Agenda item

The report was presented by Detective Chief Inspector Mark Alexander, the Integrated Offender Management Project Manager for Cambridgeshire and Annette Powell, Director of One Service.  The report provided the committee with an update on developing an Integrated Offender Management (IOM) approach to offender management and its effect on reoffending within the city. The report explained how the IOM scheme was developed in accordance with joint Home Office Ministry of Justice Guidance published in the IOM Government Policy Statement June 2009. ‘The IOM approach complemented Peterborough’s preventative agenda by looking to change behaviour and prevent reoffending’.

The Committee was asked to endorse and support the continued development of an Integrated Offender Management scheme within the city and to suggest additions or further opportunities to the approach that will further enhance it.

Observations and questions were raised around the following areas:

·         Members noted the good work being done through the IOM scheme but also wanted to know what support was being given to the victims of crimes.   The DCI informed the Committee that the victims were equally as important.  There were two parts to his responsibility one being the IOM programme and the other being the Multi Agency Referral unit which consisted of police officers, staff from Children’s Services and Social Services all working within one team. The victims would be referred to the unit then they would decide which service would be most appropriate to help those individuals. This scheme was very much in its pilot stage at present.

·         Members queried as to whether the officers had any contact with the members of the Citizen Power Project. The Director of One Service advised the Committee that in the early days of developing the One Service they did meet with people from the Citizens Power Project and held some workshops. She had also spoken at some of their events to share some of the learning and compare notes. The discussions were ongoing. The Head of Neighbourhood Services informed Members that a product of the Citizens Power strand had led to a fully re-commissioned drugs treatment system.

·         Members referred to page 30 section 4.4 of the report and asked for clarification on the statement ‘The scheme now manages regularly around 100 offenders. At any one time about half are in custody and half are in the community’. This point was clarified by explaining that the type of people the IOM Scheme was managing had received short custodial sentences. The problems they faced were that they returned to live with their families or friends or they slept on people’s sofas or were possibly homeless. IOM and One service try to ensure that when they come out of prison they go into stable accommodation and remove them from the friends and family who encouraged their criminal activity.

·         Members commented that they fully supported the scheme and felt that it helped to break the chain of criminality in families and helped them to get the support they needed to not reoffend. The DCI added that what Peterborough had just launched was the Family Recovery Project that would hopefully start to address the issue of offender’s children who were most likely to grow up to be offenders. The scheme would work with those families and try and prevent their children progressing into the IOM scheme of the future.

·         The Cambridgeshire Police Authority Representative asked whether there were any partnership working arrangements with colleagues across the boarder where there were some reciprocal arrangements to look after people on the IOM scheme from Peterborough. Sometimes the peer pressure locally was often too great for them to stop offending. The Director of One Service advised that they work with the offenders wherever they are in the country. A local partner had been contracted to provide volunteering and they work with Supporting Others Through Volunteer Action (SOVA) who were a national organisation to provide community volunteers for support those offenders who move to other areas. Members were informed that people had gone as far as Edinburgh and Liverpool and they had a community volunteer working with them.

·         The Youth Council Representative informed the Committee that he also fully supported the IOM scheme.  Was there a scheme similar to the IOM for youth offenders? The DCI advised that they had very strong links into the youth offending service.  The Youth Offending service took the lead in working with young offenders although some individuals were identified as progressing in to adult offenders and these would be adopted into the IOM scheme. The Director of One Service advised that one of the other services she had commissioned was Ormiston Children and Families Trust who worked with key families of prisoners to help them to develop the skills they needed within their family setting to provide a stable environment for the offender and the family.

·         People with drug related problems need support and to be taken away from their usual surroundings. Peterborough churches offer a lot of rehabilitation centres. Do you use these?  Members were informed that there were currently several projects working with the churches.

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee endorse and support the continued development of the Integrated Offender Management (IOM) Programme.