BEST PRACTICE IN COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP TO REDUCE YOUTH OFFENDING (Lessons Learned from Eight Years of Practice)

Transcription

1 BEST PRACTICE IN COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP TO REDUCE YOUTH OFFENDING (Lessons Learned from Eight Years of Practice) Steve Armitage Youth Justice Program, Families, Youth and Community Care Queensland Paper presented at the Conference Reducing Criminality: Partnerships and Best Practice convened by the Australian Institute of Criminology, in association with the WA Ministry of Justice, Department of Local Government, Western Australian Police Service and Safer WA and held in Perth 31 July and 1 August 2000 Disclaimer: The views expressed in this paper are not a formal statement of Queensland Government Policy

2 Abstract The paper will discuss the issues that have emerged from eight years of partnership between the State Government and the youth sector in Queensland in implementing programs to address the needs of young people at risk of entering the youth justice system. Given the experience and insight that has developed over this time the Department has been able to adopt a more proactive approach to developing collaborative projects targeting specific community concerns. To illustrate best practice in crime prevention, the Ipswich Project will be examined in detail as an example of intersectorial collaboration to develop and implement a project with a bottom up approach across the community and all levels of government. By integrating the key elements of situational and social crime prevention and early intervention this project represents a balanced approach to reducing youth offending within the targeted area. 2

3 Introduction It is apparent that assisting individuals to develop positive personal and social attachments early in life, inhibits the development of criminal behaviour and reduces the risks of crime occurring. What is required, then, is not simply short-term thinking that accompanies arguments of punishment and retribution, but rather, long-term thinking about crime prevention, by positively connecting individuals to their communities, through inclusion, opportunity and social participation. Knowing about the benefits of social cohesion, it makes sense that building the capacity of the community to enhance the positive integration of individuals is both a constructive and proactive approach to crime prevention. This way, crime (and those most at risk of offending) can be targeted before it s too late, with the result that less people should come into contact with the justice system. Background Over the eight years that the Queensland Government has been involved in youth crime prevention programs, significant learning has occurred. In 1992, the Queensland Cabinet decided upon a Juvenile Justice Strategy that included as a primary component, a statewide juvenile crime prevention program targeting year olds. Research at the time highlighted that: 1. There was no single theory that adequately explained juvenile offending. 2. Juvenile crime appeared to flourish in areas of rapid urban growth adjacent to major regional centres. 3. The financial costs of juvenile crime exceeding $25M per annum in Queensland were significant. Against this backdrop, the then Department of Family Services and Aboriginal and Islander Affairs looked at evidence from Australia and overseas, to develop a strategy that would address a situation, which was not only costly in terms of dollars, but also in terms of disruption to people s lives. To implement this, four departments Family Services and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs, Education, Police and Health came together to establish a coordinated inter-sectorial program. The strategy finally became known as the Youth And Community Combined Action program (subsequently referred to as YACCA). YACCA, was based on the French Bonnemasion program - a co-operative model involving all levels of government, the community sector and the participation of young people. The intent was a proactive, integrated package that would present challenging activities and experiences to marginalised young people. The package offered a planned approach to preventing crime by involving local communities in reaching young people at risk and diverting them toward constructive and productive prosocial activities and called for the cooperation and participation of young people, their parents, local schools and police, local traders and prominent citizens, churches and civic organisations. 3

4 The package envisaged a combination of community based development activity concurrent with direct situational crime prevention strategies to bring about both short and long term outcomes. The Model A two tier funding model was developed with Community Activity Projects and Neighbourhood Youth Projects. It was proposed that Community Activity Projects (CAP) be established in hot spot locations. These operate in 16 locations. Neighbourhood Youth Projects, with a significantly higher level of funding, on the other hand, were established in areas where high rates of crime were experienced but were not serviced by existing youth agencies. These are based in four locations - two in the Brisbane area and the others at Townsville and Mackay which are major regional centres. The thinking was that this would result in projects that could: analyse the nature and probable causes of local youth crime; form a locally appropriate auspice committee to include participants from relevant agencies, community groups, parents and young people; design and conduct a range of activities aimed at reducing local youth crime; Additionally, the Mainstream Youth Organisation Task Force was funded to use existing networks of mainstream youth organisations to involve marginalised young people in age appropriate activities and also broaden the historical target group for these organisations. At its inception in1993, YACCA had an annual budget of $1.5M. Program Development In October 1992, the first YACCA paper was published. The intent and direction was to collaboratively develop a number of innovative local level responses that were attractive to young people and strengthened the bond between young people and their communities, including sharing resources, skills, expertise and ideas. Suggested activities set out in that paper included: Development of employment related opportunities; ie vocational skills development Skills development; ie personal skills, literacy, living skills etc Recreational activities. ie outdoor adventure activities, canoeing, abseiling, camping, sport, discos, music, art, mural painting etc. The principle of strengthening communities to respond to the factors that predispose young people to offending behaviour and promote social integration was captured at a policy level. The intent however, did not readily translate into the first set guidelines developed for the program. 4

5 At one level the Department was stressing the need for inter-sectorial collaboration, while at the same time encouraging sections of the community to form small working parties, identify community issues and become an incorporated body to receive funding. What resulted was a range of small organisations across the State essentially operating in isolation. Many of the people, while very well intentioned, had limited understanding of what was required to implement a crime prevention program, limited understanding of government processes and no infrastructure to support a community based project. When an evaluation of YACCA was conducted by Griffith University, two critical issues emerged in the report published in January If the goal of YACCA is crime prevention, this needs to be addressed concurrently and directly as part of all program and project policies and measures. 2. It is critical that the Department clarify the primary goal(s) of YACCA as to whether funds are to provide broad brush community based activities for all youth as part of the development of community infrastructure and/or whether YACCA is seeking to reduce the rate of crime among disadvantaged people who may offend or who have offended and those currently before the justice system. It was also recommended that relevant crime prevention information be provided to service providers, management committees and departmental staff involved in the program. Other findings included: The diversity of YACCA projects: Few communities had knowledge of crime prevention solutions that have worked in similar contexts. Communities were encouraged to develop projects based mainly on what marginalised young people stated they needed. As a result, communities generally adopted a scatter gun approach which may be more appropriately classed as the development of general community infrastructure. This may not impact on the involvement of young people in crime. The very general criteria for the acceptance of young people into projects. In the majority of instances, services had recruited young people who were unlikely to ever come into contact with the judicial system. Project workers were unclear about the role played by the Department. Some projects were confused about their reporting relationship and whether requests for information were appropriate. Some projects reported receiving conflicting information from departmental staff at all levels. Training: Training was provided largely from the perspective of youth work. There had been little emphasis on techniques for community based development programs and little consideration of approaches to crime prevention. Between 1992 and 1997 the program had suffered from significant drift The Department attempted to address this by changing the guidelines. However, it failed to introduce any form of analysis into establishing what was working. The program moved from an outcome statement which in 1992 was to reduce the levels of juvenile offending in targeted high crime rate areas and increase community participation in crime prevention activities, to three broad output statements: 5

6 1. Broad community participation and action 2. Activities directed at primary crime prevention 3. Activities directed at early intervention in local crime problems While they appear similar, these outputs came with a rider, The extent to which individual projects focus on each output area will be determined by agreement with the management committee and the local Community Advisory Group. While the concept of having some sort of advisory or planning group had always been with the programs, it was formalised in Unfortunately, establishing a Community Advisory Group was the performance measure of Output 1 Broad Community support. As previously stated, a large number of services were small organisations, with one independent youth crime prevention worker who operated fairly autonomously. The establishment of the advisory groups was an enormous challenge and has remained so, as the youth crime prevention worker has generally failed to rally the strategic support from local government, other government agencies and the wider community. In 1997 an internal review examined the extent to which YACCA were addressing the issue of youth crime and the impact of the new guidelines. This report Future Directions in the Youth and Community Combined Action (YACCA) Program set out some directions and focus for YACCA services. The process attempted to refocus service delivery into the area of crime prevention, early intervention and strategies to enhance community participation in issues connected with juvenile offending. The review and subsequent report actually did little more than make some assertions that organisations are making progress towards meeting the requirements of the 1997 YACCA funding guidelines. It also stated that Extensive and ongoing program development and service level resourcing and support was required to ensure that the YACCA program achieves its stated aim of preventing contact by at-risk young people with the juvenile justice system. The departmental response was to spend the following 12 months attempting to bring about a revised focus and developmental approach at service level. However, training and specific information on crime prevention was not introduced as part of the process. The focus was almost exclusively on the development of new data collection methods. While parts of the program were struggling to maintain any crime prevention focus, others had very clear directions and were making (and continue to make) a significant impact. As an example I would like to give a quick overview of the YACCA program in Mackay, a town of some 80,000 on the coast of Central Queensland with large Indigenous and South Sea Islander communities. Established in 1992, this project saw itself from the outset as a crime prevention service. The people involved set about establishing a reference group for the service, whose membership still consists of, local council, business representatives, senior police and judicial staff, representatives of government agencies, school staff, Indigenous representatives and the general community. This group receives input from a youth reference group who offer advice based on consultations with other young people. 6

7 Planning has always taken place in a strategic way. Short and long term outcomes are systematically planned. There are very culturally diverse target groups, with participants from young children to older youth, family members and the wider community. Currently, the project offers the following activities: life skills programs, programs to reconnect young people with school, youth leadership programs, camps and adventure activities, literacy and numeracy classes, discos, alcohol and drug work-shops, youth employment initiatives, vocational training, cultural activities. All activities are available for Indigenous youth, specific South Sea Island groups and the wider community. Currently, they are working alongside TAFE who as part of an international cultural exchange have available traditional artists from the Solomon Islands and Vanuatu who are teaching the young people traditional carving techniques. But the point is, as an organisation they have been able to strategically respond to the changing needs of the community while remaining firmly focussed on the factors that contribute to youth crime. With a high level reference group, they have been able to attract funds from a range of State and Federal Government Departments and have developed into a highly credible community organisation which is achieving significant measurable outcomes in reducing the numbers of young people offending. But, to get back to the topic at hand, 1998 saw significant changes on a number of levels. In 1998, a new State Government came to power on a platform of being tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime. Building Safer Communities was a major component of the Government s overall approach to crime. This strategy encompassed, Community Renewal, School Programs to address truancy and bullying, parenting programs, violence against women, improved policing, youth offending, employment and violence in Indigenous communities. The strategy has six basic principles: 1. Community Involvement and Ownership Local communities are most closely involved with their own problems and with appropriate support are best placed to develop solutions. 2. Working Better and Working Together No single institution or agency can prevent crime. To be successful, crime prevention initiatives need to be thoroughly planned with a focus on integrated and coordinated service delivery at a local level. 7

8 3. A Comprehensive Approach Research indicated that the most effective way to tackle crime is through a mix of developmental, community, situational and criminal justice approaches: 4. A Focus on people and Places Interventions need to be targeted at individuals, groups or places that are more at risk of crime or victimisation. 5. Value for Money The sharing of responsibility for crime and its prevention calls for the development of new funding models and a partnership of funding sources. 6. A Focus on Outcomes and on What Works Crime prevention initiatives should focus on crime prevention outcomes, while seeking to maximise other benefits and outcomes. As a consequence, changes took place within the Department. One of these changes was the transfer of YACCA from the Office of Youth Affairs to the Youth Justice Program - a move that created the opportunity to focus YACCA more specifically upon issues of youth crime and its prevention. Youth Crime Prevention Forum In August 1999, the Department hosted a Youth Crime Prevention Forum as part of the process of bringing the prevention of youth crime to the fore and refocus the YACCA program. The Forum was the first attempt to bring all interested parties together. A range of speakers presented material that examined: current responses and research into the nature and extent of youth crime; responses and research into methods of deterring youth crime; current practice issues; and showcased some examples of current programs. It also brought together a wide cross section from state government departments, local government, community organisations, representatives of the Indigenous community, academics and interested community people. Bringing together a wide range of stakeholders also highlighted the need to develop a coordinated response to youth offending and that programs needed to be informed by a range of different views to fully ensure a holistic service delivery response. The theme of the forum was one of developing partnerships with all stakeholders, including families and young people. A number of workshops looked at topics around the concept of partnership. These included: what were the important elements, what would indicate a successful partnerships and what outcomes should and could result from these. 8

9 Issues raised at the forum included: 1. Young people need to be active partners. 2. The over-representation of Indigenous young people in the juvenile justice system needs to be addressed. 3. Information on crime prevention, projects and programs needs to more accessible to the broader community. 4. Cross government partnerships need to be enhanced. 5. The involvement of families needs to be promoted. New Initiatives The youth crime component of the new Government strategy was additional funding of $3.5M over four years resulting in new services in Ipswich, Hervey Bay, North Queensland and Woorabinda and the establishment of a non-recurrent grants program. New program guidelines consistent with the Whole of Government Strategy have been developed focussing on achieving specific outcomes. The non-recurrent grants program has given communities the opportunity to experiment with innovative approaches to offending. We recognise that the local community is best placed to identify their youth offending issues and implement strategies particular to that location. In the first year 22 projects were funded with some very exciting and promising outcomes such as: Innisfail Police Citizens Youth Club: Youth Leadership Project (Funding $12,500) This project centres around the personal development and promotion of young people. It incorporates cultural activities, life skills and substance abuse education and gives participants the opportunity to become role models and mentors to other young people. Initiated by the Queensland police and commencing in September 1999, the project was a response to repeated contact with the same group of young people. Rather than repeatedly processing these young people through the juvenile justice system, the police proactively sought to target this group through a preventative program supplemented with camps, sport, and community activities. Program participants include, police, police liaison officers, Indigenous Elders, school staff and other youth organisations. 31 young people (18 indigenous and 13 non-indigenous) participated. To date none have offended or reoffended. The young people through their own mentoring process positively deal with unacceptable behaviour. This project is going to be continued with funding from the Police. A similar project is now being implemented by the Cairns police. 9

10 Booringa Shire Council: Personal Development Project (Funding $25,000 (a community in western queensland) Activities are provided to young people across the shire through programs coordinated by the rural youth worker. Activities and workshops were developed in response to issues identified through community consultations and endorsed by the Booringa Youth Council. Sixty young people have participated to date in workshops focusing on substance abuse, sexual health, anger management, life skills, parent education and employment skills. Additionally, recreational activities and excursions occur throughout the shire. Again there has been a significant reduction in youth offending. Funding Program Development The Youth Justice Program has examined literature and held discussions with practitioners and academics from Australia and overseas and participated in the State level Crime Prevention Evaluation. This elicited information from all services and projects on the types of outcomes they are achieving, which along with information supplied by services and nonrecurrent projects informed the development of clear outcomes for funded originations. Which are: 1. Community responses are developed to address the criminogenic 1 needs of young people. 2. Young people develop skills to participate positively in their community. 3. Reduction in the rate of youth offending. 4. Reduction in the over-representation of Indigenous young people in the Juvenile Justice System, particularly in custody. These outcomes hopefully capture the full scope of programs funded by the Youth Justice Program and ensure that crime prevention is a targeted outcome focused program. This outcomes focus coincided with calls from particular communities to increase the scope of youth crime prevention activities in their areas. One such community was Ipswich, 40 km west of Brisbane, a predominantly working class city with a strong coal mining history. Similar to many such cities, Ipswich has, over time, become a relatively low socio-economic area, affected by rising unemployment, in particular, youth unemployment, an increasing substance abuse problem, an expanding cultural mix, and a substantial incidence of crime. Compounding these issues, is the high proportion of the State s correctional institutions (both adult and juvenile) located in close proximity. Ipswich was also a strategic location for the new service in other ways. It was reflective of the new Youth Justice Program s changed focus. One of the three pilot Youth Justice Services for young people subject to supervised court orders had been established here. Rather than distribute funds to individual and isolated agencies, the Youth Justice Program commenced discussions with the Ipswich City Council which, as a larger, over-arching organisation, had the capacity to value add and enhance the effectiveness of the project. It also had a very active Community Services Department with considerable infrastructure, support workers and the ability to manage and coordinate a large scale cross-government community crime prevention project. 1 Criminogenic refers to the factors contributing to or underpinning offending behaviour. 10

11 The Council identified the suburb of Goodna as the area of most need as it is recognised as a severely disadvantaged area, predominantly public housing with little in the way of social infrastructure such as transport, shopping or other services. Consultation with community members, local organisations and government agencies identified a range of concerns: High levels of both adult and youth crime High levels of child abuse notifications High incidence of households where an adult of juvenile member is incarcerated High incidence of rent defaults High levels of truancy, school exclusion and expulsion High domestic violence notifications High incidence of both youth and adult substance abuse The list goes on. It became progressively evident throughout consultations that there were going to be no easy answers for this community. The need for action was endorsed by the local Regional Managers of Government Forum, a body made up of all government agencies within that State region, who formed a subcommittee to develop a local crime prevention action plan and made a commitment to oversee the implementation of this plan and ensure that community action resulted. Senior officers from the Queensland Police Service, Education Queensland, Queensland Health, Department of Corrections, Department of Employment Training and Industrial Relations, Department of Tourism Sport and Racing, Department of Housing, and Families Youth and Community Care Queensland are members of the crime prevention sub-committee. Representation has also been secured, from both the Ipswich City Council and the University of Queensland, Ipswich Campus. Consultations with the local community confirmed the following: The need for a holistic approach involving collaborative effort of both the state and local government, with community leaders and community based organisations; The need for the two levels of government to support and contribute to Community Capacity Building; The need to ensure that funding arrangements do not mitigate against place management at a local level; The need to ensure that the work of both government and non-government organisations are better coordinated and in synchronisation with each other; The need to ensure that dollars and resources can be pooled to attack problems at the place level; The crime prevention action plan is an integrated crime prevention strategy that assumes a highly proactive and collaborative approach. The strategy contains the following objectives: To facilitate the collaboration and integration of government and non-government agencies, in order to provide a range of activities/services which will ensure support to and development of protective factors for young people (10 16 years) who are at risk; 11

12 To support the development of appropriate local crime prevention responses which involve key stakeholders and which also develop the community s capacity to respond to local issues; To develop activities/services which increase young people s attachment to their community by developing their personal and cultural identity, pride and sense of belonging; To undertake a range of local developmental crime prevention activities which provide and build upon the social responsibilities of young people; To develop a demonstration project that has the capacity to set best practice standards for the State; To build upon crime prevention activities encapsulated in the community renewal action plan, in partnership with the local community and key stakeholders. The strategy aims to: Reduce the level of youth crime; Reduce the need for formal child protection intervention; Encourage school attendance; Reduce rent defaults and evictions; Increase employment levels; Reduce the level of substance abuse; Promote community well being; Build the community s capacity to address local issues. The plan is to focus on the Goodna community and, over time, to expand throughout the broader Ipswich region. Through the efforts of the Regional Managers Forum we have been able to realise a budget of nearly $600,000 over three years. The strategy also contains an ongoing evaluation by the University of Queensland. The project will build on the excellent work being done by the youth and community development sections of the Ipswich City Council, leaving project staff free to focus on the crime prevention action plan. Also, through the Regional Managers Forum, a research and facilitation position will be linked to the project. This worker will focus on research and documentation of the processes and will be responsible for training managers and community members in collaborative planning processes. The combination of the YACCA background scan and current research has brought this project to fruition with some increased understanding around what works. 12

13 We have established that crime prevention is best achieved through: Integrated service delivery; The coordinated activities of all levels of government; Not sitting back and expecting one or two players to do the work; and Encouraging and enabling agencies to develop collaborative arrangements. We have learnt that, if we want to prevent crime, we need to recognise that high levels of youth crime (along with family breakdown, drugs, health problems and so on) is consequential of community dysfunction, most predominantly brought about by economic disadvantage. Therefore, to realistically prevent crime, we need to focus our energies upon targeting economic disadvantage at the community level in all of its various manifestations, such as education, employment, housing, health etc. The Ipswich project then: Is about reviving the local economy through business development and increased employment opportunities; Is about ensuring that residents have equal access to educational facilities and opportunities; Is about ensuring a coordinated and collaborative approach to resource and service allocation; Is about equal access to health and mental health services; Is about coordination at all levels of government including the regional management level where priorities and decision making emanate; Is about collaboration and integration across government, community and business; Is about long term social planning and development that is mindful of crime reduction principles; Is about building in evaluation rigour; Is about using examples of what works from a wide range of sources; and In total, it s about building the capacity of the community to better meet the economic and lifestyle needs of its population to ensure that the factors which predispose young people to offending are significantly reduced. Ipswich, as a microcosm of the State, demonstrates the effectiveness of linking all levels of youth justice intervention, from crime prevention through to post detention services. The strategy brings together regional heads of government from a broad range of departments. It encourages a united and coordinated approach to both policy and resource development in this target area. This means that decision making and resource allocation with regard to housing, health, policing, justice, child protection, education, recreation, employment and so on, is integrated and concerned with issues of community capacity building and crime prevention. While the Ipswich project is still very much in its infancy, there is much promise in the partnerships that have emerged and the direction that this is taking, And, in closing, in Queensland, we are serious about the prevention of crime. We intend to keep it firmly on the community agenda and to meet the challenges that arise. 13