Youth custody: what is the future?
Neil Puffett
Tuesday, February 3, 2015
As the number of young people in custody dips below 1,000, experts consider the future of the secure estate.
Although widely welcomed by campaigners, news that the number of under-18s in custody has dropped below 1,000 for the first time poses a number of questions for the future of youth custody.
With the population falling by two-thirds in the space of just six years (see graph), several large young offender institutions have been "decommissioned", meaning there are now just six of them now compared to 13 in 2009. This has increased the catchment area for each institution, an occurrence that has been blamed for reported increases in gangs and violence due to troubled young people from different areas mixing in a volatile environment.
All this comes against the backdrop of controversial plans to introduce "secure colleges", the first of which is an £80m establishment for 320 young people, earmarked to open in 2017 next to Glen Parva young offender institution (YOI) in Leicestershire, prompting concerns that young people will eventually be concentrated in just a few "titan" prisons.
Here, John Drew, former chief executive of the Youth Justice Board, and Tim Bateman, criminologist at the University of Bedfordshire, give their views on the state of youth custody.
What are the implications of fewer young people in custody?
Tim Bateman "The falling numbers mean that those children who continue to be imprisoned will, on average, have more serious offending histories and are likely to present more complex needs. For instance, the latest HMI Prisons Annual Report on children in custody found that the proportion of boys in YOIs who reported having a mental or emotional health problem had risen by four per cent over the previous year. This group of children is accordingly more likely to pose greater challenges for custodial establishments and resettlement providers, with those detained in YOIs more likely to report being subject to physical restraint and segregation."
John Drew "As a group, young people in custody are now more challenging because they are more concentrated than before. Ideally, we should now be downsizing the custodial units. From inspection reports, Parc YOI appears to be doing well with a unit of just over 60, as are several of the secure children's homes and secure training centres. More smaller units would also mean young people could be placed nearer home, aiding resettlement."
What does it mean for secure colleges?
John Drew "There is a real risk that such a large unit could become a large white elephant, a solution to yesterday's problems. A secure college of 320 young people in a field in Leicestershire makes no sense when there are fewer than 1,000 young people in custody. There is nothing that I have read about the secure college model that would prevent it being run at a maximum size of 80. I'd love to see the Ministry of Justice think again about this size question. As numbers stand, three secure colleges could meet existing demand. There would then be huge operational and logistical problems. Young people would be held very long distances from family, court, education and employment. It's not obvious that these have been thought through properly."
Tim Bateman "Not surprisingly, the reduction in imprisonment has resulted in a significant reconfiguration of the custodial estate and it is disappointing in this context that the government has not taken the opportunity to shift resources towards the use of smaller units with higher staff to child ratios - such as secure children homes (SCHs). Indeed, with closures of SCHs, there is the potential for a shortage of provision for particularly vulnerable children."
Is the current level of youth custody sustainable?
John Drew "Recent history shows that radical reductions are entirely possible if there is the will. There are still considerable regional variations in custody rates, so there is no reason to imagine we could not get numbers down to 500. For this to happen, all partners in the youth justice system must be signed up to the ambition. That's the basis on which we have made the progress to date."
Tim Bateman "It is difficult to predict whether current trends will continue - and indeed many commentators did predict that there would be a fall of this magnitude. Certainly, a significant number of those currently imprisoned could be accommodated in the community without unduly posing a risk to the public - but that is unlikely to be the determining factor. Providing the existing target to reduce the number of children in custody remains in place, the current - relatively low - population is sustainable."
What could trigger numbers rising again?
John Drew "Numbers in custody have fallen because of purposeful diversion out of the youth justice system, supported by all involved. Public spending cuts could threaten this."
Tim Bateman "The fall in custody has been driven to a significant extent by the decline in first-time entrants (FTEs). The main trigger that might lead to a rise in incarceration would accordingly be a sharp increase in FTEs and a corresponding growth in the number of children in court. Such a development would pose real difficulties for a trimmed-down secure estate - as opening capacity takes longer than closing and some of the smaller facilities will have disappeared rather than having been re-rolled. Youth justice is intensely political, and broader developments - such as a high-profile case that catches the public imagination - might easily reverse the recent falls relatively quickly."