Agenda item

This item will provide an overview to members of His Majesty Inspectorate Probation (HMIP) new inspection framework standards, for Youth Justice Services. It will also provide an update on the proposed work being undertaken in preparation for an inspection under the new framework.

The agenda item provided an overview on His Majesty Inspectorate Probation (HMIP) new inspection framework standards for Youth Justice Services, as well as update on the proposed work being undertaken in preparation for inspection under the new framework.

The Chair welcomed to the meeting Councillor Cusworth, Cabinet Member of Children and Young People Services (CYPS), Kelly White, Interim Assistant Director for Early Help and Business Support and LINK Officer for the Commission, and Zulfiqar Shaffi, Youth Justice Service Manager.

The Chair invited the Youth Justice Service Manager to provide the presentation, during which the following was noted:

Inspectorate Aims When Changing the Framework-

• Ensure children and victims would be at the forefront of its inspections.
• Be proportionate in its inspection activity; be responsive and agile.
• Ensure inspections would have a positive impact; drive effective practice and improvement.
• Look at the quality of work based on the needs of the child rather than the type of disposal they received.
• Ensure a greater focus on the service victims were receiving, many of whom were also children.
• Increase the frequency with which inspections occurred, to avoid long delays between inspections.

The Critical Changes-

• The new framework considered the impact of contextual safeguarding and how best to promote positive outcomes.
• There was a significant change of language and focus throughout which was positive and was compatible with the language of the child first, and child first principles.
• It highlighted the importance of the Youth Justice Service partnership and the Board. 
• It had a greater focus on victims.
• All work with children was combined into a single domain. There was a clearer focus on the child’s needs and not the disposal and/or outcome they received.

Introduction of Two Types of Inspection-

• The first type was an Inspection of Youth Justice Services (IYJS), which would last for two weeks and would focus on practice and governance. This type of Inspection would include the Partnership Board and governance and approximately 15% of Inspections would be this type.
• The second type was an Inspection of Youth Justice work with children and victims’ (IYJWCV). This type of Inspection  would last for one week and would focus on mainly on practise and children and victims only, approximately 85% of Inspections would be this type. Previously the Inspection only looked at certain children based on their pathway, the Inspection will now focus on all children within the service.

The Two-Week Inspection, Based on Domains One and Two-

• This would be completed over two weeks, week one of the inspection would require a presentation, case inspection (children and victims), and children’s, parents and carers participation. Information from week one would then inform the themes for week two.
• Week two would be triangulation meetings, focus groups, multi-agency case discussion sessions and meetings with the Youth Justice Board, Board Chair, and staff.
• There would be a three-and-a-half-week announcement period, an example was provided of how the Inspection would be announced on a Wednesday, a planning meeting would then be arranged for the Friday or Monday.
• Work delivered to children and victims would be at the forefront of this inspection.

The One-Week Inspection, Work with Children and Victims Only-

• Inspectors would be on-site Monday afternoon to Friday morning for this type of Inspection.
• The Inspection would include a meeting with the Head of Service, and a presentation from the Chair of the Management Board, on the Monday afternoon.
• There would be a three-and-a-half-week announcement period, an example was provided of how the Inspection would be announced on a Wednesday, a planning meeting would then be arranged for the Friday or Monday.
• The Inspection would include some focus groups, a showcase slot for good practice examples, and two multi-agency case discussion meetings, to provide positive examples of partnership working.
• It would include children, parents and carers participation, and an opportunity for them to engage through a variety of methods during the week
• Leadership and governance, staffing, partnerships, facilities and services would be inspected through the lens of the work delivered with children.

Inspection Outcomes-

• The outcomes are the same as the Ofsted outcomes and are as follows:

o   Inadequate

o   Requires Improvement

o   Good

o   Outstanding.

• Rotherham was last inspected in 2020, and the outcome was Requires Improvement. 
• Since the last inspection, all actions were now completed and significant work had been undertaken, including the following:

o   A Peer Review in 2022

o   A Quality Assurance Review of Out of Court Work in 2023

o   Practice Discover Day by the Youth Justice Board, in 2024.  

On-going Work-

• There was a new Board Induction in place and membership of the Board had been reviewed, alongside agreeing a Vice-Chair for the Board.
• The service was working with Remedi, who had completed their Self-Assessment Victim Standards.
• The service was working with the Performance Team to ensure inspection readiness.
• The service was reviewing Youth Justice Services policies and protocol’s, updating documents where required and collating them in preparation.
• The Partnership Board would hold a Focus Workshop in February 2025, to consider priorities and inspection readiness. 
• The Service had rolled out a new Mandatory Prevention and Diversion Assessment Tool to support assessments.
• The Service was leading on the creation of a Regional Out of Court Practice Scrutiny Panel, with neighbouring South Yorkshire Local Authorities.
• Employees had engaged in training on constructive resettlement for children leaving custody.
• The service was gathering good practice examples through audit activity.

The Chair thanked the relevant officer for the presentation and invited questions, this led to the following points being raised during the discussion:

• In relation to external partners, a Youth Justice Service Manager audits the activity of external partners such as Remedi on a monthly basis. The Service would choose which cases they would like to audit and would moderate all work undertaken for each case. Remedi delivered victim work and one-to-one reparation work.
• The Local Authority delivered all group work, which was delivered via evidence-based programmes.
• Reassurance was provided by the service that they would be prepared for an Inspection, if the call was received.
• The CHANCE Group was still in place and continuing as a group. The CHANCE group had attended the Children’s and Young Peoples Partnership Board which linked with the Rotherham Together Partnership Plan. An invitation was extended to all members of the Commission, to attend the Children’s and Young People’s Partnership Board.
• All local authorities were due an Inspection, including Rotherham, due to a pause in the Inspection Framework. The local authority would receive three and a half weeks’ notice of the Inspection. The Inspectorate would decide which Inspection a local authority would have out of the two options available; this would be based on information that they held about the local authority, an example was provided of if a local authority area had a high knife crime rate, the Inspectorate may want to visit that area sooner.
• There was a network which informed the service of where the Inspectorate was at, at that point in time, they were currently inspecting a London Borough. The service would contact the London Borough after their Inspection was complete, to gain their feedback of the process. It was likely that most local authorities would receive a one-week inspection, 15% of local authorities would receive the two-week inspection.
• The Youth Justice Service were holding fortnightly Inspection Ready Meetings in preparation for an Inspection. The Service was working alongside the Performance Team to collect all data required for an inspection. The Youth Justice Board had implemented a Showcase Slot within their agenda to focus on finding examples of good practise to celebrate, in readiness of the Inspection.
• There was a detailed action plan developed as a result of the last Youth Justice Service Inspection, which detailed plans of how the service would progress from the “Requires Improvement” Inspection outcome. All actions from the plan developed in 2020 were completed within the last five-years since the Inspection. The completed action plan was presented to the Commission at the previous Youth Justice Service update in 2023.
• Early Intervention to prevent children from entering the Youth Justice Service was an area of focus for the service. There had been a reduction in the re-offending rate over the last twelve months. The level of re-offending rates was below the national average and reginal partner averages. Low First Time Entrance (FTE) rates resulted in a low re-offending rate.
• The Partnership Board held a workshop in February where the Board looked at developing their next Youth Justice Plan for the next year. The plan could often be local authority heavy, so the Partnership Board focused on encouraging partner participation in this. The workshop was well attended and promoted good discussions around current pressures and priorities for the service. Discussions took place during the workshop, relating to the following:

o   How to prioritise the sharing of online images and how to engage the partnership and schools in this area of focus.

o   How to understand disproportionality within the Youth Justice Service, it was noted that more than a third of the young people engaging with the service had additional needs, several of these young people had un-diagnosed additional needs.

o   How to focus on prevention, in particular the broader offer available via the Family Help Team and Family Hubs Service.

o   The priorities required, relating to youth violence.

• The actions obtained from the workshop would be imbedded into the Youth Justice Service’s Plan which would be produced by June 2025. The Youth Justice Board had agreed that a longer plan could be developed moving forwards, rather than a yearly plan.
• The service commissioned a speech and language worker to screen young people entering the youth justice service for speech and language needs. Trained practitioners would also identify any additional needs whilst working alongside young people within the service.

Resolved:- That the Improving Lives Select Commission

1)    Considers the content of the report and associated presentation, and acknowledges the progress made to date.

2)    Requests that a written response is provided to the Commission on Rotherham’s statistical neighbours.