Progress Report on. Garda Youth Diversion Project Development

Transcription

1 Progress Report on Garda Youth Diversion Project Development

2 Report compiled by: Community Programmes Unit Irish Youth Justice Service Department of Justice and Equality Investing in Your Future

3 The report gives a summary of Garda Youth Diversion Project (GYDP) developments since 2009 and also provides national statistical information captured electronically by projects in 4 quarterly performance reports during The Community Programmes Unit of the Irish Youth Justice Service wishes to acknowledge the co-operation and effort by all stakeholders to enable this report to be generated. This report can be accessed via the Irish Youth Justice Website and the Department of Justice and Equality website [email protected] Community Programmes Unit Irish Youth Justice Service Department of Justice and Equality Mespil Rd Dublin 4 Tel (01) [email protected] 2

4 Contents Page Introduction Statistics Summary 7 Overview of Garda Youth Diversion Projects (GYDP) 8 Funding 8 GYDP Development Annual Planning and Reporting 11 Training 12 Online Learning Community 12 Risk Assessment 12 Trial Site Initiative 13 European Social Fund and Garda Youth Diversion 14 Projects Statistics for Programmes delivered by GYDPs 23 Examples of outcomes for participants 27 Progress Report on Garda Youth Diversion Project Developments

5 Introduction Introduction The first 2 Garda Youth Diversion Projects (GYDPs) were established in Since then there has been a steady growth and by 2008, 100 projects were in operation. The plan under the then Programme for Government was to establish a further 68 during the lifetime of that Programme but that expansion was halted due to the economic downturn. GYDPs fulfil many necessary functions, but their primary mission is to directly impact on youth crime which distinguishes them from other youth service interventions and underlines the logic for Department of Justice and Equality investment. Since 2009, the Irish Youth Justice Service (IYJS) and the Garda Office for Children and Youth Affairs (GOCYA) have undertaken a major programme of development and reform in partnership with GYDPs and Community Based Organisations (CBOs) which manage the projects. The focus of the programme has been to improve the effectiveness of the projects which, in turn will have a positive impact on reducing crime in the communities they service and support improvements in the lives of the participants attending the projects and their families. GYDPs specific aim is to support An Garda Síochána at local level by impacting upon the attitudes, behaviours and circumstances that give rise to youth offending. Projects are located in one hundred communities across the country and focus their attention on a priority group of young people who appear to be establishing a pattern of repeat offending. The majority of participants are identified by the local Gardaí. Project interventions are planned following a detailed annual examination of local youth crime patterns by local project staff and Gardaí. This process ensures that each planned programme of interventions is based on sound evidence and can demonstrate clearly how project activity intends to impact youth crime. Professionals in GYDPs typically concentrate on establishing and building relationships with targeted young people, planning positive outcomes but also challenging their offending behaviour and addressing their needs. Over the last three years, data from the Annual reports of the Committee appointed to Monitor the Effectiveness of the Diversion Programme suggests strongly that there has been a marked decrease in youth crime. While specific attribution for the apparent reduction is complex, we believe the role of the Diversion Programme with support from the GYDPs cannot be understated. Certainly GYDPs support the key policy message of detention as a last resort contained in the Children Act 2001 (as amended). Without these types of interventions it is likely that more young people will end up before the courts. However, of equal importance, their focus and the quality of interventions also builds public confidence in the capacity of community based interventions to reduce crime. 6

6 2011 Statistics Summary 5,673 young people engaged with GYDPs in ,103 were male (72%). 1,570 were female (28%). 2,990 (53%) received a caution for committing a crime (Primary referrals). Of the 2,990 young people who had committed a crime, 77% were male. 2,683 (47%) of young people engaged had not been cautioned (Secondary referrals) but were deemed to be at risk of offending. 63% of all participants had been referred by Juvenile Liaison Officers or other Garda source. Almost 50% of offences relate to alcohol and public order, 22% of offences were theft, 12% of crime related to assaults, harassments and related offences. 4,010 risk assessments were carried out in % of young people scored as having some anti-social friends. 926 separate programmes were delivered to young people by projects. 758 programmes were delivered under the European Social Fund Programme with 8,434 places for participants being provided under these programmes. 7

7 Overview of Garda Youth Diversion Projects GYDPs are administered by Community Programmes Unit of the IYJS, Department of Justice and Equality in cooperation with the Garda Office for Children and Youth Affairs (GOCYA). Projects are community based, multi-agency youth crime prevention initiatives which primarily seek to divert young people who have been involved in anti-social and/or criminal behaviour. They do this by challenging their behaviour through providing targeted interventions to facilitate personal development, promote civic responsibility and improve long-term employability prospects. The projects may also work with young people who are significantly at risk of becoming involved in anti-social and/or criminal behaviour. By doing so, the projects contribute to improving the quality of life within communities and enhancing Garda/community relations. The role of the community and other locally based agencies as partners is vital in the implementation and delivery of the GYDPs. The projects provide an important support to An Garda Síochána and Garda Juvenile Liaison Officers (JLOs) in particular, in the implementation of the Statutory Diversion Programme as set out in Part 4 of the Children Act, 2001(as amended). Requirements for the operation of Projects New Operational Requirements were put in place in January 2011 replacing the Garda Youth Diversion Project Guidelines introduced in These requirements provide a governance framework setting out the structures, business processes, and outline the roles of individual project stakeholders in day to day project operations. Each GYDP has a project committee which is responsible for advising on and approving project planning and strategy, and monitoring and evaluating project performance. Each project also has a referral committee which decides on participants for inclusion in the project. Funding Projects are funded by way of Funding Agreements between Community Based Organisations and the Minister for Justice and Equality. Funding of a project year on year is 8

8 subject (inter alia) to sign off by IYJS of Annual Plans and compliance with the requirements of the Funding Agreement. Core funding to projects has been reduced by 17% since In 2011, Community Programmes provided funding from the Exchequer for projects as follows: Core funding:- 7,559,947 Funding under European Social Fund Measure 1 117,976 (ESF personal development and IT courses) Funding under European Social Fund Measure 2 3,569,582 (Funding of 2nd worker in each project) Total: 11,247,505 Number of Projects and Management Structure In 2011, there were 100 GYDPs nationwide. These are managed by 39 CBOs as follows:- Foróige operates 29 projects. Catholic Youth Care operates 10 projects. Sixteen Community Based Organisations falling within the Youth Work Ireland Federation operates 38 projects. Ógra Chorcaí operates 3 projects. Twenty independent Community Based Organisations operate 20 projects. In general, each GYDP is staffed by two youth justice workers who are managed on behalf of the CBO by a line manager. 9

9 Location of Garda Youth Diversion Projects 10

10 GYDP Development One of the key priorities of the National Youth Justice Strategy was to improve the effectiveness of GYDPs. A baseline analysis was undertaken by IYJS in involving local interviews with all staff involved in the GYDPs. The analysis provided a qualitative profile of youth crime in each project locality and an account of how each project intended to reduce the occurrence of youth crime. This exercise is now repeated each year by local project staff in terms of submitting each project s proposed plan of interventions for funding approval (see Improved Focus below). The baseline report, Designing effective local responses to youth crime (available at was published in July 2009 and provided for a change of approach to orientating and planning project interventions. The report's key recommendations were:- Improved focus: Improved alignment of project activities to addressing local youth crime patterns; Improved capacity building: Improved opportunities for targeted training and knowledge building for staff across all projects; Improved design and planning: Improved evidence-based service design and development, (to be implemented initially in five projects on a trial basis). Annual Planning and Reporting Improved focus A revised Annual Planning format introduced to projects in 2010 and improved in 2011 requires projects to liaise closely with local Garda, in gathering and considering appropriate youth crime data before finalising its intended activities for the forthcoming year. The format is designed to: Secure core descriptive information about the intended scope of the project; Provide an indication of the level and type of youth crime experienced within the project s catchment area; Provide an indication of the project s intention and capacity to make improvements. 11

11 Project Annual Plans must be approved each year by IYJS and GOCYA. Plans are appraised by IYJS and GOCYA and detailed written feedback is provided to each project each year. An electronic quarterly reporting format was introduced by IYJS on 1 st January This reporting format has enabled IYJS to collate the national picture of the work of the projects. Training Improved capacity building Targeted training inputs have been provided to all staff to support their engagement with young people. The training inputs included pro social modelling, motivational interviewing, risk assessment (using the Youth Level of Service / Case Management Inventory Screening Version (YLS/CMI-SV)) and logic-modelling (see below). Online Learning Community The baseline report also identified a need to build knowledge across the network of GYDPs both in terms of sharing practice and access to international research literature. A key challenge for building knowledge was the wide spread locations of projects (see map page 10) and the wide variety of GYDP management structures (see page 9). An online learning community YJ Forum was designed for access by all staff in GYDPs, locally based JLOs from An Garda Síochána and Probation Officers specialising in work with young people. During 2011 the on-line learning community was expanded to include members from the Youth Justice Board in Northern Ireland and interested Irish and International academics. These additions support wider discussion and sharing. Membership of the YJ Forum has been extended to approximately 400 by end of Risk Assessment In 2010, the IYJS and An Garda Síochána approved the use of the Youth Level of Service / Case Management Inventory Screening Version (YLS/CMI SV). The YLS/CMI-SV is a core assessment tool for use by JLOs and GYDP staff to help determine which young people in a locality may benefit most from project intervention and identify what needs they present with. In addition this tool was chosen for its capacity to help standardise the approach to targeting across projects, its acceptance that professional judgement 12

12 sometimes overrides established risk indicators and its specific design for use in the diversion system. The tool is applied at the point of referral (or shortly afterwards) and is then applied again after an appropriate period of intervention to indicate what progress a young person is making. YLS/CMI-SV training was provided to JLOs and project staff between February and April 2011 and the screening assessment is now used routinely to establish a baseline level of risk and need among young people who attend the GYDPs. Improved design and planning Trial Site Initiative The trial site initiative, led by IYJS and GOCYA involved five GYDPs for an 18 month period July 2009-December The initiative involved a detailed process of data gathering, evidence based service design and innovation. Each participating project undertook a detailed analysis of local youth crime in co-operation with An Garda Síochána, informed by data provided by An Garda Síochána Analysis Service and designed a service response demonstrating how its interventions would impact youth crime in the community it serves. The trial site projects have been critical in the development of GYDP practice. They have road tested a number of important initiatives which now form part of routine GYDP practice, including evidence-based annual planning, use of the YLS/CMI-SV risk assessment tool, design of training interventions and design of the YJ Forum. The initial learning from the development of the 5 projects has been disseminated across all GYDPs and is now supporting the planning process nationally. In 2011, 9 additional projects were added to the trial site initiative and the development focus has now shifted to developing means to evidence and measure improved outcomes. 13

13 European Social Fund (ESF) and Garda Youth Diversion Projects The ESF Human Capital Investment Operational Programme provides GYDPs with an opportunity to support young people in projects to develop their skill set towards future employment. GYDPs operate 2 Sub Measures under the ESF Programme under the priority of Activation & Participation of Groups outside of the Workforce. The Sub Measures are:- to improve the employability of participants in GYDPs through the provision of Information Technology Skills and education in Personal Development courses (Sub Measure 1) to provide assistance with one-to-one and group work on the projects (Sub Measure 2) by identifying pathways, including further and second chance education, for individual participants towards the labour market, combating discrimination in accessing and progressing in the labour market and promoting acceptance of diversity in the workplace. Sub Measure 2 required the employment of a second worker in each project to pursue this measure. The upfront GYDP costs associated with the ESF Programme to the Exchequer are 25million approximately over the period of the Programme ( ) with 50% of the annual spend by the Exchequer on ESF measures to be claimed retrospectively from Europe. The Programme will have a net cost of approx 12.5million to the Exchequer. Value of ESF The programme has enabled projects to significantly increase their capacity, intensify their interventions and target specific issues with the young people engaged with the projects. ESF Data S&E BMW Total Number of male participants Number of female participants Total

14 Number of programmes completed by Youth Justice Workers S&E BMW Total Number of places for participants provided * * A number of participants availed of more than one course in 2011 Total projects with ESF funded Youth Justice Workers S&E BMW Total A number of projects were not in a position to employ a second Youth Justice Worker in Exchequer funding for ESF measures in 2011 was 3.6million approximately which will enable a claim from the EU for approximately 1.8 million (50%). 15

15 Statistics for 2011 Total number of young people engaged 5,673 Average per GYDP 56 The number engaged can be broken down as primary referrals (those who had received a caution) and secondary referrals (those deemed at risk but who have not received a caution). Figure 1 - Geographical spread of the participants Region Male Female Primary Secondary BMW Border Midlands West Total BMW S&E Dublin Mid East Mid West South East South West Total S&E National Total

16 Figure 2 - Total Participants per quarter in Number of Participants Quarter 1 Quarter 2 Quarter 3 Quarter 4 On average, the 100 GYDPs engaged 3,883 participants per quarter. Figure 3 - Gender Breakdown Number of Participants Male (72%) Female (28%) 17

17 Figure 4 - Age Breakdown of Participants Number of Participants and Under and Over The majority of the participants were in the years old age bracket. Figure 5 - Breakdown of Participants by Referral Status Secondary, % Primary, 2990 Primary participants have been cautioned for an offence. Secondary participants have not been cautioned for an offence. 18

18 Figure 6 - Breakdown of Participants by Gender and Referral Status Number of Participants Male Female Male Female Primary Secondary Figure 7 - Breakdown of Participants by Referral Source 3122, 55% 46, 1% 63, 1% 640, 11% 98, 2% 118, 2% 229, 4% 387, 7% 460, 8% 510, 9% JLO Self Other Agency Other Garda Source Youth Worker Parent Other Community Group HSE Community Rep 19

19 55% (3,115) of the participants engaged in the project were referred through the JLO; this figure comprises both primary and secondary participants. Primary referrals represented 53% of the total participants with a 3:1 male/female ratio. Secondary referrals represented 47% of the total participants engaged with the project with a 2:1 male/female ratio. Of the secondary referrals the majority were referred by other Garda source (8%) and other agency (9%). Figure 8 - Breakdown of Participants by Cultural Background White Irish (White) Irish Traveller Any other white background (Black or black Irish) African - 31 Asian or Asian Irish - 5 Other including mixed background - 63 (Black or black Irish) Any other black background

20 Figure 9 - Breakdown of Primary Participants (2990) by Type of Offence Public Order & other social code offences Assaults, harassments, and related offences Burglary & Related offences Road & Traffic offences (NEC) Dangerous and negligent acts Other Crime Theft & Related offences Controlled Drug offences Weapons & Explosive offences Robbery, extortion & highjacking offences Offences not elsewhere classified Fraud, Deception & Related offences Almost 50% of offences relate to an alcohol and public order. 610 participants (22%) were cautioned for theft and related offences with the majority of participants listed as having stolen from a shop. 21

21 Figure 10 - Breakdown of Participants by Risk Assessment information History of involvement in criminal or anti social behaviour Current school or employment problems Some anti social friends Alcohol/drug problems Leisure/spare time issues Behaviour problems YLS/CMI-sv Family circumstances/parentin g issues Attitudes/orientation problems Yes No Yes No The two areas that emerged as the most significant risk / need factors for the young people assessed in 2011 were: having anti-social peers (86.1%) and lack of appropriate spare time activities (59%). Therefore the need to focus interventions on the importance of a positive peer group and pro-social spare time activities is clear. Other areas of risk and need that were significant included young people s behaviour and problems within the family. Almost half of young people assessed experienced difficulties with school, had pro-criminal attitudes and problems with drugs and alcohol. These areas of risk/need were addressed in the various programmes offered to young people. 22

22 Programmes delivered by Garda Youth Diversion Projects In 2011 the GYDPs delivered 926 programmes to participants. Figure 11 - Programmes delivered by projects 22% 11% 16% 5% 5% 3% 3% 7% 7% 10% 11% Life Skills and Social Activities Educational/Employment Empathy of the impact of crime Community Programmes Substance abuse/dangerous activities Change in offending behaviour/patterns Relationships built with local Gardaí Improved family communication Personal Development Individual Support Other Note: Programmes listed include activities funded through ESF Other includes programmes run at specific times of the year including Summer, Halloween and Easter. Changes in Offending Behaviour In 2011, 88 courses were delivered with the specific aim of diverting participants from offending behaviour. Examples of courses delivered under this heading were Copping On, Restorative Justice and Public Order Programmes. Projects reported that participants who have completed courses have displayed a willingness to change and to take steps towards becoming productive members of society. 23

23 Improvement in School 147 courses were delivered in 2011 with the aim of improving the level of engagement the participant has with education and/or creating pathways towards employment. Early school leaving is a trend among participants and some projects reported that a number of participants view criminality as a viable career path. In % of projects offered support to the local schools, including homework clubs and encouragement to participants to sit State exams. In terms of employment, participants were encouraged to set goals, create CVs, job applications and research jobs that they found interesting. GYDPs also offered career specific courses such as hairdressing, car mechanics and courses aimed towards the music industry. Improvement in Family Life 25% of projects successfully engaged with the families of the participants of the GYDPs. Projects offered courses such as the Strengthening Families Programme. They also engaged with families through home visits and provided updates on the progress of the participant to the parent/guardian while in the project. Supporting the family dynamic encouraged more positive communication between young people and parent/ guardian, demonstrated better coping mechanisms for parents/guardians and in some instances referral to appropriate agencies such as the HSE or Young Persons Probation. Awareness and empathy in relation to the impact of crime 61 programmes were delivered in 2011 aimed at enhancing the participants awareness of the impact of crime on communities and families. Participants were advised on the consequences of breaking the law and were provided with information on how their decision impacts not only on themselves but the wider community, for example, road traffic offences, disorderly conduct and damaging public property. One to One In projects delivered one-to-one support for participants engaging with the project. Participants are assessed on a needs basis and a focus is placed on designing the best type of intervention. Projects determine the work to be carried out with each individual referral, looking at their needs, their educational or employment situation and also what level of engagement they would be able to commit to. 24

24 Behavioural Changes Interlinked with activities specifically aimed at diverting the young person from offending behaviour, the projects delivered programmes with the intention of motivating the young person to examine their behaviour and to provide them with the tools to cope more effectively in difficult circumstances. Examples of these programmes include Anger Management, Interacting with Peer Groups and Anti-Social behaviour (bullying and racism). Building Relationships with Gardaí An Garda Síochána are actively involved in interactions with the participants of the GYDPs from initial engagement through to completion of an intervention. The Gardaí supported the projects in delivering, for example, Soccer Leagues, Camp Diversion, Pool Tournaments. Gardaí also delivered talks on road safety, anti-social behaviour and the justice system. Projects have reported that participants benefited from the interaction with the Gardaí and are now more willing to approach community Gardaí outside of the project environment and their attitudes towards authority have become more positive. Projects also indicated that participants are now more knowledgeable of the justice system and are realising the long term consequences of their actions. Increased knowledge or awareness of the dangers of substance abuse Alcohol and public order related offences accounted for almost 50% of cautions given to participants engaged with the GYDPs in Projects have delivered programmes on the dangers of alcohol and drug abuse. Projects reported that participants are demonstrating a willingness to remove themselves from groups where alcohol and drug use is prevalent. Participants were also counselled on road safety and many projects have reported that participants had not previously considered the full impact of driving dangerously and/or being under the influence of drugs/alcohol. Community Programmes 38 projects delivered courses with the intention of enhancing the productivity of the participants in the community. Such activities included cleaning up the local area, creating a community garden and participating in a citizenship programme. Projects have reported that participants enjoyed the positive feedback from the local community and took pride in the work achieved. Several projects reported that instances of 25

25 graffiti and anti-social behaviour have reduced among the participants who completed these activities. Life Skills and Social Interactions In 2011, 24% of the courses delivered were aimed at enhancing the life skills and social interactions of the participants. The courses included cookery, money management, health education, art and equestrian care. Participants were encouraged to be self accountable, listen to directions from instructors, interact positively with peer groups and to develop core competencies sought by employers such as team building and leadership skills. 26

26 Examples of outcomes for participants Case Study A This young person is 17 years old and has been known to the project since he was 11 years when he was referred due to problems at school. The young person had angry outbursts and often took out his frustrations in physically abusive ways such as throwing chairs at class mates and teachers. There has been a high level of addiction in the young person s family including alcohol and drug use. The young person is a known drug user and has poor conflict management skills and has become known to the Gardaí and has been arrested. The young person s attendance in the projects group sessions was good and although he often needed a high level of support within groups, he was willing to engage with the youth justice worker on matters of education, anger control management and drug abuse. With the assistance of the youth justice worker the youth completed a barber shop course, attended counselling for drug abuse and is pursuing additional courses in the hopes of gaining future employment. Case Study B This young person is 17 years of age. He became known to the project through his offending peer group and referred himself in June 2010 requesting support in dealing with personal and unemployment issues. The participant lives in an estate which is disadvantaged and where there are high levels of crime. The participant has achieved the leaving certificate with a passing grade. Despite completing school the participant exhibited signs of mental health issues and has become affected by the lack of employment opportunities in the area. The youth justice worker began intensive intervention work and it became clear that the participant had completed school with no goals or skills that would help them to plan, resource or aim for any job, training or career. A personal plan that was based on skills development, access to support and recreational/social need was designed for the young person. Through the job seeking program the young person developed a real interest in working and applied for numerous jobs and went for many interviews. The programme content and activities was designed by the young person and it was both creative and ambitious using both decision making skills and planning skills. 27

27 Case Study C The young person was referred to the project by a Social Worker with the support of the JLO. Issues relating to behaviour difficulties and communication within the family were identified. The young person indicated that they had self harming and suicidal thoughts. The youth justice worker identified that the young person was in need of anger management, family intervention, counselling and educational support. Through intensive one to one support with the youth justice worker the participant has learnt to control their anger and understands the consequences of becoming involved in altercations with others. The young person took part in a programme designed to aid them in managing their thoughts towards self harming and suicide. To date the young person has engaged well with the project and maintains contact with the youth justice worker. The young person is engaging with their family and the parent of the young person is engaging with services to improve upon their parenting skills. 28

28