Improving Partnership working By Cezar Tan-YOS Operations Manager

Improving Partnership working By: Cezar Tan-YOS Operations Manager Wendy Jones-Care Planning D Team Manager

Aim Improving Partnership working between Youth Offending Service and the Social Care Team. Description This protocol reflects a joint commitment between services to support the joint working arrangements. The protocol has been jointly drafted by Youth Offending Service and Social Care Team at Brent Council and approved by Senior Management in the Children and Young People Department. The procedure helps services work together to identify the risks and needs of the young person, it explains the process of joint working arrangements and how organisations cooperate to build a package of support with an agreed plan to support young people with complex needs. Age range 10 -18

I. Introduction II. Case discussion-key points III. Identified problems IV. Our solutions V. Questions and Answers VI. End

Case discussions Matthew has been known to the Local Authority since 2009, now aged 17, he is currently made subject to Full Care Order s. 31. The Local Authority has had concerns in relation to Matthew who has been affiliated with gangs in South Kilburn, from the age of thirteen. Further concerns have been raised in relation to Matthew's relationship with his father being abusive and chaotic. Matthew has reported that his father has been supplying him with cannabis, alcohol and tobacco.

Case discussions Matthew’s previous placements broken down in both residential and semi-independent and Matthew was spending increasing amounts of time gravitating back home with his mother and his father’s address. The situation was volatile as mother did not always feel able to cope with Matthew’s behaviour. Matthew was spending a lot of time out of the house and spent large proportions of his money on Cannabis and often returned home in the early hours of the morning.

Case discussions Matthew was NEET and scoring up to seven years below his age range. There were also concerns around Matthew’s mental health that was attributed to his past parenting history of server exposure to DV. Initially his school had reported that Matthew was obsessive about cleanliness. Matthew was also engaging in a sexual relationship with a girlfriend, who is 15 years old and which led to a termination of a recent pregnancy.

Case discussions Matthew was posing a risk to both himself and to others. His behaviour was impulsive and unpredictable; he can be regularly verbally abusive and has physically abused police officers. Matthew was becoming very angry if he does not get his own way and regularly makes threats in addition to allegations against professionals.

Case discussions Matthew became known to YOS in 2013 after he received a 6 -month Referral Order (RO) for Possession of Cannabis. He partially completed his RO contract and his Court Order expired in August 2014. In 2016, Matthew was sentenced to a 12 -month Youth Rehabilitation Order (YRO) for the following offences: Criminal Damage to Vehicle, 2 x Assault on Police officer and 2 x Causing Harassment Alarm Distress by Threatening Words or Behaviour. His YRO requirements include: 12 months supervision, 14 days activity and an electronically tagged curfew for 3 months from 8 pm to 7 am.

Case discussions In June 2016, Matthew breached his YRO for refusing to engage with YOS. His 12 months YRO was revoked and re-sentenced with 6 -month YRO with the following requirements: • • • Programme requirement - to complete 18 days (6 days substance misuse 6 days weapon awareness and 6 days conflict resolution) Activity requirement for 10 days - indirect reparation Tagged curfew 7 pm - 7 am for 4 months Mental Health Treatment Requirement - CAMHS to be commissioned through Social Care

Identified Joint Working Problems In Relation To Matthew or Young People with Similar Complex needs.

Identified problems • Poor communication- even though we were co-located on the same floor, workers were not communicating. • Not sharing information- data systems, reports and assessments were not shared. • Culture of blame- in times of crisis respective professionals would complain about each other, not support each other and/or not share case actions responsibility. • Lack of clarity re role and responsibility- YOS manage Court Orders and Public Protection concerns, Social Care manage safeguarding. There also concerns re over reliance of responsibilities.

Identified problems • Issue re accommodation and re-settlement- children and young people released in custody without joint planning to include joint support packages and suitable released addresses • Managing risk, safety and well-being -no joint lone working risk assessment • Issue re recruitment and retention-high turn over of staff which led to lack of information sharing.

Our Solutions

Our Solutions • YOS and Social Care Protocol • The protocol has been multiwas updated which has agency drawn up and approved improved the partnership by Senior Management in the working for children and Children and Young People young people like Matthew Department. This reflects a joint who are receiving a services commitment between services from both YOS and Social Care to support the joint working agents. arrangements.

Our Solutions Matthew has made threats to self harm. One incident was where he threatened jump of the placement roof. All partners came together to carry out their safeguarding functions responsibilities. To include Senior Managers being available and approachable when needed and informing the risk and safety plan.

Our Solutions • Matthew previously had 4 placement moves, but has since remained living with his mother owing to YOS and Social Care attending joint meetings with the family to avoid breakdown and any further placement moves. As well as Social Care being present at the compliance panel meetings that outlines their supervision and behaviour contract.

Our Solutions • Matthew had a propensity to • Matthews presented to have make allegations against staff signs and symptoms of ASD; the and his main offence was case was presented to the YOS assaults against professionals. A Risk/Safety and Wellbeing joint staff risk assessment was Management panel bringing completed and lone working together for the first time the policy and procedures where newly revised panel that shared. To include joint home included Social Care, Education, visits and PNC checks on joint Police, Probation, CAMHS, and worked cases. Specialist Workers.

Our Solutions • Given that the young people we work with has complex needs and difficulties it was important that our differing roles and responsibilities was clarified to all front line practitioners. This was achieved by YOS Managers and Social Care Team Managers attended respective Team Meetings.

Our Solutions • Information-sharing was also central to improving the outcome for Matthew. Joint assessment and planning to meet Matthews needs included sharing of data bases (Childview-YOS and Mosaic-Social Care). The YOS statutory Assets Plus assessment tool was shared with Social Care and the Care Plans and Children and Family assessments used by Social Care was shared with YOS.

Our Solutions • Matthew has often expressed that he is depressed and low which is why he misuses drugs. Given that Matthew is known to both teams a strategy meeting was convened that ensured a joint and clear response.

Our Solutions • There were occasions where Matthew’s offending behaviour increased and a breakdown in his placement with his mother was imminent. His case was presented to the Re-settlement and After-Care Meeting as a contingency plan to prepare Commissioning Resource Team (CRT) to look for an appropriate accommodation for him. The meeting is always organised by YOS and cochaired by CRT Principle Officer. The panel members include, Youth Offending Operations Manager and a Social Care Team Manager.

Our Solutions • In support of the complex case management peer supervision between YOS and Social Care Managers has been prompted.

Question and Answer