Lambeth Youth Offending Service (YOS) had worked hard to improve but needed to do more, said Paul McDowell, Chief Inspector of Probation. Today he published the report of a recent joint inspection of the work of Lambeth YOS.

This joint inspection of youth offending work in Lambeth is one of a small number of full joint inspections undertaken by HM Inspectorate of Probation with colleagues from the criminal justice, social care, education and health inspectorates. Inspectors focused on six key areas: reducing reoffending, protecting the public, protecting children and young people, ensuring that the sentence is served, the effectiveness of governance and the delivery of interventions.

Recently Lambeth had achieved a reduction in the number of children and young people entering the youth justice system. However, reoffending rates remained high. The published rate for children and young people in Lambeth at the time of the inspection was 42.5%, worse than the average performance for England and Wales (35.4%).

Inspectors were concerned to find that:

• work to reduce reoffending was unsatisfactory. Insufficient priority was given to reducing reoffending and the ongoing churn in staff turnover prevented effective continuity of delivery. Initial assessments were largely done well and health service provision was generally good but there was a lack of substance misuse provision;
• work to protect the public and actual or potential victims was unsatisfactory. Assessments and plans to reduce the risk of harm some children and young people posed were underdeveloped. Victim work had recently become more coordinated and YOS police officers and case managers worked well together;
• work to protect children and young people and reduce their vulnerability was unsatisfactory. It continued to suffer from long-standing gaps in staffing. A number of case managers did not fully understand how to make referrals to the local authority when there were safeguarding concerns and management oversight was not always effective;
• the effectiveness of governance and partnership arrangements was unsatisfactory. Long-standing workforce problems had not been dealt with, and while a strategy was in development, it had not been finalised. The Board regularly monitored the YOS performance and it was encouraging to see a local target around education, training and employment; and
• the management and delivery of interventions to reduce reoffending was unsatisfactory. There was a range of appropriate interventions available to children and young people and staff members delivering them were skilled practitioners. However, often the planned interventions were not delivered.

Inspectors were, however, pleased to find that:

• work to ensure that the sentence was served was good. The contribution of health provision was very good in most areas and making a difference. Case managers established good relationships with children and young people and their parents/carers. Innovative interventions were used to overcome barriers to engagement, and the YOS took appropriate enforcement action when required.

Inspectors made recommendations to assist Lambeth in its continuing improvement, including: resolving workforce management and staffing issues, updating safeguarding training for YOS staff, ensuring reoffending is reduced, and improving management oversight.

Paul McDowell said:

“Since the last inspection in 2011, Lambeth Youth Offending Service had made encouraging progress. While it had not yet achieved an overall satisfactory level of performance there was evidence to show that the YOS had worked hard to improve its service delivery. YOS staff were enthusiastic about their work and showed considerable skill in being able to positively engage with children and young people and their parents/carers. We found a commitment from partner agencies to invest in the work of the YOS but the absence of a workforce strategy to address an alarming trend in staff turnover, vacancies and the use of short term agency staff left the YOS in a precarious situation. These workforce issues must be dealt with as a matter of urgency, and until they are there will remain deficits in effective governance, safeguarding work, reducing reoffending and public protection.”

– ENDS –

NOTES TO EDITORS

1. The report is available at http://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprobation from 7 January 2015.
2. The inspection programme of youth offending work, based on a risk-proportionate approach, was agreed by ministers in December 2011. Under this programme, full joint inspections are targeted primarily on areas where there are significant concerns about the effectiveness of youth offending work, based primarily on the three national youth justice indicators, supplemented by other measures, such as recent inspections. Occasional inspections are undertaken in areas that report high performance, in order to maintain a benchmark for good practice. Inspectors chose to inspect Lambeth YOS because of the long-standing performance concerns by the Youth Justice Board, which in turn have led to support being provided.
3. These inspections focus on issues not subject to other forms of external scrutiny: work to reduce offending and re-offending by young people; the management and minimisation of the risk of harm that a young person may pose to other people; safeguarding young people from harm (from their own actions and others); and work to ensure they serve their sentence.
4. The inspections are led by HMI Probation, with participation by Ofsted, CQC and HMI Constabulary (and in Wales by the corresponding Welsh inspectorates, Healthcare Inspectorate Wales, Estyn and Care and Social Services Inspectorate Wales).

For further information or to request an interview, please contact Jane Parsons at HMI Probation on 020 3681 2775 or 07880 787452.