6.10 Management of Those Who Present a Risk to Children
Show amendments
AMENDMENT
In March 2014, this chapter was updated to provide links to the most recent MAPPA guidance issued by the Ministry of Justice and Home Office guidance on Offences against Children.
Contents
- 1. Introduction(Jump to)
- 2. Register of Sexual Offenders(Jump to)
- 3. Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA)(Jump to)
- 4. Developing Intelligence About Organised or Persistent Offenders(Jump to)
- 5. Release and Temporary Release of Prisoners Convicted of Offences Against Children(Jump to)
- 6. Identified Offenders & Others Who May Pose a Risk to Children(Jump to)
- 7. Visits by Children to High Secure Hospitals & Prisons(Jump to)
1. Introduction
1.1 | LASSL(2005) 'Identification of Individuals who Present a Risk to Children' appended Home Office Circular 16/2005 which indicated that the use of the term 'Schedule 1 Offender' commonly used to describe those convicted of offences against children should be discontinued and replaced with the term 'a person identified as presenting a risk or potential risk to children'. |
1.2 |
The rationale for this advice was that:
|
1.3 | The work of the multi-agency Schedule 1 Review is continuing but advice in LASSL (2005) is that any conclusion that an individual poses a risk to children should be based on all available information including that provided by relevant agencies such as assessment of risk made by Probation, Police Health individually or via MAPPA. |
1.4 | A consolidated list of Schedule 1 offences provided in the above guidance is not exhaustive and should not to be used as a trigger to denote risk. The protection of children at risk of Significant Harm remains the responsibility of practitioners exercising professional judgement. |
1.5 | The remainder of this section provides procedures in relation to the responses required with respect to those identified as presenting a risk or potential risk to children. |
2. Register of Sexual Offenders
2.1 | Notification requirements of Part 2 Sexual Offences Act 2003 (known as the Sex Offenders Register) are an automatic requirement on offenders who receive a conviction or caution for certain sexual offences. |
2.2 | Notification requirements are intended to ensure police are informed of the whereabouts of offenders. They do not bar offenders from certain types of employment, being alone with children etc. |
2.3 | Offenders must notify the police of certain personal details within 3 days of their conviction or caution for a relevant sexual offence (or, if they are in prison on this date, within 3 days of their release.) |
2.4 | Such an offender must then notify the police, within 3 days, of any change to the notified details and whenever they spend 7 days or more at another address within a 12 months period. |
2.5 | All offenders must reconfirm their details at least once every 12 months and notify the police, 7 days in advance of any travel overseas for a period of 3 days or more. |
2.6 | The period of time that an offender must comply with these requirements depends on whether s/he received a conviction or caution and, where appropriate, the sentence received. |
2.7 | Failure to comply with these requirements is a criminal offence with a maximum penalty of 5 years' imprisonment. |
2.8 | The police should be contacted if such an offence is committed. |
3. Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA)
Introduction |
|
3.1 | The following material reproduces the multi-agency protocol signed off in February 2005 by respective senior managers in Thames Valley Police, Probation and the Prison Service. |
3.2 | The protocol revised previous local arrangements following publication of national guidance by the Home Secretary in March 2003 and subsequent review of local practice. It takes full account of the legislative requirements of the Sexual Offences Act 2003, Criminal Justice Act 2003, Criminal Justice and Courts Services Act 2000, the Human Rights Act 1998, the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and the Data Protection Act 1998. |
3.3 |
The protocol forms the basis for multi-agency information sharing and participation in MAPPA operating in the Thames Valley. |
3.4 | Each member of each agency contributing at any level i.e. providing written or verbal information through the initial referral process or participating in meetings / panels must confirm that their agency will comply with its expectations. |
|
|
3.5 |
The Criminal Justice and Court Services Act 2000 and Criminal Justice Act 2003 require Police, Probation and Prison services (jointly comprising the 'responsible authorities') to establish formal arrangements for the purpose of assessing and managing risks posed by:
|
3.6 | The arrangements may also be used for cases that have no formal convictions where advice is sought outside MAPPA, from the professionals attending the meeting, e.g. a non-convicted domestic abuse perpetrator. This is considered a 'Professionals Meeting'. |
|
|
3.7 |
MAPPA exist in order to:
|
|
|
3.8 |
Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements will identify 3 levels at which risk is assessed and managed:
|
3.9 | National MAPPA Guidance pages 34 to 37 provides further details. |
3.10 | Meetings held to consider level 2 cases are known locally as 'Multi-Agency Risk Management Meetings' (MARMMs) to distinguish them from Panels (MAPPs), which are reserved for level 3 cases. |
3.11 |
'Relevant sexual or violent offenders' are those:
Click here to access the most recent Mappa Guidance issued by the Government. |
|
|
3.12 |
PP1 PP1 - the standard notification form is the method of notifying the Police Public Protection Office of MAPPA cases. Notifications will be completed by public protection officers on registered sex offenders in the community and those who receive short custodial sentences. PP1s should be completed by probation officers/case managers (including YOT officers) for sex offenders or violent offenders who are serving over 12 months imprisonment and cases assessed as posing high or very high risk of serious harm of violence when the offender is subject to a Community Rehabilitation Order. Other agencies may also refer cases to the MAPPA Co-ordination Panel but they are required to complete a notification form. PP2 Minutes of 'initial meetings' and 'reviews' are produced for each level 2 and 3 case discussed at MAPPA meetings. This standardised form is designed to guide the discussion and decision-making. PP3 (additional housing information) The form should be attached to the PP1 notification form and needs to be completed if housing concerns are identified on high risk or very high risk cases. A copy must be sent directly to the NPS-TV housing needs team manager (this is particularly important when a hostel-based release plan is envisaged for serving prisoners as it will ensure that move-on resettlement work is considered at the earliest opportunity). All other cases requiring housing input can be dealt with using the usual probation housing referral process. |
|
|
3.13 | Thames Valley MAPPA Co-ordination panel meets weekly to review all PP1s, (the standard notification form) received for relevant cases. |
3.14 |
Panel members are drawn from the 'responsible authorities' and include:
|
3.15 | The role of the panel is to demonstrate public accountability, consistency in assessment and adherence to government expectations in relation to MAPPA. |
3.16 | It is also to quality assure the MAPPA process by confirming that assessments are supported by appropriate evidence and are defensible and proportionate. This role is important both for the appropriate level of supervision of dangerous offenders and the probity of MAPPA statistics which are published annually. |
|
|
3.17 | In each police command area within the Thames Valley, it is the joint responsibility of the police, prison and probation services to convene and chair Multi-Agency Risk Management meetings (MARMMs) and MAPPs. This will be achieved through the identification of local lead managers in each agency. |
3.18 | Thames Valley Police provide a centralised administrative resource, within the Police Public Protection Office, through which MAPPA referrals (PPIs) will be channelled. This enables consistent collection of information, appropriate and timely notification to local lead managers of relevant information for meetings under MAPPA and facilitation of the MAPPA co-ordination panel. |
3.19 | In each police command area there will be a monthly meeting under MAPPA. Meetings will be chaired by either a manager from the Probation Service of at least senior probation officer grade or a manager from the Police of at least Chief Inspector rank. |
3.20 | Such meetings may additionally be convened at short notice in response to events or receipt of information about risk which requires urgent attention. |
3.21 | Where a referral under MAPPA has been confirmed as level 1 following consideration by the co-ordination panel, the chair of the local meeting will ensure that information contained in the MAPPA referral is made available to partner agencies. |
3.22 | Those cases confirmed as Level 2 will additionally require a MARMM to be convened. Cases confirmed as Level 3 will require that a MAPPP is convened. |
3.23 | MAPPs and MARMMs may have the same or similar membership and it will often be convenient to manage both Level 2 and Level 3 meetings within the local monthly meeting cycle. |
3.24 | Where this occurs, that part of the meeting constituted as a Level 3 (MAPPP) meeting must be attended, additionally by either the Detective Superintendent (Specialist Operations) or the DCI Public Protection Unit Force Crime Management and an Assistant Chief Probation Officer, one of whom will chair the MAPPP. |
3.25 |
The number of people involved in meetings arranged under MAPPA should be restricted to those who have a significant contribution to make and/or are at a level/rank which enables them to commit their agency to the agreed involvement in any subsequently determined risk management plan, including, where appropriate, the allocation of specific (additional) resources. |
3.26 |
Representatives attending meetings should include, among others:
|
3.27 | This list is not exhaustive but the chair of each meeting must be satisfied that invitees are able to conform to expectations clarified elsewhere in this protocol regarding the confidential receipt and use of information - see paragraphs on Information Sharing |
3.28 | Attendance by a representative of the Prison Service will be in accordance with 'SE1 Prison Region MAPPA Protocol' which confirms there will be a prison representative at all Level 3 meetings on prisoners held in Thames Valley prisons with Thames Valley addresses for which the authorities have accepted responsibility. |
3.29 | Attempts will be made, where possible, to return prisoners to Thames Valley prisons to facilitate local release. Attendance over and above is at the discretion of the prison governor and can be negotiated. |
|
|
3.30 | S. 325(1-5) of the Criminal Justice Act (2003) imposes a 'duty to co-operate' with the MAPPA responsible authorities on various organisations providing public services. This development has been informed and defined in co-operation with relevant government departments and interest groups. |
3.31 | The purpose of this development is to help strengthen the MAPPA in making defensible decisions about the management of offenders. It acknowledges the crucial role in the resettlement and rehabilitation of offenders that is played by various governmental and other organisations. |
3.32 | It is designed to enable these agencies to work together in order to achieve co-operation rather than 'collision', whereby agencies might unintentionally frustrate or compromise the work of one another through lack of communication or recognition of their responsibilities. |
3.33 | The MAPPA in itself is not a legal entity but rather a set of administrative arrangements - authority and professional responsibility for action remains with the agencies involved and to this end MAPPA aims at 'co-ordination not conglomeration'. |
3.34 | The legislation does not define the activities that the duty to co-operate involves but provides guidance to this effect. It requires duty-to-co-operate agencies to co-operate only insofar as this is compatible with their existing statutory responsibilities. |
3.35 | It is vital that different agencies respect the role provided by each other and the professional responsibilities and limitations that this might involve. |
3.36 | Co-operation cannot be based on the command and control of one agency by another. There is a recognition that co-operation between agencies will not always be plain sailing. Partnerships of the sort embodied by MAPPA can be problematic, particularly when they involve individual offenders who present considerable challenges to the professionals concerned. The aim for the agencies is to work together to protect known victims and the public. |
3.37 | It is recognised that in many cases 'duty to co-operate' agencies are already represented and active in the MAPPA process both at local level and on regional Strategic Management Boards and to this end the legislation may be clarifying practice that is already in place. |
3.38 |
The 4 key roles of any agency operating within the MAPPA process are to:
|
|
|
3.39 | The following agencies have a duty to co-operate in MAPPA. Details of their respective roles and responsibilities are provided. |
|
|
3.40 | YOTs are multi-agency partnerships established by local authorities across England and Wales. |
3.41 | YOTS can provide a 'single agency' risk assessment and risk management at MAPPA Level 1 though are required to refer into the MAPPA for young people meeting the requirements of Level 2 or 3. |
3.42 | Further MAPPA involvement may come about in some cases where supervision of the case is being transferred to the Probation Service (generally those serving s.91 sentences for very serious offences). |
|
|
3.43 | This agency was formed in April 2002 by combining the employment service and parts of the benefits agency providing services to people of working age. |
3.44 | Jobcentre Plus is involved in MAPPA under the auspices of Probation Circular 48/1999 regarding the employment of potentially dangerous offenders. |
3.45 | Information disclosed in these cases should only be strictly limited to the identity of the offender and the nature of the employment from which s/he should be restricted. In appropriate further disclosure may be unlawful. |
|
|
3.46 |
It has been agreed that the most likely involvement of Children's Services (Education) in MAPPA will involve either:
|
3.47 |
In both cases Children's Services (Education) is most likely to become involved either through the YOT (of which it is a statutory partner) or through child protection arrangements. Children's Services (Education) can further contribute to MAPPA by:
|
|
|
3.48 | The duty to co-operate does not create a duty for LHAs to house offenders. |
3.49 | LHAs do have a role in providing information and allocating long-term accommodation to those entitled, who have become homeless through no fault of their own; this includes some offenders who can be classified as 'vulnerable' if they have spent time in custody. |
|
|
3.50 | This group includes Housing Associations and Trusts, Co-operatives and Companies. Only those which provide accommodation to MAPPA offenders have a requirement to co-operate - normally when considering the offer of housing to such an offender. |
|
|
3.51 | Links between these agencies and MAPPA are likely to be in the area of child protection. Children's Social Care under Section 47 of the Children Act 1989, has a duty to investigate and if needs be intervene in cases where it has 'reasonable cause to suspect' that a child might be suffering Significant Harm. |
|
|
3.52 | Mental Health Trusts are the most likely health agencies to be involved in MAPPA as their remit includes mentally disordered offenders, some of whom are MAPPA cases. |
3.53 | Liaison between criminal justice agencies and mental health agencies predates MAPPA by many years and such co-working will still apply in many non-MAPPA cases. |
3.54 | Complications may arise here because of the different way in which health professionals may work particularly regarding the issue of patient confidentiality. |
3.55 | In cases where such complications arise the need for senior representation from the health authority is important. Discussions with the Royal College of Psychiatrists' Forensic Faculty have highlighted the importance of clarity of role and authority. |
|
|
3.56 | These groups play an important part in the management of high-risk MAPPA cases. Their duty to co-operate is synonymous with their contractual responsibilities. |
3.57 | They may provide an input to MAPPA by advising about available electronic monitoring technology and its limitations and also giving advice to MAPPP meetings regarding the requirements of particular cases. |
|
|
3.58 |
Although not part of local MAPPA, certain central Home Office bodies are involved in procedures that are central to the processes of MAPPA. These include:
|
|
|
3.59 | Critical concepts in terms of information sharing are those of necessity and proportionality - that there must be a pressing public need for the information and the amount of information shared must only be that necessary to achieve the purpose for which it is being shared. |
3.60 | Different MAPPA agencies may have different policies about sharing of information about offenders involved in the MAPPA process. This may especially be the case for the health professionals who are governed by confidentiality clauses within their professional role. The duty imposed by s.325 does not create a requirement to disclose in all cases but provides a statutory gateway that permits disclosure when it is necessary. |
3.61 | It should be noted that s.96 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 contains specific provision to allow the Home Secretary to make regulations on the sharing of information on registered sex offenders including those held in hospital settings. |
3.62 | Further guidance from Annex B of the NHS code of practice states that information about a patient should not be used for any purpose 'except as originally understood by the confider'. |
3.63 | There are some cases where breach of confidentiality is justified 'where there is an over-riding public interest' e.g. to prevent and support detection, investigation and punishment of serious crime - defined as murder, manslaughter, rape, treason, serious public disorder, kidnapping and child abuse) |
3.64 | This can be achieved under s.60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2001 so long as whoever authorises disclosure makes a record of this providing clear evidence of the reasoning used and circumstances prevailing. Where possible the patient should be informed if such a procedure has taken place although in some cases such disclosure might not be considered safe. |
3.65 | MAPPA meeting minutes should remain confidential and only contain information strictly relevant to matters discussed. They should only be given to people who attended and further seen by those who have the duty to consider what was discussed and decided. |
3.66 | Requests for disclosure of MAPPA minutes by an offender can be made through her/his legal representative though there are some exemptions to the Data Protection Act when access can be refused. |
3.67 | A decision to refuse access for a given reason can be made by the Chair of the MAPPA meeting where the minutes were taken although where there is a lack of clarity about how to proceed, the responsible authority should seek legal advice. |
3.68 |
Information-sharing should be in accordance with the:
|
|
|
3.69 | All cases falling within the definitions contained in ss.67 and 68 of the CJCSA 2000 will be notified to the Thames Valley Police Public Protection Office Manager using the standard notification form (PP1). This also serves as the Level 2 and Level 3 MAPPA referral form for those cases assessed as meeting the criteria identified in pages 34 to 37 of the National MAPPA Guidance. |
3.70 | For prison and probation service offenders the joint prison / probation Offender Assessment System (OASys) is the principal risk assessment tool, in particular the risk of harm assessment. This assessment will trigger the need for specialist assessments. |
3.71 | The Risk Matrix 2000 is the principal tool for assessing risk of reconviction in adult male sex offenders and is used by the Police Public Protection Office to assess static risk for registered male sex offenders. The Spousal Assault Risk Assessment (SARA is the principal tool used by Probation for assessing risk in cases of domestic abuse. |
3.72 | Referrals under MAPPA can be made by any agency. It is essential that assessments are informed by consideration of the dynamic risk factors relevant in each case. |
3.73 | Professional judgement remains an essential ingredient in all risk assessments and for this reason active participation by a range of professionals at inter-agency meetings will be a vital part of the risk assessment and management process within MAPPA. |
3.74 | Following assessment, Thames Valley Police Public Protection Office will be notified of all relevant offenders (whatever the risk level), using the standard notification form (PP1). |
3.75 | If housing concerns are identified at this stage the Housing Information form (PP3) attached to the PP1, will also be completed and sent to the Public Protection Office and copied directly to the NPS-TV Housing Needs Team Manager. |
3.76 | It will be clear from the notification which cases are deemed to meet the criteria for consideration by a MAPPP. |
3.77 | The co-ordination panel will either confirm the assessment or require that further evidence be submitted before the appropriate risk and management level is agreed. |
3.78 | The Thames Valley Police Public Protection Office Manager will then distribute notifications to the appropriate MAPPA lead managers for inclusion on the agenda of the next meeting (or for the convening of an urgent meeting if required). |
3.79 | Cases which are identified as Level 1 will be included on the agenda for information only. |
3.80 | Cases identified as Level 3 will require that the designated senior managers are invited to attend and to chair the MAPPP. |
3.81 | In practice, agendas are likely to be constructed by Police Public Protection Officers (PPOs) but local variations may be agreed. Agendas and relevant papers will be sent to local MAPPA members by PPOs 7 days before the meeting (immediately if the meeting is to be convened urgently). |
3.82 | Referrals under MAPPA arising from applications to approved hostels within the Thames Valley Area from other probation areas, where there is no local supervising officer, will be the responsibility of the hostel manager or her/his deputy. |
3.83 | It is imperative that hostel managers keep their local senior probation officers informed of high risk referrals so that they may contribute to the hostel high risk referral panel. Chairs of MAPPA meetings must also be kept informed of the release dates including releases on temporary licences and parole dates. |
3.84 | Subsequent reviews of risk assessments may also trigger a change of risk management level. Such changes will be minuted and forwarded to the central Public Protection Office. |
|
|
3.85 | The lead officers from Police and Probation will share responsibility for acting as chair for Level 2 cases. They will ensure that those required to attend are provided with relevant information as far in advance as possible to enable their full participation. |
3.86 | To ensure timely planning for release of identified prisoners, all eligible custodial cases should be referred at the start of sentence or wherever possible at least 6 months prior to expected release. |
3.87 | In those cases where sentence length permits, referral should preferably be made at least 6 months prior to release. |
3.88 | For those cases considered to pose imminent risk on release, 12 months notice is normally required so that plans for additional resources relating to accommodation, surveillance, and community treatment may be sought. |
3.89 | The Area Manager responsible for prisons in the Thames Valley has established local procedures to ensure prisoners with release addresses in the area assessed by the prison service as meeting the MAPPA criteria, are referred to the relevant lead managers. |
3.90 | This will be particularly useful in those cases where there is no statutory licence and therefore no supervising probation officer in the community (see Prison Service MAPPA Protocol). |
3.91 | Each agency represented at meetings under MAPPA is required to follow this protocol. |
3.92 | At each meeting the chair will routinely draw members' attention to the 'information sharing fact sheet' which will be available at each meeting to clarify the position of each participant with respect to information sharing. The meeting should not proceed until each member present confirms that they have read, understood and are able to comply with the expectations outlined in the fact sheet. |
3.93 | Risk assessment information on all offenders referred under MAPPA will be copied in confidence to all those invited to attend the meeting. It will be made clear which cases are for full consideration (i.e. Level 2and Level 3 cases) and which are provided to enable agencies to contribute further information if available (Level 1). |
3.94 | Information copied to agencies prior to and after meetings will be sent using the most secure means available. This will require agencies to identify to PPOs precisely how this is to be achieved. Electronic exchange of information is not deemed to be sufficiently secure at the present time and will not, therefore, be acceptable unless security can be demonstrated. |
3.95 | There will be no discussion at the meeting of Level 1 cases where risk assessment details are supplied for information only, unless an agency present has additional information to offer which may affect the assessment. |
3.96 |
For Level 2 and Level 3 cases, discussion will be focused on the development of a strategy to reduce the risk posed and manage the offender in the community. The template entitled 'minutes initial meeting /-review (PP2) will guide discussion which will include consideration of the following:
|
3.97 | Each case considered under MAPPA will be fully and separately recorded and agreed action by individual agencies identified. No handwritten notes should be taken at the meeting except for official minute taking. Representatives at the meetings may take notes of any immediate action points they have agreed. |
3.98 | The timing of reviews will be noted on the minutes but will normally be no longer than every 6 months for Level 2 MARMM cases. This includes Level 2 cases that are managed jointly by police and probation. |
3.99 | The timing of reviews need to take into account the level of risk posed, how closely the case needs to be monitored and any intervention that is planned e.g. does the meeting need to consider progress during treatment or just post programme; and whether agencies are working together effectively. |
3.100 | Level 1 cases need to be reviewed by Police and Probation at least annually to monitor any changes. If there is an increase in risk level a review of the management plan needs to be considered. If this increases the agencies involved the MAPPA level will also be increased and the reasons for the change will be noted in the minutes. |
3.101 | Originals of recorded notes (PP2 and PP3) will be sent to the Thames Valley Police Public Protection Office Manager. Copies will be distributed to members by the chair of the meeting or the PPO depending on local arrangements. |
3.102 | Such notes will be in type-written form (word processed). While discussing each case consideration should be given about who else, outside the meeting, requires a copy of the minutes. For example, if an offender is visiting another area, a copy of the minutes would normally be sent to the corresponding MAPPA meeting Chair. |
3.103 | If an offender is considered by either a MARMM or a MAPPP, there must be a presumption in favour of informing her/him of this and its implications. |
3.104 | This should be an open, participative process where the offender is left in no doubt as to the focus of the work and the expectations on her/him for change within it and the sanctions to be applied throughout. |
3.105 | This open dialogue requires considerable skill and necessitates careful planning of the input, where it should take place, who should give it and with what support. |
3.106 | Careful consideration should be given to this disclosure and agreement to withhold it should only be given if the interests of public safety (including the safety of staff in the various agencies with whom the offender is likely to come into contact) or the protection of victims are deemed to override such disclosure. This decision must be clearly recorded on the PP2 form. |
3.107 | In order for the MAPPA list to remain up to date and accurate it is important that MARMMs consider removing names from the list, i.e. at the end of a prison or community penalty. However the converse is also essential to managing risk, i.e. to keep an offender on the agenda if they are considered to pose a high or very high risk of serious harm. |
|
|
3.108 |
Probation Circular 15/1999: 'Early Warning Mechanism for the Release or Discharge of Potentially Dangerous Offenders' advises that the early warning system i.e. referral to the Public Protection Unit (formerly Dangerous Offender Unit) should be triggered in those cases where there is a 'strong risk' that serious violent or sexual offending will be committed following release and:
|
|
|
3.109 | The Probation Service has a statutory duty to consult with victims of sexual or violent offenders sentenced to imprisonment of 12 months or more to provide information and to ascertain their views regarding release conditions. |
3.110 | The duty is performed by the Victim Contact Officer, who should be considered as a core member of any MARMM or MAPPP if there is a named victim. |
3.111 | If the case is managed by Probation, the case manager should have involved the Victim Contact Officer prior to any meeting. |
|
|
3.112 | A multi-agency SMB will oversee and review the operation of this protocol and will be responsible for the production of the annual report as per the MAPPA guidance (pp.45 - p.51). This group will also assist in organising necessary training identified under MAPPA but lead managers will be responsible for inducting new members locally. The SMB will conduct ad hoc and specifically requested individual case reviews. |
|
|
3.113 | Lay advisors are appointed to assist in the MAPPA review functions, not the operational decision making. They will operate as full members of the SMB although their role is very much part time. |
3.114 | It is expected that they will attend each of the SMB meetings - at least 4 each year, and undertake such familiarisation and reading to enable them to understand and contribute to these meetings. |
3.115 | The SMB will appoint a lead officer who will take responsibility for implementing the recruitment and training of lay advisors to the Thames Valley Area. |
|
|
3.116 |
The model highlights the needs to:
|
3.117 | The MAPPA process must engage effectively in accordance with the above. |
4. Developing Intelligence About Organised or Persistent Offenders
4.1 |
Each Public Protection Unit has an intelligence capability responsible and may:
|
5. Release and Temporary Release of Prisoners Convicted of Offences Against Children
Guidance on Offences against Children can be found by clicking on the following link: GOV.UK.
Release of Prisoners Convicted of Offences Against Children |
|
5.1 | When a prisoner convicted of offences against a child is to be released at the end of her/his sentence the director of Children's Social Care and chief probation officer must, prior to the release date, be informed by the prison probation officer. |
5.2 | If there are children at the household where the prisoner intends to live, a Section 47 Enquiry must be initiated (see Section 47 Enquiries Procedure). |
|
|
5.3 | When a prisoner convicted of offences against a child is being considered for parole or is to be released from custody on a temporary basis, the prison probation officer must, in writing inform the director of Children's Social Care of the area where the prisoner is expected to reside on release, with a copy sent to the chief probation officer for the area concerned. |
5.4 | Where the prisoner is being considered for parole, the prison probation officer must request comments from the director of Children's Social Care on the prisoner's release with particular reference to the effects which release could have upon any children at the address at which the prisoner is expected to live. |
5.5 | Probation staff must interview those living at the address to assess the home circumstances and, if appropriate authorise the provision of accommodation to the prisoner. |
5.6 | Depending on the risk involved, probation staff may conduct a home visit jointly with the police. |
5.7 | The significance of the offence/s for any child living or likely to visit the address must be established and Children's Social Care informed. |
5.8 | For any child identified by the probation officer as either living or likely to visit the address, the social worker must undertake an assessment of potential risk in relation to the release of the prisoner. |
5.9 | The social worker must identify in writing any child protection issues arising from the proposed release of a prisoner to a specified address and indicate any action that Children's Social Care may need to undertake to protect the child/ren in the household. |
5.10 | The probation officer for the local area must share her/his report with the appropriate Children's Social Care. |
5.11 | If the prisoner is to be released to an address with a child/ren, a Section 47 Enquiry must be initiated (see Section 47 Enquiries Procedure). |
|
|
5.12 | These procedures should be considered along with those about abuse by children (see Abuse by Children Procedure). |
5.13 | There is a need to distinguish between those young people under the age of 18 who pose a significant risk to children and those who do not and where the circumstances of the offence do not indicate on-going child protection concerns e.g. unlawful consensual sexual intercourse between children of a similar age. |
5.14 | Both the police and the appropriate worker from YOT must notify Children's Social Care whenever a young person is accused of, or convicted of an offence against a child (including but not limited to Sch.1) and assess if there is immediate risk to any child/ren in the household or community. |
5.15 | Children's Social Care team/group manager must decide if any immediate action is necessary to protect the children. |
5.16 |
Within 10 working days of conviction, the YOT worker must:
|
5.17 | The team/group manager must consider whether a Section 47 Enquiry or Child and Family Single Assessment should be commenced. If s/he concludes further assessment is not required, a recommendation must be made to the service manager, and the resulting decision must be recorded on both Children's Social Care and YOT files. |
5.18 | Where there are convictions for sexual offences, there may be a requirement for registration on the Sex Offender's Register. In these circumstances, the YOT report and any Children's Social Care assessment and recommendations will be considered via MAPPA. |
6. Identified Offenders & Others Who May Pose a Risk to Children
Recognition |
|
6.1 |
Indicators of people who may pose a risk to children include:
|
|
|
6.2 |
On notification or discovery of a person who may pose a risk to children, Children's Social Care must treat this information as a child protection referral and instigate a Section 47 Enquiry:
|
6.3 |
Checks (including the prison service that may hold important information) must be undertaken to establish:
|
6.4 |
All assessments of risk must consider the:
|
6.5 | A Child Protection Conference must be convened if the threshold criteria are met - see Child Protection Conferences Procedure and if any child/ren require continuing protection, therapeutic intervention or family support services. |
|
|
6.6 | This procedure applies when disclosure to 3rd parties of an offender / suspected offender's previous history is being considered. |
6.7 |
Subject to the conditions set out in the Information Sharing and Confidentiality Procedure, the general presumption is that information should not normally be disclosed, except if 1 of the following applies:
|
6.8 | Legal advice should be sought where doubt exists as to the lawfulness of disclosure. |
6.9 | Absence of a conviction for child abuse in a criminal court does not prevent a local authority from informing parents or carers of the potential risk posed by someone who is honestly believed on reasonable grounds to have abused other children. |
6.10 |
Generally the risk assessment for disclosure of information on convicted abusers will be led by the Police and Probation service (see MAPPA), but Children's Social Care may need to consider the risk also of those alleged abusers who:
|
6.11 | In view of the possibility of legal challenge by the individual concerned or a future victim, all agencies must, in addition to seeking any legal advice required maintain a written audit trail of events, actions, discussions, decisions and the reasons for them. |
|
|
6.12 | Prior to any decision by Children's Social Care to disclose information, a risk assessment must be undertaken, in order to establish what risks the person poses to children in the prevailing circumstances and the risks associated with disclosure. |
6.13 | The risk assessment and management of alleged / suspected offenders will usually be through MAPPA. Children's Social Care has a particular role to play when an individual is setting up home with a new partner who has children. |
6.14 |
The risk assessment must consider both enduring and changeable factors and take account of:
|
6.15 |
The risk assessment must also consider the following risks:
|
6.16 | Where possible, the individual should be consulted to provide information to assist the risk assessment. |
6.17 | The individual should be given the opportunity to challenge the information on which the decision to disclose is being made, and the response considered as part of the risk assessment. |
6.18 | The child protection manager and legal department must be consulted regarding the possibility of disclosure and the decision taken by the service manager, in consultation with Police and Probation at a Strategy Meeting. |
6.19 | If the Police do not support any planned disclosure based on the potential risk to an identified child, further legal advice must be taken. |
|
|
6.20 | Each decision to disclose must be justified on the likelihood of harm which non-disclosure might otherwise cause and the pressing need for such a disclosure. |
6.21 |
Consideration must be given to other, less intrusive methods that might achieve any required objectives:
|
6.22 |
Where a decision to disclose is agreed, the risk management process must consider at a strategy meeting:
|
6.23 |
Following disclosure, the social worker, police or probation officer must note:
|
7. Visits by Children to High Secure Hospitals & Prisons
7.1 | High secure (formerly known as special) hospitals have a duty to implement child protection policies, liaise with their safeguarding partnership, provide safe venues for children's visits and provide nominated officers to oversee assessment of whether visits by specific children would be in their best interests. Many prisons now operate a similar system in relation to sex offenders and other dangerous offenders. |
7.2 | Children's Social Care must assist staff in high secure hospitals to carry out their responsibilities in relation to the assessment [LAC (99) 23 amended by LAC (2000)18]. |
7.3 | With respect to visits by children to patients who have mental health difficulties and are in local non-special hospitals (including those detained under the Mental Health Act 1983), the onus for risk assessments lies with the Mental Health Trust. |
7.4 | Offenders against children, those found unfit to be tried, or not guilty by reasons of insanity, in respect of murder, manslaughter or a 'Schedule 1 offence' will only be eligible for a visit if within the permitted categories of relationship. |
7.5 |
The nominated officer of the relevant hospital must contact a person with Parental Responsibility for the child to:
|
7.6 | A clinical assessment of the patient must be undertaken by the hospital. If clinical findings are supportive of the visit and the person with parental responsibility agrees, Children's Social Care must be asked to assess if the visit is in the child's best interests. The clinical assessment should be provided to the local authority. |
|
|
7.7 |
On receiving the request for an assessment, the social worker must:
|
7.8 |
Children's Social Care' assessment should establish:
|
|
|
7.9 | The assessment must be completed within 1 month of the referral and the report sent to the nominated officer at the high secure hospital stating whether, in the opinion of Children's Social Care, the visit would be in the best interests of the child. A copy must be sent to the child protection manager. |
7.10 |
The decision should take account of the:
|
7.11 | If the person with Parental Responsibility refuses to co-operate with the assessment and no information is known about the child, the nominated officer must be informed that a report cannot be provided. |
7.12 | Where the child is known to Children's Social Care information from records may be supplied with the agreement of the person with parental responsibility. |
|
|
7.13 |
There following are the circumstances in which the nominated officer must refuse to allow a child to visit. These are if:
|
|
|
7.14 | All requests for assessments and their outcomes should be reported to MK Together Partnership on a quarterly basis. |