Scaled Approach and Youth Rehabilitation OrderYOT Briefing pack

v1.2

Objectives

● To give you an overview of:

The Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 (CJ&I)

The Scaled Approach

The Youth Rehabilitation Order (YRO)

● To outline the YJB’s approach to implementation support for YOTs

● To begin planning operationally and strategically for implementation

Overview of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 including the Youth Rehabilitation Order

Key aspects of the CJ&I Act 08

● Purposes of Sentencing 30 November 09

● YRO 30 November 09

● Youth Default Orders 30 November 09

● Changes to Referral Orders 27 April 09

● Youth Conditional Caution To be advised

● Custody-related changes 2008

● Anti-Social Behaviour Orders 1 February 09

● Rehabilitation of Offenders Act December 08

Purposes of sentencing

● Brings purposes of sentencing in line with principal aim of preventing offending and gives equal weight to other factors including welfare

● When sentencing an offender under 18 the courts should give equal weight to:

the principal aim of the youth justice system (prevent offending)

the welfare of the young person in accordance with section 44 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933, and

the purposes of sentencing

● punishment of offenders

● reform and rehabilitation of offenders

● protection of the public

● making of reparation by offenders to persons affected by their offences

The Youth Rehabilitation Order

● Designed to combine existing community sentences into one generic sentence – the YRO

● Will enable sentencers to tailor sentences to individual risk and needs

● Provides menu of interventions to tackle offending behaviour

● Provides robust community sentence that can be returned to on multiple occasions adapting the menu to minimise the use of custody

● The Reparation Order and Referral Order remain as interventions below the YRO

● The Detention and Training Order remains for serious or persistent offenders where an intensive YRO is not deemed appropriate

The Youth Rehabilitation Order● Length dependent upon what requirements are imposed but cannot be

longer than three years

● No restrictions on the number of times a YRO can be ordered or the number of requirements

● Sentencing Guidelines Council will issue guidelines to the judiciary in relation the YRO in late summer 2009 to inform training lead by Judicial Studies Board

● The Scaled Approach provides a model for supporting YOTs to tailor proposals effectively in PSRs to the individual’s likelihood of reoffending and risk of serious harm to others

When making a YRO the court:

● Must consider that the offence is serious enough to warrant a YRO, and that

the restriction of liberty must be proportionate to seriousness of offence (ss

147-148 Criminal Justice Act 2003)

● Must specify the date by which requirements must be completed (three

years’ maximum length, requirements within may be different dates)

● Court must revoke an existing YRO, Referral Order or Reparation Order

before sentencing to a new YRO – existing orders (e.g. Supervision Order)

can run concurrently with the YRO for offences committed prior to the

commencement of the YRO

When making a YRO the court:● May make two or more YROs on one sentencing occasion for associated

offences (Schedule 1 paragraph 31) but:

YROs must be of the same type and run concurrently

Requirements which can vary for each YRO can run consecutively or

concurrently

● Where a Crown Court makes a YRO it can order that further proceedings

relating to that YRO can be undertaken by the youth court and magistrates

court

Further proceedings include:

● Failure to comply

● Any application for amendment or revocation

What does it replace?

● Action Plan Order

● Attendance Centre Order

● Community Punishment & Rehabilitation Order

● Community Punishment Order

● Community Rehabilitation Order

● Curfew Order

● Drug Treatment and Testing Order

● Supervision Order

● Exclusion Order

YRO Requirements

1. Supervision Requirement

2. Programme Requirement

3. Activity Requirement

4. Attendance Centre Requirement

5. Curfew Requirement

6. Education Requirement

7. Residence Requirement (16/17 year

olds only)

8. Local Authority Residence

Requirement

9. Drug Treatment Requirement

10. Drug Testing Requirement (14 years

old or over)

11. Mental Health Treatment

Requirement

12. Intoxicating Substance Treatment

Requirement

13. Exclusion Requirement

14. Prohibited Activity Requirement

15. Electronic Monitoring Requirement

16. Unpaid Work Requirement (16/17

year olds only)

17. Intensive Fostering

18. Intensive Supervision and

Surveillance

Custody Threshold

Custody threshold● Custodial sentences:

for an imprisonable offence

the court forms the opinion that the offence/s are so serious that a

community sentence cannot be justified

court states YRO with Intensive Supervision and Surveillance

(ISS) or Intensive Fostering not appropriate and reasons why

(schedule 4 – paragraph 80 (3))

● For a non-imprisonable offence, custody is an option only where:

1. it follows ‘wilful and persistent’ non-compliance of a YRO, and

2. there is ‘wilful and persistent’ non-compliance with a YRO with

Intensive Supervision and Surveillance or Intensive Fostering

length of time in custody is limited – four month DTO for the above

situation

Alternatives to custody● The YRO brings into its remit two alternatives to custody:

YRO with Intensive Supervision and Surveillance (ISS)

YRO with Intensive Fostering (pilot areas only)

● Conditions:

The offence must be imprisonable

The offence is so serious, custody may be appropriate

For under 15 years only if available if deemed persistent

● Must be deemed persistent to get custody – therefore if court is considering custody for young person under 15 then ISS and Intensive Fostering become available

● If not deemed persistent but the offence is still deemed serious, then a YRO with proportionate requirements should be imposed

ISS and Intensive Fostering

● ISS mandatory requirements: An extended activity requirement (more than 90 days but no more than 180

days) Supervision Requirement A Curfew Requirement with electronic monitoring (standalone the exception)

● Intensive Fostering mandatory requirements: Pilot areas only (London, Staffordshire, Trafford and Wessex) Court must consider whether living arrangements contributed to offending Must end no later than 12 months Must not include any period of time after the young person has turned 18 Young person would become looked after Must include Supervision Requirement

● For both orders, additional requirements can be attached (e.g. Programme Requirement) but the YRO is still considered a YRO with ISS / Intensive Fostering

Assessment for ISS proposals

ASSET/ROSH

undertaken

PSRon

sentencerequired

START

Assessed level of

intervention required

Custody threshold

met

Medium intensity ISS with 90 days activity:

Month 1: 20 hoursMonth 2: 20 hoursMonth 3: 10 hours

Months 4-6: 5 hours

High intensity ISS with 90 days activity:

Month 1: 25 hoursMonth 2: 25 hoursMonth 3: 25 hours

Months 4-6: 5 hours

Extended (12 month) ISS with 180 days activity:Months 1-4: 25 hoursMonths 5-6: 15 hoursMonths 7-12: 5 hours

If the young person meets the custody threshold but does not have an Asset score of 24 and above and/or a high or very high ROSH, the YOT should propose a high level YRO intervention package as determined by local

resources

YES

YES

NO

ISS threshold

NO

(1) e.g. where there has been multiple YRO's/ISS/previous custodial sentence/wilful and persistent failure to comply?

Asset score

33-64 and/or very high

ROSH

Additional criteria must

be met *(1)

Is an extended ISS the only

option to prevent a custodial

sentence?

AND

Asset score

24 – 32 and/or high ROSH

Additional criteria must

be met *(1)

Is a High Intensity ISS

the only option to prevent a custodial

sentence? (1)

AND

Custody-related changes

● PSR must be in writing where possible custody sentence likely

● Public protection sentences

● Curfew credit for tagged bail periods, at courts discretion if nine+hours per

day, to be taken into account in fixing DTO period

● Young people aged 17 years can be tagged on bail, if court satisfied bail

would not otherwise be given

● Subject to satisfaction re risk of serious harm to others, automatic 28 day

release after recall for 12+ months custody

Breach of YRO requirements

● It is now within the legislation and National Standards that:

Warning must be given for failure to comply without reasonable excuse

If third warning within 12 month ‘warned period’ case must be referred to court for breach proceedings

● Court action can be stayed if exceptional circumstances – with manager approval

● Court penalties for breach

No action – continue with existing YRO

Fine (under 14 max £250 / over 14 max £1000)

Amend YRO but not with ISS or Intensive Fostering unless already applies

Revoke YRO and re-sentence

● Breach is of the YRO not the requirement

Draft transitional arrangements

Q1. A young person commits an offence prior to 30 November 2009 but

is sentenced after implementation. Which legislation will they be

sentenced under?

The date that will determine which provisions will apply when a young

person is sentenced is the date the offence was committed. See

paragraph 1(1)(a) of Schedule 27 to the Criminal Justice and

Immigration Act 2008

Q2. A young person commits an offence both pre and post 30 November

2009 but is sentenced for both after the 30 November 2009. How

should they be sentenced?

Yes they would have to be sentenced to both old and new orders

Q3. A young person is subject to a current order goes on to reoffend after the implementation of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008. How should they be sentenced? Can the old and new run concurrently? Yes, however, if the existing order is a “youth community order” then

the court will have to ensure, so far as practicable, that any requirement imposed by a YRO is such as to avoid any conflict with the requirement of the existing “youth community order”

Q4. A young person is on the community element of their custodial sentence and they reoffend. Can a YRO run alongside this ‘licence’ period? If subject to DTO under s 100 of the Sentencing Act then YRO will

have to take effect either instead of or after any supervision period i.e. not at the same time

Draft transitional arrangements

Referral Order changes in the Criminal Justice & Immigration Act

From April 2009, Courts can make Referral Orders where:

● there is one previous conviction and Referral Order not given

● previous bind over or conditional discharge

● in exceptional circumstances on YOT recommendation in case with previous Referral Order

● also includes where a previous custodial sentence has been given

And court discretion to:

● discharge Referral Orders early for good behaviour

● extend up to three months at YOT recommendation e.g. non-compliance

Youth Conditional Caution● Higher-tariff, pre-court disposal available for use by police – must be CPS

approved

● Initially to be piloted during 2009 with 16 and 17 year olds (date to be confirmed)

● Only if certain conditions met e.g. signs offence admission, sufficient evidence to charge, Appropriate Adult present if 16 or under

● And can include fine (up to £100) or activity (up to 20 hours) supervised by the YOT

For further information please refer to the

Youth Conditional Caution Code of Practice (Draft)

Further community-related provisions

● Statutory one year reviews of ASBOs for under 17 year olds

● ISOs must be issued with every ASBO where magistrates’ court consider it

would help prevent further antisocial behaviour

● Youth Default Orders power in lieu of unpaid fine to impose unpaid work

(16-17 yrs), curfew (with or without EM) or attendance centre

● Reprimands and Warning spent once given; Youth Conditional Caution

after three months; Apply retrospectively

● Sexual Offences Prevention Order

● Court Ordered Reviews – piloted in Liverpool and will require further

consultation and a statutory instrument to implement

Implications

● Public Accounts Committee found for adult Community Orders:

Requirement options limited by availability/funding

Delayed starts impacting on completion

Geographical variation including enforcement

● For YOT and management board

All YOT partners understand and support the complexity of YRO

requirements and the Scaled Approach

Recognise that YOT will case manage orders but expect partners to

support contact activity

Seek regular Scaled Approach and YRO performance management

reports, consider and forward plan to ensure resources match need

Overview of the Scaled Approach

Why introduce the Scaled Approach?

● Audit Commission (2004) recommendation:

‘YOTs should make better use of Asset to determine the amount as

well as the nature of interventions with individuals using a scaled

approach’

● Recent review of evidence to develop the revised Key Elements of Effective

Practice tells us that interventions are more effective when:

the level and intensity of intervention is matched to an assessment of

the likelihood of reoffending

it is focused on the risk factors associated with offending

● YOT interest in a risk-led approach and existing practice in some YOTs

● Supported by the risk-based pilot that the YJB ran with four YOTs to inform the development of the Scaled Approach

● Already a tiered framework of interventions in the adult sector from which we could gather learning

● The YRO will require a more tailored and targeted approach to the proposals made in court reports

Why introduce the Scaled Approach?

Anticipated benefits

More efficient and effective allocation of YOT resources

Strengthened case management across the youth justice system

Improved practice in assessment quality, pre-sentence reports and intervention planning

Tailored interventions based on an the young person’s risks and needs

Fewer young people in custody

Reduced reoffending Reduced risk of serious harm

Increased public confidence

Principles of the Scaled Approach

● Aims to ensure interventions are tailored to the young person, with more

resources directed to those most likely to reoffend and/or pose a risk of

serious harm to others

● Framework for assessment, proposals to court and youth offender panels,

interventions and review

● Overall revised National Standards for Youth Justice Services incorporating

the Scaled Approach should not result in additional demands on YOTs 

● Assessment determines frequency of YOT contact and type of intervention appropriate (quality is paramount)

● Focus on:

likelihood of reoffending (using Asset dynamic and static factors)

risk of serious harm to others (using Risk of Serious Harm Asset)

● Professional judgement can be used to amend the assessed intervention level but this decision must be:

defensible

discussed and agreed with a manager

clearly recorded

● Assessment of vulnerability should influence multi-agency input

Principles of the Scaled Approach

How did we develop the Scaled Approach?

● Used all available evidence (e.g. Asset Research, Juvenile Cohort Study data, etc)

● Sought approval from Ministry of Justice lawyers

● Piloted risk-based approach to interventions with four YOTs (Neath Port Talbot; Shropshire, Telford and Wrekin; Suffolk; and Wessex)

● Commissioned a process evaluation of the pilots (awaiting publication)

● Consultation – invited key people from the youth justice system to take part and provide feedback

● Developed and published the latest draft model in February 2009

Scaled Approach in practice

How does it work?

The Scaled Approach should be used by the YOT to determine the level of intervention (either standard, enhanced or intensive) required when a child or young person is subject to one of the following court orders:

• Referral Order

• YRO

• Community element of a custodial sentence

Does not include pre-court interventions

The Scaled Approach and the YRO● The Scaled Approach will enable and encourage YOTs to tailor the content

of orders to the individual risk factors and needs of the young person

● For example, those at higher risk of reoffending and/or causing serious

harm to others receiving the most intensive interventions

● This approach will align closely with the YRO, as the menu of requirements

will enable the order to be better tailored to the individual

● Scaled Approach contacts will only be applied to the Supervision

Requirement of the YRO. Assessed level of intervention will help YOTs

determine proposals for appropriate requirements

Court requests

PSR

Court indicates

likely sentence

YOT undertakes assessment

Gather Info fromrange of sources

Populate Asset

(and ROSH if applicable)

DetermineScaled Approach

Intervention level

Apply professional judgement if

applicable and seek managerial

signoff

Determine possible YRO requirements

Prepare PSR based on all available info

Scaled Approach in practice – an example

Static factors Scoring Initial score

Offence type Motoring offences/vehicle theft/unauthorised taking = 4Burglary (domestic and non-domestic) = 3Other offence = 0

Age at first Reprimand/Caution/Warning

10 to 12 = 4 13 to 17 = 2No previous Reprimand/Caution/Warning = 0

Age at first conviction 10 to 13 = 414 to 17 = 3No previous convictions = 0

Number of previous convictions

4 or more = 41 to 3 = 3No previous convictions = 0

Total static factors score (0-16)

Determining Likelihood of Reoffending – static factors

Determining Likelihood of Reoffending – dynamic factors

Dynamic factors/Asset section Scoring Initial score

Living arrangements 0, 1, 2, 3, 4

Family and personal relationships 0, 1, 2, 3, 4

Education, training and employment 0, 1, 2, 3, 4

Neighbourhood 0, 1, 2, 3, 4

Lifestyle 0, 1, 2, 3, 4

Substance use 0, 1, 2, 3, 4

Physical health 0, 1, 2, 3, 4

Emotional and mental health 0, 1, 2, 3, 4

Perception of self and others 0, 1, 2, 3, 4

Thinking and behaviour 0, 1, 2, 3, 4

Attitudes to offending 0, 1, 2, 3, 4

Motivation to change 0, 1, 2, 3, 4

Total dynamic factors score (0-48)

TOTAL SCORE (0-64)

Overall assessed likelihood of reoffending

Rating

Standard (score 0-14 inclusive)

Enhanced (score 15-32 inclusive)

Intensive (score 33-64 inclusive)

Determining intervention level

Child/young person profile Intervention Level

Low likelihood of reoffending (as indicated by Asset score [dynamic and static factors] between 0 and 14 inclusive)ANDLow risk of serious harm (as indicated by no risk of serious harm assessment being required, or low risk of serious harm assessment)

Standard

Medium likelihood of reoffending (as indicated by Asset score [dynamic and static factors] between 15 and 32 inclusive)ORMedium risk of serious harm (as indicated by risk of serious harm assessment)

Enhanced

High likelihood of reoffending (as indicated by Asset score [dynamic and static factors] between 33 and 64 inclusive)OR High risk of serious harm or very high risk of serious harm (as indicated by risk of serious harm assessment)

Intensive

Statutory contacts for assessed intervention level

Intervention Level

(likelihood of reoffending Score)

Contacts per month

for first three months

Contacts per month

for rest of order

Standard (0 – 14 inclusive) 2 1

Enhanced (15 – 32 inclusive) 4 2

Intensive (33 – 64 inclusive) 12 4

The contact is a face to face planned meeting between the child/ young person, the YOT case manager, another member of the YOT, or a member of another agency or a volunteer approved to work with the young person in respect of the supervision of his or her court order.

Intervention level

Function Possible proposal to court (not exclusive)

Standard Enabling compliance and repairing harm

• Reparation• Supervision • Stand-alone unpaid work• Stand-alone attendance centre

Enhanced Enabling compliance and repairing harm ANDEnabling help/change

• Reparation• Supervision • Requirement/component to help or change behaviour, e.g. drug treatment, offending behaviour programme, education, programme• Combination of the above

Intensive Enabling compliance and repairing harm ANDEnabling help/change ANDEnsuring control

• Reparation• Supervision +• Requirement/component to help or change behaviour• Requirement/component to monitor or restrict movement, e.g. prohibited activity, curfew, exclusion or electronic monitoring• Combination of the above

Proposals to court

Case management

● After sentencing/ Referral Order contract agreement, a detailed intervention plan should be drawn up in line with Scaled Approach intervention levels

● YOT practitioners, as responsible officers, have the discretion to amend the level of supervision where there is clear evidence of a change in circumstances that would lead to amended intervention level

● Decisions to amend intervention levels must be recorded in an Asset and discussed with the young person, family, carers, etc.

● Any welfare or diversity needs should be addressed as part of ongoing case management

● YOT and secure estate relationships should be considered

Other considerations

● Criminal Justice: Simple, Speedy, Summary

● Deter Young Offender Scheme (DYO)

From 30 November the ‘Deter Group’ will be those young people falling

into the intensive category under the Scaled Approach

The Office for Criminal Justice Reform has published its management

framework

● Knife Possession Prevention Programme

● Secure estate

eAsset changes to allow the Scaled Approach intervention levels

Resettlement planning

Benefits of the risk-based approach

Benefits cited by pilot YOTs

• ‘A risk-based approach is logical, the most intervention for the most needy should lead to reduced reoffending and public protection’

• ‘Scaled Approach allows you to focus on the high risk offenders – those most likely to reoffend or cause serious harm.’

• ‘Going from what we had to risk-based approach did make us think more about assessment and do more ROSHs’

• ‘Staff are more satisfied with this approach; better professionalism, better consistency, makes jobs more satisfying

• ‘You get time to work with people you need to work with’, ‘It is common sense’

• ‘It’s a more rational approach’ ‘It’s defensible’ ’Putting resources in the right place’

• ’A focus on quality is now taking place’

• ‘I would not go back to the old way of working’

Benefits the Scaled Approach can contribute to include:• Contribute to reduction of breaches, instances of serious harm

• Increase the chances of interventions tackling offending behaviour

• Improve the quality of assessments, plans and reports

• Staff confidence in improved outcomes for young people

• Improve staff satisfaction

• More effective use of YOT resources

• Help enable defensible managerial, operational and resource decisions

• Improve sentencer confidence

And the possible disadvantages• Static factors weighting may adversely affect intervention levels?

• Increase potential for challenge by courts, defence, young people, youth

offender panel members and family?

• Community / custody transition issues

• Practitioners might tamper with the banding

• Management board will withdraw resources

• Concern around sustaining quality where you identify more contacts

Benefits approach: However…

• Scaled Approach is a journey, involving significant cultural change

• It is straightforward to measure the Scaled Approach in relation to YOT

practice (quality, congruence), but it is difficult to have confidence in its

effect on key strategic objectives (e.g. reducing reoffending)

While benefits to young people can be almost immediate, measuring those and wider benefits is not possible in a short timescale

Benefits approach: reporting

• National measures will be collected via National Indicators and

measurements which are already collected through YOT returns

• No new measures planned specifically for Scaled Approach

• For local measures, YOTs will be asked their ‘confidence level’

• Baseline questionnaire

• Post-Scaled Approach go live questionnaire and post-implementation

review

Implementation overview

Scaled Approach roles and responsibilities

Central Implementation Team

Wales / Regional Scaled Approach and YRO leads

YOT Scaled Approach and YRO Leads

YOT management boards,YOT officers

The role of the Central Implementation Team

● Design and development of the implementation model

● Design and development of implementation tools for YOT partnerships and

Wales / regional teams

● Knowledge transfer for YOT partnerships

● Advice and assistance to Wales / regional leads

● Proactive and reactive support to YOT partnerships in conjunction with

Wales / regional leads

● Information and query management

Implementation approach: Standard

STANDARD

Legislative changes and the Scaled Approach

● Guidance

● Toolkits

● Briefing packs

● OU training

Implementation

● YOT Change Checklist

● Toolkits

● Contact level forecasting tool

Plus regional / Wales support as normal!

Implementation approach: Standard

● Based on learning from the pilots

● Set of tasks to ensure YOTs are ready for 30 November

● It includes:

Set-up

Governance

Contact level forecasting tool

Stakeholder engagement (including courts)

Staff training and quality assurance

Performance reporting

● Sent out to all YOTS as planned on 23 April

Implementation approach: YOT Change Checklist (Standard)

Implementation approach: What will happen to the checklists?

Checkpoint 1YOT checklist

R/W checklist

Submission to: scaled.approach@yjb.gov.uk

YOT Change Checklist submission cc Regional/Wales Lead

Ongoing monitoring of system-wide implementation readiness

Checkpoint 2YOT checklist

R/W checklist

Checkpoint 3YOT checklist

R/W checklist

Central collation, analysis & reporting

Implementation approach: Proactive

Proactive Support

Upfront planning, based on judgement, impact, knowledge of business, number of cases

STANDARD

Implementation approach: What might proactive support look like? ● Assistance to YOT on key activities including:

Use of contact level forecasting tool

Engagement of the management board and establishment of the

steering group

Engagement of courts, youth offender panels and YOT officers

Advice on the use of materials and tools generated by the YJB including

quality assurance toolkits and benefits measurements pack

Cap Gemini analysis

Heads of Regions/W

alesRegional/

Wales leads input

Confirmed list of YOTs

Compare with existing /

impending Performance Consultant

work

Wales / Regional leads

Performance Consultants

Central Implementation Team

Proactive support

Submissions from the Change

Checklists

Discusswith YOTs

Ongoing monitoring and assessment of priorities

Implementation approach: Identifying who needs proactive support

• Wales / Regional leads• Performance Consultants• Central Implementation Team

Proactive support

Confirm with the YOTs identified whether

support is actually sought

Scoping meeting

organised by Wales / regional team

Scoping meeting

confirms nature of support

Support delivered by:• Regional/Wales lead and/or Central Team) • Performance consultants

Attended by:• YOTs•Regional/Wales lead•Other regional/Wales reps•Central Implementation Team member

Implementation approach: Delivering proactive support

Implementation approach

Reactive Support

Request from YOTs for assistance

Upfront planning, based on judgement, impact, knowledge of business, number of cases

Proactive Support

STANDARD

Information and query management: Proposed methodYOTs submit queries to Wales/regional lead using appropriate mechanism

Wales / regional response to query

Update FAQsRevise model (if necessary)

Revise guidance and toolkits

Central Implementation Team analysis of queries

Project timeline

Phase 1:

Project Initiation

Phase 2: Preparation Phase 3: Implementation Phase 4:

Post

Implementation

April

09’

May 09’ –

19 June

June ‘09 Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec +

Until April 11’

• Kick-off briefing events

• Scope of Case

Management technical

solution

• First submission of

Change Checklist

• First formal checkpoint

report

•Support YOTs

•Delivery of further briefing events

• Second submission of Change

Checklist

•National Standards published

•Case Management Guidance

published

•Case management technical

changes developed, tested and

deployment commenced

• Second formal checkpoint report

•Support YOTs

•YOT Leads delivering

knowledge drop in

events for YOT staff

•Third submission of

Change Checklist

•National Standards

and Case

Management

guidance distributed.

•Technical changes

will be deployed

• Third formal

checkpoint report

• Monitor

benefits

• Monitor post

implementation

issues

• Three formal

checkpoints to

assess the

implementation

success of the

Scaled

Approach &

YRO

● December 2009 onwards until April 2011

Support users

Post implementation change checklists

Post implementation reviews

Benefits realisation support and tracking

Enhancing the Scaled Approach model where necessary

Continued link with the performance framework

Gradual reduction in project team size

● April 2011

Move to business as usual

Project timeline: Post November 2009

Next steps

Next steps● Review and plan the suggested activities listed on the YOT Change

Checklist

● Submit first Change Checklist on 11 June

● Start using the Scaled Approach section of the YJB website for toolkits

● Organise local briefing events!

● Attend the second series of events that will be planned for in September

● Organise post September local briefings for your staff

● Provide any feedback/issues to your Wales/regional leads