Mainly Forensic offending behaviours

1
Introduction

• Mainly Forensic??? (offending behaviours)
• Issues and Possible Solutions
• Aim, Objectives and Vision (Mine!)
• Possible Gap Solutions
• Definitions
• What Next

2
Some of what's going on?

• M/C ? LSU and or step up
• Cheshire and Wirral (Soss moss and specialist
  outreach)
• Merseycare (local LSU)
• Rochdale PCT (Move on)
• North Cumbria and NE
• Private Sector (LSU etc)
• Turning Point (Step-down and move on)
• Private capital Access
• MH and LD Secure
• More OATs data
• Under 18s with NSCAG
• Also Region-wide Workshop being planned
• Professional Groups / roles

• National Group
• Calderstones (Step Up and outreach)
• Advocacy Matters
• Hindley, styal and Liverpool prisons
• IABA (Training)
• Valuing people / Prison Health
• St Martin's College (staff training)
• Cumbria MDO Group
• Liverpool John Moores Uni
• Sheila's group
• Lots of local good practice
• In Control

3
Some of the issues

• Prevention
• Loss of Money
• Lack of expertise
• Sharing
• Variable cost and Quality (OATS)
• Big Gaps in local zonal and Regional basic
  provision

• Ad hoc developments
• Capacity
• CJS
• Transfer 14 days
• Probation
• More Victims?

4
Aims of Developments

• Other than Q,PC,VM, E
• To balance personal choice with public protection
• To develop cohesive local, zonal and regional
  services with agreed protocols and shared
  philosophies across the NW
• Free Movement
• To bring back patients/clients to the North West
  where appropriate (or off pathway)
• To develop pro-active and re-active services
  across the North West
• The Ring

5
How do we move on?

• Within the framework (BC)
• With local commissioners
• With other key stakeholders
• With users
• With advocates

6
Principles

• One Risk Assessment
• One Approach
• Balance between public safety and choice
• Free Movement
• Shared Expertise
• Joint Training

• Agreed Treatment Outcomes
• Mix of Providers
• Standards

7
ComponentsLocal, Zonal, Regional (1)

• Medium Secure
• Low Secure Central
• Low Secure Community
• High Secure
• Appropriate Adult Service
• Staff
• Step Down
• E.A.S
• Ordinary/specialist Housing
• Longer Term
• Active Prevention

• Behavioural Support Team (SST)
• Prison in-reach
• Support to Probation
• Support to Courts
• Employment
• Education
• Transition workers
• Out-Patients
• Advocacy
• Provider rich

8
Components Local, Zonal, Regional(2)

• Medium Secure
• Low Secure Central
• Low Secure Community
• High Secure
• Appropriate Adult Service
• Staff
• Step Down
• E.A.S
• Ordinary/specialist Housing
• Longer Term
• Active Prevention

• Behavioural Support Team (SST)
• Prison in-reach
• Support to Probation
• Support to Courts
• Employment
• Education
• Transition workers
• Out-Patients
• Advocacy
• Provider rich

9
Under 18
3 - 5
15 -18
0 - 3
5 - 15
10
Virtual SSTMulti disciplinary/agency

• Located in Community Teams
• Pro-active and re-active
• Available to all parts of the network
• 1 hour response time (excludes central LSUs and
  MSUs) - 24 hr service
• Experts in IABA approaches and elements of CJS
• Advice,direct support, capacity building
• The Glue!

11
New In-Patient Services

• EAS
• Opportunity to explore a range of ideas/options
• A potential danger to others
• 6 month maximum stay
• Detailed behavioural analysis available to
  commissioners
• Assistance in finding future placements

• Step Down
• 2 year target stay
• All admissions from secure facilities
• Move-on plans to be in place before admission
• Most patients likely to be detained

12
In Patient Secure

• MSU
• 2 year target stay (treatment)
• 3 month target stay (assessment)
• Robust physical security required in addition to
  relational and procedural security

• LSU
• 2 year target stay (treatment)
• 3 month target stay (assessment)
• Physical security required in addition to
  relational and procedural security

13
Prison In-reach/Probation

• Part of community (extension of SST function?)
• Clear criteria to be set but generally as
  community
• Where appropriate link to local services prior to
  release
• Bridge between network and CJS
• Establish service as part of community sentence
  () National Pilot?

14
Preferred Providers

• Accredited Services Only
• Standards to be agreed by NW Commissioners
• Including minimum staff training
• National Work underway (Kitemark)
• No accreditation - no placements
• Monitor with Local Commissioners
• Monitor Via CPA
• Discharge dates set on admission where
  appropriate
• Assign treatment targets

15
Network Group(Commissioning)

• To receive referrals
• To look at matching
• To Identify service required
• Service Spec from current providers
• In put from SST
• Service spec from commissioner / Team
• Service spec from potential provider (dev.team)

16
Development Group(Procurement)

• Develop service as specified
• Identify provider
• Finance plan
• Infra-structure element
• Link with workforce development
• Membership?

17
Monitoring Group

• Maintain /adjust specifications
• Agree network and individual standards
• Maintain data base
• Produce quarterly reports on all network services
• Maintain data base
• Set both pro-active and re-active
  targets/priorities
• Membership?

18
Time to ACT

• Same Issues
• Early solutions concentrated on the wronng end of
  the spectrum
• Problems are being Compounded (OATS)
• Most Local Commissioners recognise the necessity
  to work together
• Lets act (by securing agreements) before we all
  change again!!!

19
NEXT

• Continue to explore gaps and look at developing
  joint procurement initiates (ASD)
• Look at Common Solutions (E.g. Community Teams)
  with potentially different funding streams
• Agree Project Management arrangements, with
  targets and delegated Authority from ALL key
  players (variety of options from existing to new)
• How do we procure new developments?
• Separately? Collectively?Specialist? Lead
  Arrangements? New Organisation?