Youth Justice - Youth offending teams begin to feel the pinch

Ever since their inception in 2000, youth offending teams (YOTs) have grown accustomed to seeing their funds rise every year. Their collective contributions from the Youth Justice Board (YJB) have soared from £39m in 2000/01 to £117m in 2007/08.

But as the recession bites, the first signs of belt tightening have started to appear. The most recent allocation of money from the YJB to YOTs dropped by £2m to £115m, while central government funding to the YJB for prevention programmes dropped by £2m last year to £36m.

At the same time, YJB chiefs have announced they need to slash overhead costs by 10 per cent and are introducing a new portfolio management system, which will assess whether programmes and projects meet YJB priorities and aims and could result in some being dropped.

To compound matters, other statutory funders of YOTs - probation, police, health and children and young people's services - are facing their own pressures.

Impact on services

The cutbacks are prompting fears about the impact on services that YOTs provide over the coming months and years. Simon Page, head of York YOT, says the funding his service receives from the YJB is yet to be affected. But he has concerns about other areas.

"It's the bigger picture that worries me, with cuts from other partners and the overall rickety funding structure for what should be core statutory service," he says. "The theory behind the patchwork funding of YOTs might have been okay when there was money pouring into the public sector but leaves YOTs very vulnerable to each partner nibbling away."

Mike Rees, manager of North Somerset youth offending services, says the pressure to cut costs at partner agencies means no new money is available.

"The struggle with them is to maintain their current budget allocation," he says. "It is fair to say all of them - probation, police, health and children and young people's services - are under budgetary pressure."

Rees believes YOTs can benefit by being creative in accessing services funded by other means such as family intervention projects paid for by the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF).

He adds that it is critical YOTs push the credibility and contribution of preventative services to ensure continued funding for them.

Tim Bateman, senior policy development manager at crime reduction charity Nacro, says there are a number of anecdotal signs that things are getting more difficult for YOTs.

"For example, YOT staff are finding it hard to get money for training, which is the kind of thing that in a sense is discretionary," he says.

Mike Thomas, chair of the Association of YOT Managers, says he does not believe the current YJB cost-cutting drive will necessarily affect YOTs. "We have to be realistic," he says. "Any government department has to look in terms of saving money. It makes sense that the YJB, which funds a whole range of activities, is undertaking a review."

He adds that the YJB's portfolio management system may lead to some areas being brought together in a more cost-effective way.

COST CUTTING

• Government funding for YJB prevention programmes was down five per cent in the last financial year (2008/09) to £36m compared with £38m in 2007/08
• YJB funding for YOTs dropped for the first time, by £2m to £115m in the last financial year
• The YJB last month announced its ambition to cut overhead costs by 10 per cent
• Contributions from the Ministry of Justice, Home Office and the Department for Children, Schools and Families to the YJB for spending on education have increased year-on-year since YOTs were set up. The combined figure currently stands at £49m, compared with £17m in 2000/01
• Councils will take responsibility for education of children custody, with a phased roll-out beginning from 2010