Evaluation of Youth Offending Teams in New Zealand

‘Just Published’ flyer

Number 52, November 2007

Anne Harland and Amanda Borich

Research, Evaluation and Modelling Unit

Introduction

Youth Offending Teams (YOTs) were formed in late 2002 at the recommendation of the Youth Offending Strategy (2002). It was intended that through the YOTs, effective working relationships would be built between the four government service delivery agencies that intervene with youth offenders: Police; Child, Youth and Family; Education; and Health. The overall aim of YOTs is to co-ordinate service delivery at a local level to young offenders. There are currently 32 teams spread throughout New Zealand.

The Youth Justice Leadership Group (YJLG) has been charged with overseeing the performance of YOTs and ensuring that all teams are supported to function effectively. The Youth Justice Leadership Group comprises national policy and operational managers from the Ministries of Justice, Social Development, Health and Education; the Department of Child, Youth and Family; and New Zealand Police.

The Ministry of Justice provides two fulltime YOT Adviser positions to provide support and guidance to YOTs and act as a link between the YOTs and the Youth Justice Leadership Group.

This report presents the findings of a process evaluation of Youth Offending Teams in New Zealand. The evaluation used both qualitative and quantitative methods to collect information about how YOTs operate, with the intention of identifying examples of best practice and opportunities for development, and useful guidelines for improving the efficiency and appropriateness of their functioning. Interviews were held with 45 key informants from seven YOTs, including both current and past YOT members.

The key informants interviewed were from a range of agencies and both managers and practitioners were interviewed. In addition, a survey was sent electronically to all current YOT members. A total of 199 members completed the survey, representing a 42% response rate. A focus group discussion was held with members of the YJLG in order to gain an understanding of their views and their expectations of YOTs. A limited-focus literature review was undertaken to inform the recommendations arising from the evaluation.

Purpose of Youth Offending Teams

The evaluation found a lack of a shared understanding about the purpose and role of YOTs and four out of ten survey participants did not believe that 'the role of the YOT is clear to all participants'. There was also a lack of clarity about how the aims should be achieved, with YOT members requesting that direction be provided as to their purpose and how the YOTs should function.

Respondents identified aspects of inter-agency engagement as the most important or significant function of YOTs. Best practice shows that the higher the level of engagement, the greater the potential gain from the inter-agency engagement. On a continuum of collaboration (as identified in the literature review) YOTs tend to currently be positioned at lower levels of collaboration, and respondents identified communication, information sharing and co-operation as the main forms of the inter-agency engagement.

Youth Offending Teams are generally seen to be effective in encouraging inter-agency collaboration, although they are considered to be 'quite' rather than 'very' effective. YOTs were rated as being far more effective at collaboration between the four core youth justice agencies than between the four core agencies and local community groups.

A specific advantage of YOTs in terms of inter-agency engagement is that whilst there are other inter-agency forums that involve Police and Child, Youth and Family, the YOT's structure includes Health and Education and therefore it allows for a more holistic approach to be taken when addressing youth offending in local areas.

It is believed that Youth Offending Teams have encouraged communication and networking that would not have occurred without the YOT. Just over four in ten survey participants 'strongly agreed' that this is the case. Just over three in ten 'strongly agreed' that YOTs have facilitated inter-agency collaboration that would not have been achieved without the YOT.

Whilst YOT members consider that they generally meet with the same people at YOT meetings as at other inter-agency meetings, they believe that their YOT does serve a different purpose to other inter-agency groups and that different issues are discussed at the YOT meetings.

Membership and other involvement in Youth Offending Teams

The core composition of a YOT should be made up of a local practitioner and a manager from each of the four key agencies: Police; Child, Youth and Family; Health; and Education. Youth Offending Teams are expected to develop ways of sharing information and keeping other stakeholders up to date, such as holding liaison meetings and inviting interested parties to attend YOT meetings.

There is confusion about what the relationship between YOTs and community organisations should be. There is considerable variation between YOTs, both in terms of what they believe that they should be doing in relation to community involvement, and in terms of what they actually do.

Most of the YOT members involved in this evaluation stated a preference for the membership of their YOT to be extended beyond the current composition, and beyond the four core government agencies. The importance of maintaining a focus on core business was, however, acknowledged by some YOT members who believed that there are both advantages and disadvantages of having community organisations as members of the teams.

Non-core agencies can be involved with YOTs in ways other than through membership. This includes consulting the agency or organisation or involving them in specific initiatives when required. This type of involvement is currently undertaken by YOTs. Consultation and involvement is highest for government agencies, both central government (excluding the four core agencies) and local government. There is a higher level of consultation and involvement amongst Māori than amongst Pacific representation and service providers. Respondents indicated a preference for a higher level of consultation and involvement from other agencies and organisations than is currently the case.

Achievements of Youth Offending Teams

Whilst co-ordination or collaboration was generally seen as the main purpose of YOTs, YOTs fulfil other roles such as identifying gaps in services in the local areas and undertaking projects and initiatives.

A recurring theme that emerged from those who had undertaken specific projects is that the projects are useful for increasing the cohesiveness of the team, and to create a sense of team success. Projects are seen to energise members and to encourage regular attendance. However, many teams do not see projects and initiatives as a necessary function of YOTs and do not believe that they have the resources, in terms either of funding or people, to undertake projects.

Youth Offending Teams are seen to be effective at improving the dissemination and flow of information about youth offending. Information of various types is shared, some of it reasonably informal and some of it more data-driven. There is considerable variation between teams as to the extent and type of information shared.

Some information sharing contributes to one of the purposes of YOTs: identification of service gaps in the local areas. Youth Offending Teams are considered by their members to be more effective at identifying gaps in services available than at implementing projects or initiatives.

Governance of Youth Offending Teams

The New Zealand Police's input to YOTs was considered by YOT members who responded to the survey to be the most valuable of the four core agencies whilst Health's input was rated as the least valuable. For each agency, it was considered by survey respondents that the value of the agency's input was much higher than the value that agency received from their involvement in the YOT.

Health was the agency seen as gaining the least from their involvement in YOTs.

Figure 1 Rating of a) value of each agency's input to YOT and b) value received by each agency from their involvement in YOT as 'very valuable'

Having the representation of both managers and practitioners on YOTs was considered to be an appropriate model, with managers providing the strategic direction and decision making regarding resources, and the practitioners as the frontline people with an overview of what is happening in the community. Some YOT members believed that the managers currently represented on the YOTs are not senior enough, often as a result of delegation by more senior managers. A lack of appropriate senior level management representation appears to be hindering decision making on a number of YOTs. Only six in ten of the survey respondents thought that there is sufficient decision making power from the four core agencies.

The Police, and Child, Youth and Family are more likely to be seen by all respondents to have sufficient decision making power on the YOT than are Education or Health.

Most YOT members were confident that they have the support and encouragement of their managers regarding their involvement in YOTs. However fewer considered that their agency valued their involvement.

The chair is a critical role to the YOT and a motivated chair is considered very important for the success of a YOT. A number of personal characteristics and leadership skills were identified as being important for an effective chair: strategic thinking; passion; team building skills; leading with authority; adhering to good meeting protocols; facilitation skills; communication skills; ability to maintain neutrality; and having drive and clout.

The success of a particular YOT is currently driven to a large extent by the involvement and input of individual members rather than the structure and processes of the YOT. The driving force can be the person who is the chair, but it can also be a motivated member of the YOT other than the chair. Youth Offending Teams are therefore vulnerable to changes in membership and the absence or departure from the YOT of a key member who is a driving force can have a considerable effect on the performance of that YOT.

Funding for projects is considered important for the success of YOTs and the current lack of funding is an issue for YOT members. The perceived lack of funding and resourcing was seen by some as indicative of an overall lack of commitment to YOTs.

Meetings

Meetings are core business for YOTs and are expected to be held monthly. Almost all YOTs do meet monthly, even though a few members would prefer to meet less frequently.

YOT members were asked about the frequency of representation of managers and practitioners from each of the core agencies at their YOT meetings. According to survey respondents, practitioners are more likely to attend YOT meetings regularly than are managers.

Figure 2 Frequency of Representation of the Core YOT Agencies by Manager and Practitioner Level

A lack of consistent attendance can impact the value and continuity of YOT meetings and consistency of attendance is considered to be one of the key requirements to ensure the success of YOTs. Reasons given for inconsistency of attendance included: staff shortages; work load issues; other inter-agency meetings; personal motivation; travel time; and travel costs.

High membership turnover was also seen to impact the functioning of the YOT. Turnover increases the time required at a meeting to undertake introductions and briefings on the business at hand, so that perceptions of the usefulness of YOT meetings may be reduced. High turnover also increases difficulties in the building and maintaining of team relationships and trust. Half of the survey respondents stated they have been involved with YOTs for less than two years and a quarter of them have been involved for less than a year.

Overall successfulness of the Youth Offending Teams

There is considerable variation between YOT members as to perceptions of the overall effectiveness or successfulness of YOTs. There was a general tendency for Child, Youth and Family and also Education representatives to be more positive about the success of YOTs, and for Police and Health representatives to be somewhat less positive.

Whilst almost half the survey respondents stated that their YOT was effective overall, only a very small proportion (8%) stated that it was 'very effective'. Statistical analysis was undertaken that showed that rating the YOT positively on aspects relating to implementation of projects, improving outcomes for young people and their whānau, making day-to-day work easier, clarity of role and effectively serving the geographic area the YOT covers, is a predictor of an overall positive rating of effectiveness. YOT members believe that it is these outcomes, rather than information sharing and collaboration, that are a true measure of the YOT's effectiveness.

However, YOTs are generally seen to serve a useful purpose, with eight in ten survey respondents agreeing that YOTs in general serve a very useful purpose. Child, Youth and Family representatives were the most positive about YOTs serving a useful purpose and Police representatives were the least positive.

Almost six in ten survey respondents stated that their YOT was successful and the same rating was given for YOTs in general. Rating their YOT positively on aspects relating to the speed of implementation of projects, improving outcomes for young people and their whānau, serving a useful purpose and effectively covering the geographic area it covers, is a predictor of an overall positive rating of successfulness of their YOT. The analysis showed that aspects relating to collaboration were not significant in driving perceptions of the YOT's successfulness.

Going forward

A number of factors were identified as being important for the successful functioning of YOTs. It was acknowledged that the more successful a YOT is, the better the attendance and participation of members will be, and that this will generate further success. The motivation of the members is seen to be of greatest importance for the success of a YOT; both having motivated people who drive the YOT and having a motivated chairperson. Consistency of attendance at the meetings was also considered extremely important for the success of a YOT.

The need for greater support from a number of sources was identified in this evaluation. Greater support is required from the core agencies, the Ministry of Justice and the Youth Justice Leadership Group. It was considered that a paid co-ordinator could offer support to YOTs, in particular administrative assistance, however support from other sources was seen as more critical for the success of a YOT.

The four core agencies need to provide greater championing and awareness of YOTs within their organisations, and they need to value their representatives for their involvement in the YOT.

The Ministry of Justice could provide more support to YOTs by providing: more information about what is happening with regard to youth offending, including sharing of information about how other YOTs are dealing with issues, a YOT website including contact details of YOT members and possibly a shared database; induction and orientation packages for YOT members; guidance, training and support for the chairperson; and more face to face support, including visits to YOTs and facilitated planning and team building sessions.

The Youth Justice Leadership Group could provide more support to YOTs by: having a greater local presence by undertaking more visits to YOTs and providing more information and regular feedback; becoming more involved with YOTs that are struggling; and championing YOTs at a national level to ensure greater investment in and support for YOTs from the core agencies at the senior management level.

A small number of YOTs have a locally supported coordinator to assist them. One role for a co-ordinator could primarily involve undertaking the administrative work for the YOT and this is the role most key informants thought of when asked about a co-ordinator. It was considered that it would be helpful to have a dedicated person to support the YOT chair and to have them undertake the administrative duties that currently fall to the chair. However, some saw that the co-ordinator role should additionally cover research tasks, project co-ordination and management, liaison, information sharing and dissemination and linking with the community. More than three-quarters of the survey respondents thought that having a paid co-ordinator was an important requirement for the success of a YOT.

Conclusions

Youth Offending Teams were established to improve inter-agency engagement between Child, Youth and Family; Police; Health; and Education. The YOTs' overall aim is to co-ordinate service delivery at a local level to young offenders. The conclusions that follow provide an overview of the issues that have emerged from the evaluation.

Youth Offending Teams successfully encourage inter-agency engagement between the four core youth justice agencies. Specifically, the sharing of information and communication between the agencies is considered to be one of the key benefits of YOTs in addressing youth offending. However, on the continuum of collaboration (as presented in the literature review), YOTs are currently operating at the lower levels of communication and cooperation rather than at the higher levels of collaboration that they have the potential to operate at.

Whilst there are other inter-agency forums that involve Police and Child, Youth and Family, the YOT's structure includes Health and Education and therefore allows for a more holistic approach to be taken to addressing youth offending in the local areas.

However, there is a lack of a shared understanding about the purpose and role of the YOTs and also about their governance and day-to-day operation. This is perhaps one explanation for the considerable variability in the functioning of teams. Specifically, there is a lack of clarity as to whether the purpose of the teams is primarily interaction between the members (i.e. networking, collaboration, sharing information) or operational (undertaking initiatives and projects), or the extent to which both roles are expected.

The success of a particular YOT is currently driven, to a large extent, by the involvement and input of individual members rather than the structure and processes of the YOT. The individual YOTs are therefore vulnerable to changes in membership and the absence or departure from the YOT of a key member can have a considerable effect on the performance of that YOT. This dependence on individual members is another explanation for the considerable variability in the functioning of teams.

In terms of the day-to-day operation of YOTs, there is a lack of clarity regarding how community organisations should be involved with YOTs. There are issues both about consulting with community organisations and involving them in specific initiatives, and also whether membership of the YOT should be core agency membership only or whether community members should also be members. The literature indicates that before successful collaboration can happen between government agencies and NGOs, core agencies need to be working together properly.

There is also a lack of clarity as to which services within Health and Education offer the most appropriate representation on YOTs. In some teams this has led to a level of disillusionment, both by the Health and Education representatives and representatives from the other agencies, as to the role that Health and Education are expected to take on the YOT.

Having clear action plans along with systems and processes that support the planning process, are important factors to creating a culture of success within YOTs. Once a culture of success is achieved, further success becomes more easily achievable.

Current perceptions of effectiveness and success of YOTs are related to outcomes associated with projects or initiatives and improving outcomes for young people and their whānau, rather than with aspects of collaboration.

Despite some specific issues, Youth Offending Teams are considered by their members to serve a very useful purpose; they effectively encourage inter-agency engagement and information sharing and achieve positive benefits that would not have occurred without the teams.

Recommendations

The following recommendations relate to issues that need to be addressed; they are not the solutions to those issues. The group primarily responsible for addressing each of the recommendations is identified, as is the group that needs to take action.

How to obtain a copy

The full report is available on the Ministry of Justice website - www.justice.govt.nz

Full Report - Corp 336
Just Published - Corp 337