noted that even at one in four young people reoffending it was an area the service was committed to improve upon by targeting resources on those young people causing the most impact within communities.  He added that the detection rate by Durham Constabulary was the highest in the country.

Councillor P Atkinson echoed the comments of Councillor D Boyes as regards a hardcore element and noted the perception was things were not being done.  The Chair noted that unfortunately the representative from the Police was not in attendance and explained the Overview and Scrutiny Officer was looking into issue of Police attending the meeting.  Councillor J Quinn noted he represented the same ward as Councillor P Atkinson and noted he had attended a recent meeting with Police as regards issues, including anti-social behaviour.  He noted that from his understanding the Police had less powers to arrest young people and that in cases of anti-social behaviour Police were filling out ‘misc’ forms, with 77 having been issued in the last year in his ward, with 13 being for the same individual.  He added that, as he understood, if cases were taken to court then Police would subsequently have the power to arrest and asked why therefore more cases were not being taken to court.  The Youth Justice Service Manager noted that it was not an area for his service, in terms of looking to caution or prosecute, rather his service would become involved once a young person had gone through that process.

Councillor D Sutton-Lloyd noted a similar situation in his ward, with the public being frustrated and Members receiving negative feedback in that there seemed to be little action taken by the Police or the Council.  He noted some frustrations in terms of not being able to pursue prosecution.

The Head of Early Help, Inclusion and Vulnerable Children noted that comments of Members as regards issue in their areas.  He noted that many of the cases referred to were those not significant enough to then come through to the CDYJS and reiterated as regards a workshop session with Police colleagues.  He added that Neighbourhood Inspectors were attending Area Action Partnership (AAP) meetings and forum in which Local Members could have those discussions as regards their areas.  He added he was happy to speak to Members after the meeting as regards issues as they could help inform him in terms of his discussions with colleagues from the Police, however, he suggested it may be appropriate for Overview and Scrutiny to have discussions with the Police in addition.  The Youth Justice Service Manager noted that a lot of work was being undertaken with young people and he noted that Members were welcome to visit the service to see the work and the types of activities carried out. 

Councillor B Avery noted the comments of his fellow Local Members and explained that it appeared to Councillors that very little was being done in terms of tackling the hardcore element, it having become radically worse over the last few years.  He noted the issue had previously been looked at by the Committee and noted he did not know what the answer would be in terms of tackling anti-social behaviour.  He added that the PCVC had attended a recent meeting of his local AAP and had received many comments as regards not seeing actions on the ground.  He noted the hardcore element needed to be tackled and that element had not respect for the Police.  The Chair noted there appeared to be an issue with a hardcore element in many Members areas and the issue was one that Police colleagues could respond to at a future meeting.

Councillor D Nicholls noted 80 percent of the young people going through the service had some form of speech, language or communication need and asked what the service was doing to help, working with schools and partners.  The Youth Justice Service Manager noted ClearCut Communication, a part of the service, was a nationally recognised expert in terms of speech, language and communication need and had developed screening tools specifically for working with young people, much more young people and communication friendly.  He explained that ClearCut Communications had developed a range of resources relating to speech, language and communication which, together with training, was provided across the country.  The Youth Justice Service Manager explained that every young person coming into the service was screened for speech, language and communication needs and added that all staff were trained to be aware and recognise speech, language and communication needs and also to deliver interventions in a speech, language and communication friendly way.  He noted lower-level needs could be dealt with by mainstream staff and explained that within the service’s Health Team there were 2.5 full-time equivalent speech and language specialists that worked specifically to provide higher level interventions for those with the greatest need.  He explained as regards work with schools and plans are developed with schools, post-16 providers or employers.  The Youth Justice Service Manager noted that many young people had gone through the school system without those needs being identified, in some cases the young people are quiet and not troublesome and that could lead to vulnerabilities around exploitation.  He added that for some young people the issue can be seen as ‘problem behaviour’ rather than an issue with communication and therefore work is undertaken with schools.  He noted that County Durham was a country leader in the area of working with young people with speech, language and communication needs within the Criminal Justice System. 

Councillor L Mavin asked as regards young people that may have autism or Asperger’s Syndrome.  The Youth Justice Service Manager noted that was another element within the screening process, linking to the health provision within the service, another area in which the service was country leading.  He added the service was looking to develop further understanding and skills to be able to deal with at a lower-level, with specialists to focus at the high level, as it was considered that nationally it was an issue within the Criminal Justice System.

Resolved:

(i)   The contents of the report and the work of the service be noted.

(ii)  That the comments from the Committee are collated by the Overview and Scrutiny Officer and shared with the Safe Durham Partnership, the Head of Service and colleagues from Durham Constabulary.