The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

Executive Summary

Context

This report is the final evaluation report on the two-year Intensive Support and Monitoring Services ( ISMS) evaluation that DTZ was commissioned to undertake by the then Scottish Executive ¹.

ISMS was introduced by the Antisocial Behaviour, etc. (Scotland) Act 2004 and the Intensive Support and Monitoring (Scotland) Regulations 2005, and came into force in April 2005. It is currently at a phase 1 stage and has been rolled out in seven local authorities.

This report covers the period from October 2004 to the end of April 2007, which is two years on from the official starting date for ISMS in April 2005.

Research specification

In its Research Specification, the Scottish Executive Education Department stated that it wished to commission an evaluation of the use of ISMS within the Children's Hearings System. This research was to evaluate the operation, the financial costs and long-term effectiveness of ISMS. The principal aims of the research were twofold

1. To evaluate the effectiveness of ISMS in reducing the offending behaviour of persistent young offenders, in responding to the needs of young people who are at risk of absconding, and/or who are likely to injure themselves or others, and improving the longer term outcomes for young people, for example returning to full-time education.
2. To assess the cost-effectiveness of ISMS in delivering successful outcomes especially for the children and young people, compared with alternative measures.

Research method

We designed and employed a number of different research instruments to address the requirements of the research. The main stages of the research were as follows.

• A policy and research review
• Interviews with other researchers working in the field (to map all of the other relevant research activity and to attempt to reach collaborative working arrangements)
• Interviews with the phase 1 LA areas on the implementation and operation of ISMS in their area (ongoing feature of the evaluation over a three year period)
• Feedback to and discussion with the Scottish Government and the Research Advisory Group ( RAG) (on a regular basis)
• Interviews with main external providers on ISMS
• Mapping and baselining (all the ISMS and research activity)
• Survey of wider stakeholders
• Survey of Panel Members within the Children's Hearings System
• Case studies of 21 individual ISMS and Intensive Support only cases
• Analysis of other outcome data (held by Includem and Glasgow City Council)
• Analysis of the cost of implementing and operating ISMS in each of the phase 1 LAs
• A final report (that pulls together all of the data and attempts to triangulate the evidence to derive the main findings and conclusions of the research).

Evidence from the literature

There is little to compare ISMS with in the literature because it is a unique intervention. However, there is some research evidence that suggests that elements of the package do work in terms of tackling offending behaviour, especially the intensive support element. The evidence on the effectiveness of tagging/electronic monitoring is more mixed, but leans towards limited or no impact on key criteria, such as reduced recidivism.

Work still has to be undertaken on 'what works' in establishing an evidence base for ISMS. In order to evaluate the effectiveness of the ISMS and intensive support service packages, some cognisance should be paid to another of the 'what works' principles: programme integrity. This principle states that effective interventions have clear aims and objectives that are delivered by appropriately trained, experienced and monitoring staff. In the absence of programme integrity, the interventions might result in a negative effect on risky behaviours, although there is no evidence that this is currently happening with ISMS.

Need for infrastructure and partnership arrangements

A lot of effort has gone in to introducing ISMS in each of the phase 1 areas. However, putting all of the infrastructure in place to deliver this programme has proven to be a difficult exercise. It is a matter for debate whether all of the physical infrastructure is required for an effective ISMS programme, e.g. co-location, new offices, etc. All we can say is that the LA areas that either had or developed this physical infrastructure at an early stage seemed to implement the programme more quickly and effectively.

Effective partnership arrangements with all the delivery bodies would also seem to be required and much work has to be undertaken with other key stakeholders, particularly within the Children's Hearings System to ensure that ISMS is known about and used appropriately. Difficulties in achieving all of these requirements have led to delays in implementation of ISMS and a lack of throughput on ISMS cases.

Despite some difficulties, all areas have now implemented a multi-agency approach from referral straight through to post- MRC support, as well as extensive partnerships arrangements and protocols as multi-agency training. This is a genuine achievement in a period a little over two years.

Low number of ISMS cases

There have been a low number of ISMS cases, much lower than initial estimates, but a low number of cases should not necessarily be seen as a failure. The estimates were not targets, but rather represented approximate throughput levels that the LAs believed that they could achieve. In some areas the estimates were not achieved because insufficient priority was given to the ISMS programme and/or because of ideological concerns about the nature of electronic monitoring. However, other areas clearly prioritised and approved of the programme. It does seem that the number of cases was over-estimated at the outset, but there have also been a larger number of intensive support only cases. Many of these cases were not suitable for ISMS because the intensive support that they received during the assessment phase rendered the MRC as no longer necessary. There were other problems in moving many cases on to an MRC, such as a lack of suitable accommodation or difficulties in the young person's family relationships.

Need for clearer guidance

Clearer guidance is needed on whom ISMS should be targeted. The Scottish Executive is clear that ISMS is intended for those who meet Section 70(10) conditions ² and, therefore, act as a disposal for a relatively small number of young people. It appears doubtful whether this guidance has been stuck to in all areas throughout the evaluation period, especially with the relatively high number of intensive support service cases in relation to ISMS cases. However, there does seem to be a case for using ISMS (or intensive support only) as a preventative measure for young people who may meet this criteria in the future.

Factors underpinning successful implementation of ISMS

There appear to be a number of major factors that need to be in place before a programme such as ISMS can be successfully implemented. Any national roll-out of ISMS should take account of these factors.

1. A Programme Manager needs to be in place quickly to drive the programme forward. He should assemble and be supported by a core ISMS Team.
2. There needs to be high level management support for the programme within the LA.
3. Effective partnership arrangements need to be built early on, especially involving Education, Social Work, external providers and others as appropriate. The different agencies and workers need to be aware of their and other's roles and responsibilities.
4. There needs to be a supply of suitable accommodation for young people in an area. The lack of this in some areas has been a significant problem.
5. The programme needs to be marketed effectively, especially to the police, the Courts and the Children's Hearings System so that the disposals will actually be used. Its profile also needs raised in the wider community so that people are aware of it and what it is intended to do.
6. There needs to be an effective link-up with secure providers to ensure that those young people in secure are assessed for ISMS and that work (such as assessment work) is not being duplicated.
7. The case conference approach to assessment seems to be the best way in which to gather all of the opinions of the professional staff involved in a case and discuss and debate the issues surrounding a young person and what they need.
8. There needs to be flexibility in programme construction and delivery so that the needs of different types of young people are met.

Intensive Support external providers

The main external Intensive Support providers are Includem (providing intensive support in five of the phase 1 LA areas) and NCH (providing intensive support in Highland). Serco provide the electronic monitoring service, having taken over from Reliance Monitoring Services.

What intensive support involves can vary depending on the needs of the young person and their circumstances. It usually involves providing support in the community, addressing offending behaviour and other problems the young person may have, and providing 24-hour crisis support.

Views of stakeholders and Panel Members

Relationships between the core services delivering ISMS appear strong, but more work has to be done in integrating other services, notably Housing, Mental Health Services, Employment Services and Addictions Services.

Generally, there was strong support for the ISMS programme among the stakeholder group and Panel Members as a way of helping young people and their communities as well as offering a cost effective alternative to secure accommodation. Many of the key parts of the ISMS programme were perceived as effective, especially crisis response and Includem/ NCH. Accommodation, employment services, mental health services and addictions services all scored relatively lowly in terms of perceptions of effectiveness.

In terms of perceived effectiveness, ISMS compares favourably, among the stakeholders and Panel Members, with alternative measures within the Children's Hearings System and the adult system. Among Panel Members, ISMS was generally considered as being more appropriate than secure accommodation for persistent offenders and for younger children. Secure accommodation was generally preferred for serious offenders and for cases where there was a risk of self harm or absconding.

Case study evidence

The case study evidence showed that young people on ISMS seem to find it to be a better alternative to secure accommodation, but are not generally positive to the MRC.

ISMS appears to allow young people access to resources that could act as protective factors, and to receive interventions that serve to reduce risk. However, access to suitable housing and accommodation appears to be a problem in several cases.

Social workers and carers seem supportive of ISMS in helping to manage the young person in the community rather than a secure setting. There is some support for the electronic monitoring component in terms of encouraging compliance with conditions, but there was also some dissent found within interviews.

Costs of ISMS

Funding and spending patterns varied sharply across the LAs. This is because they were delivering their own models of service and had different requirements in terms of provisions and resources.

Total expected costs were very similar to total actual costs in all of the LAs, but, given the much lower number of cases than initially anticipated, actual average costs per case were more than double the expected average costs nationally.

Rolling-out ISMS nationally is estimated to cost about £14 million ³.

Overall conclusions

Evidence from the case studies and local evaluation and monitoring work indicate that the ISMS and intensive support service programmes have been effective for a significant number of young people in terms of reduced offending, improved attendance rates on programmes, reducing absconding and reducing substance misuse. There is particularly wide support for the intensive support provision. There also appear to have been reported cost savings against the use of secure in some areas, and the views of professionals seem to be generally positive.

There is some evidence that the MRC works for young people whose problem behaviour is related to their peer group and for those who require rapid response to problems. It would also seem to have a positive impact in helping carers to assert rules.

« Previous | Contents | Next »