The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

Chapter 1 Background and Introduction

introduction

1.1 This report presents the findings of a 12 month monitoring and evaluation exercise to assess the Support and Information for Victims of Youth Crime ( SIVYC) pilot, which has been operational in the Forth Valley area (Stirling, Clackmannanshire and Falkirk) since 1 October 2003.

1.2 The general principles of the scheme are:

• to provide victims of youth crime with access to routine practical and emotional information and support;
• to provide specific information to victims (and specified others) about the outcome of referrals to the Reporter for young people who have perpetrated against them; and
• to protect the right to confidentiality of the child referred to the Principal Reporter.

1.3 The SIVYC pilot protocol was developed in the context of new legislative provision set out in Section 53 of the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 2003. The Act enables the Principal Reporter to release information to victims of youth crime regarding decisions and disposals relating to young people referred on offence grounds. Information can also be provided to specified third parties: the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority ( CICA), the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board ( CICB) and Insurers.

1.4 Section 53 of the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act came into force on 27 June 2003 and, following this, information for victims on the outcome of youth crime referrals became available. Due to the administration involved in identifying victims who require such information, assessing their eligibility and providing appropriate means through which the information could be delivered, the SIVYC pilot was established to test a model of service delivery involving three agencies in the following roles.

The Police

• to identify victims for the purpose of the scheme;
• to advise victims of the scheme by letter;
• to record any opt out of the scheme by victims and to inform SCRA of this;
• to advise VSS of victims of youth crime (if no opt out) and their Crime Reference Number ( CRNO); and
• to inform SCRA of victims details with the Standard Police Report ( SPR) on the child/young person responsible.

Victim Support Scotland ( VSS)

• to offer practical and emotional information and support to victims;
• to provide general information about youth justice and the Children's Hearings System;
• to inform SCRA of any opt out from the scheme; and
• to inform SCRA of referral outcome information i.e. Reporter Decision, that is to be sent to the victim through SCRA.

Scottish Children's Reporter Administration ( SCRA)

• to provide information to victims as required;
• to inform VSS of outcome information sent to victims; and
• to record action regarding the victim on the Referrals Administration Database ( RAD).

1.5 Although all victims have the right to request such information, discretion lies with the Reporter as to whether the release of information is granted. In order for information to be released, it must have been requested by the victim (or other third party), and it must be deemed by the Reporter that the release of information would not be detrimental to the best interests of the child referred, or any other child connected in any way with that case.

1.6 The SIVYC pilot is, therefore, a system whereby information held by these agencies can be provided to victims of youth crime. The pilot systems should enable tracking of individual young people and victims through the system to enable outcomes of referrals to be conveyed to victims. The involvement of Victim Support Scotland in the pilot means that victims also have access to routine practical and emotional support.

the pilot in context

1.7 Scotland's Action Programme to Reduce Youth Crime (Scottish Executive, 2002), stated the Scottish Executive's aim of giving victims an appropriate stake in Scotland's justice and, in particular, to:

• improve the information on the details of the offending and the impact on the victim provided to Children's Hearings;
• consider the information that can lawfully be disclosed to the victim, victims and/or community on the action taken by the Reporter, Local Authority, Police or Children's Hearing in response to the offence;
• consider and develop any proposals for legislation to give victims an appropriate place in the youth justice process; and
• consult on the group's proposals together with options for introducing the proposal to the Hearings System.

1.8 The introduction of the SIVYC scheme reflects an increasing awareness of the need to involve victims in the youth justice process, to ensure that they have a voice and that they are made aware, more generally, of the youth justice system.

1.9 The need for greater victim involvement was highlighted in the 2004 Scottish Executive publication Getting it right for every child: Report on the Responses to the Phase One Consultation on the Review of the Children's Hearings System (Stevenson and Brotchie, 2004). The first phase of the ongoing Scottish Executive review into the Children's Hearings System was designed to gather public and practitioner views on the principles and objectives of the Hearings System through widespread consultation.

1.10 The consultation elicited a number of responses which have implications for the way in which a support and information service such as SIVYC is offered, including:

• the need to maintain a child centred system;
• ensuring that the Children's Hearings System continues to focus on meeting the needs of individual children rather than balancing these with the needs of family members and the wider community; and
• in the interests of linking with local communities, and whilst ensuring that confidentiality is not compromised, to ensure that more information about outcomes from the Children's Hearings System is made available to local communities.

1.11 The last of these issues is already addressed by the current Children's Hearings System to some extent. One of its key principles is that Hearings are held locally and each local authority area has a Children's Panel consisting of lay volunteers from the local community. There are over 2,000 Panel members across Scotland. The Phase one consultation suggests, however, that there is a greater need for sharing information about the Children's Hearings process and activity among the community. The consultation also noted that, in the current system, there is no direct way for local communities to convey their own wishes and needs to those responsible for operating the system.

1.12 The review also revealed limited awareness of the Children's Hearings System among the public. For some, this was coupled with feelings that the current system was an insufficient deterrent to children and young people referred on offence grounds and was seen as a 'soft option' for young offenders. The researchers found, however, that much of this may be due to a lack of understanding of how the system works and what it can achieve. It is important to note at this point that the Children's Hearings System does not exist exclusively for children and young people referred on offence grounds. Children and young people are also referred on care and protection issues.

1.13 In order to achieve more widespread public understanding of the Children's Hearings System, the Phase One consultation noted the scope for a public relations campaign to advertise what the system does and highlight the positive outcomes of the system for both young people and the community. The consultation elicited a number of means by which this might be achieved, including:

• more frequent and effective publicity for the work of the Children's Hearings System;
• developing stronger links between Children's Panels and local community organisations;
• communication of the outcomes of Hearings decisions within local communities; and
• developing opportunities for people to learn more about the work of the Children's Hearings System through formal education and community based learning.

1.14 The consultation also revealed that, whilst people did not want too much information about the system, and recognised the need for limited exposure of individual cases, many felt that providing information about the outcomes of specific referrals, in a suitably anonymised format, offered one way in which the positive outcomes of the system could be demonstrated to the community. It was suggested that this too might impact on restoring public confidence in the youth justice system.

1.15 To support the Children's Hearings Review, the Criminal Justice Social Work Development Centre for Scotland (Buist and Whyte, 2004) was commissioned by the Scottish Executive to examine evidence of the effectiveness of child welfare and youth justice services. The authors explored the requirement for balancing youth care and protection and youth justice (as offered by the Scottish Children's Reporter Administration), which they define as:

• A welfare approach (by making decisions according to judgements about the needs and welfare of the child based on the child's circumstances); and
• A justice approach (with attention to due process and decisions made with a more narrow focus on the offence and proportional response to it).

1.16 The authors report that, internationally, a number of different models have been developed which attempt to meet both of these needs, and that they are, for the most part, compromised. In assessing what works, however, the report suggested that:

• restorative approaches, especially those requiring community involvement, can lead to a sense of ownership and assist in reducing youth crime;
• the involvement of lay people in judicial decision making works well in both the adult and youth justice systems; and
• system transparency facilitates confidence in the system.

1.17 Research evidence suggests, therefore, that there is a requirement for greater transparency and more information about the Youth Justice System in Scotland among the general public, as a potential means for reducing misunderstanding of what can be achieved and how the service operates to meet the needs of both the young person and communities. Importantly, the SIVYC service builds on this general need and focuses on victims of youth crime

Identifying Victims' Needs

1.18 The development of SIVYC as a support and information service draws on existing research evidence regarding what victims need.

1.19 A review of Victim Support user needs (Victim Support, 2003) identified a number of types of victims' needs:

• recognition - that there is a source of support and that there is somebody who holds an interest ('somebody who cares');
• immediate help and advice - immediate practical help such as dealing with injuries or arranging accommodation;
• information - generic information (eg about the criminal justice system), case specific information (eg whether someone has been charged with the offence; the progress of the case) or information about other agencies who may be able to assist;
• support - providing 'a listening ear' and other types of emotional support; and
• practical - eg changing locks, repairs to property, insurance claims, etc.

1.21 A survey of victims and police forces carried out for the Scottish Office ( MVA, 1995) also identified information needs of victims. Victims and the representatives of criminal justice agencies interviewed were asked what type of information they thought all types of victims of adult and youth crimes were entitled to receive. Responses identified two distinct types of information, these being:

• case-specific information - information unique to each individual case; and
• general information - non case-specific.

1.22 The case-specific information required consisted of factual details about the progress of the case. The main priorities were to receive information on the progress of the investigation and the case outcome.

1.23 The general information was required to cover the sequence of events followed in a criminal case and relevant criminal justice procedures. A list of agencies and individuals to contact for help and support was also considered necessary.

1.24 The majority of victims felt that both information types should be provided together; general information would act to contextualise case-specific information.

1.25 While victims and agencies agreed on information types, there was disagreement about the method of provision. Some felt that information should be provided automatically as part of a pro-active system, whereas others felt that this was too resource intensive and that victims should ask for information only when they need it (ie an 'opt in' approach).

1.26 Three main difficulties with a reactive system of information provision were identified:

• not all victims are able to telephone, visit offices etc. for information;
• some victims feel their case is too trivial to request information (when in fact they may need it); and
• victims may not know when to ask for the information they require.

1.27 The final difficulty was considered potentially the most serious. For example, victims would not know when to telephone for the outcome of a trial if they were not told when it would take place. This would be a particular problem for those who wanted information due to needs associated with fear. Most respondents preferred a pro-active system of information provision and this is reflected in the SIVYC model that was adopted.

Findings from the Scottish Crime Survey

1.28 Data from the Scottish Crime Survey ( SCS) also provides an indication of the support and information needs of victims.

1.29 The 2000 Scottish Crime Survey showed that victims required post-victimisation support in a third of cases. The most common types of support required were information from the police, someone to talk to or moral support and protection from further victimisation or harassment. In a third (31%) of cases, victims said they had asked for or received support from at least one source. Thirty six per cent of people who knew that they had been victimised by people under the age of 18 said that they sought or were offered help from an organisation. This is slightly lower than the 39% of people who knew they were victimised by people over 18 and highlights a need for separate services such as SIVYC in meeting the needs of victims of 'younger' offenders.

1.30 In three quarters (76%) of cases in the 2000 SCS, victims said that they had heard of Victim Support. Only three per cent said that they had sought or been offered help from Victim Support following the incident. Due to such small numbers, it is not possible to examine experience of the Victim Support service from the SCS meaningfully. However, findings from the Victim Support User Satisfaction Survey (2003) show that:

• 81% of respondents found information leaflets useful;
• 82% could recall that other services were available to them, and 62% used such services. Satisfaction with these other services was high, ranging from 88% who were happy with support at court to 97% who were happy with emotional support received; and
• 71% felt that the level of contact with Victim Support was 'about right', but 25% would have preferred more contact.

1.31 Such figures highlight the central role that support agencies such as Victim Support play in meeting the needs of victims, and the importance of their involvement in a scheme such as SIVYC.

Need for the SIVYC Pilot

1.34 Research evidence to date suggests, therefore, that there is a need for greater transparency of the Youth Justice System in Scotland per se in addition to improved support and information for victims of crime. Whilst the transparency of the adult criminal justice system means that some of victims' information needs can be met through the ready availability of case outcome information, the introduction of Section 53 of the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 2003 means that steps are being taken to address the similar information needs of victims of youth crime. The SIVYC pilot offers an example of how provision of this information can be achieved.

1.35 The support needs of victims of youth crime as a distinct group has largely been subsumed within wider 'victims needs' assessments, however, anecdotally, those who work with victims of youth crime have long suggested that a separate focus is required to address the needs of these victims. Again, the SIVYC pilot provides a means by which these distinct support needs can be assessed.

Research Aims and Objectives

1.36 The principal aim of the SIVYC monitoring and evaluation exercise was to assess the impact of the SIVYC pilot scheme on improving the experience of victims of young offenders dealt with by the Children's Hearings System in the Forth Valley area.

1.37 The impact of the scheme on the organisations involved in the pilot was also to be assessed, as were any benefits of the scheme for local communities.

1.38 The specific objectives set for the monitoring and evaluation were to:

• describe the key features of the operation of the pilot and the awareness of/support for victims of children and young people referred to the Children's Hearings system outside of the pilot area;
• assess the protocols and procedures developed and used by the Police, Victim Support Scotland, Children's Reporters and other professionals to inform the operation of the scheme (for example, referrals being 'lost' between organisations and issues relating to information sharing and handling);
• assess the Police, SCRA and VSS performance against the agreed time intervals and other standards;
• examine cases referred to the Principal Reporter in the pilot area where it was decided inappropriate for information to be disclosed to the victim. The consistency, effectiveness and appropriateness of methods used by the Reporter in the decision making process was also addressed;
• assess satisfaction levels of victims, in relation to the method of contact used by Victim Support Scotland (ie visit, phone call, or letter/leaflet) along with the presentation, quality and timing of that information. Where visited by Victim Support Scotland staff and volunteers, to measure the victims' satisfaction with their explanation of the youth justice system, as well as the victims' satisfaction with written material and correspondence from Victim Support and SCRA;

• explore the views and experiences of victims who participated in the case specific element of the pilot, those that opted out of the scheme and the key stakeholders in relation to the process and outcomes of the pilot;
• identify any significant changes in approach to service delivery made within the SIVYC pilot area during the course of the pilot period, establishing the reasons for and impacts of these changes; and
• utilising the evidence collected, make recommendations (where appropriate) of how such information and support services can be improved if they were to be introduced nationwide.

1.39 In these respects, the research went beyond a simple assessment of victims' satisfaction with the SIVYC service and focused on three core elements of the pilot, these being the establishment, operation and effectiveness of the scheme.

Assessment Methodology

1.40 The main methodological components of the work were:

• consultation with each of the three principal stakeholders involved in administering the SIVYC scheme (the Police, Victim Support Scotland and Scottish Children's Reporter Administration), to ascertain pilot practices and perceptions of the pilot;
• a baseline questionnaire survey of victims to explore the experiences of victims of youth crime in the Forth Valley area prior to the pilot. This survey was coupled with ten in-depth interviews exploring experiences of victimisation and views on the support and information received from the principal stakeholders;
• primary and secondary data collation and analysis including quarterly collation of stakeholder monitoring data to analyse referral activity and processing;
• a survey of victims who were eligible for, and opted in to the SIVYC scheme. This monitoring survey was complemented with case study interviews with victims to explore their experience of the SIVYC scheme in more depth; and
• a comparison area study, combining stakeholder and victim consultation in addition to a survey of victims of youth crime to compare the views and experiences of those engaged with the youth justice system outwith the pilot area. An area was chosen (West Lothian) that was comparable to the Forth Valley area in terms of demographic profiles and referral caseload for VSS and SCRA.

1.41 The pilot assessment was undertaken over a 12 month period from December 2003 to December 2004. However, the focus of the research was the first 12 months operation of the pilot itself, that is, from 1 October 2003 to the end of September 2004. The assessment start date was planned to be simultaneous with the pilot implementation but was set back due to delays in getting access approval from the governing bodies of some of the main stakeholders involved in the pilot. This meant that some retrospective analytical work was required. This is important to note because of the impact on the methodological approach to the work described in this report.

costing sivyc

1.42 A costing exercise was undertaken. There were two principal objectives for this. The first was to record the pilot costs as borne by each of the stakeholders and, as far as possible, to identify the costs of different activities and service components. The second was to identify the workload and cost implications of extending the scheme more widely.

Report structure

1.43 This report explores the establishment, operation and effectiveness of the SIVYC pilot for the period between 1st October 2003 and 30th September 2004. Chapter two provides a description of the set-up and operation of the pilot, and chapter three summarises the activity of each of the principal stakeholders during the pilot period. Chapter four presents the findings from consultation with victims, including data from the baseline, monitoring and comparison area surveys and the qualitative case study interviews. Chapter five presents the detailed costings for the SIVYC pilot and chapter six offers a summary of the research findings before making recommendations for the future of a Support and Information Scheme for Victims of Youth Crime in Scotland.

« Previous | Contents | Next »