The work being undertaken to improve the safety of communities through the Multi-
Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) is vitally important and a priority for
government. The annual reports for 2004/5 provide evidence of that active engagement.
Violence and sexual abuse are unacceptable wherever they occur, and it is evident that
through MAPPA such offenders are identified and better managed than ever before. As
the number of offenders within MAPPA continues to grow as expected, there is clear
evidence that the Responsible Authority, that is the local police, probation and prison
service, is addressing these additional demands by strengthening local partnerships,
using new statutory powers to restrict the behaviour of offenders, returning offenders to
custody where they breach their licence or order, and using the findings of research and
inspection to strengthen national guidance and local practice.
The active implementation of the Criminal Justice Act (2003) during the last year has
clearly enhanced the ability of a number of agencies including health, social services
and housing to work collaboratively with the Responsible Authority in assessing and
managing those sexual and violent offenders in our communities who pose the highest
risk of serious harm. For the continued success of MAPPA this collaboration, together
with the scrutiny of policy and practice, must become the hallmark of these
arrangements. Similarly MAPPA must integrate with other public protection mechanisms
dealing with child abuse, domestic abuse and racial abuse.
For me one of the most exciting developments in this arena in the last 12 months has
been the appointment of lay advisers to assist the Responsible Authority in the oversight
of the arrangements. As ordinary members of the public these lay advisers represent a
diverse, able and committed group of people who are now helping the statutory agencies
to oversee the work being undertaken through MAPPA and communicate with the public
more effectively. Without a growing sense of public knowledge and confidence about this
work, much of the benefits of the public protection arrangements will be lost.
I hope this annual report will be useful, informative and re-assuring to local communities.
The agencies and individuals who have contributed to the achievement of MAPPA
locally are to be commended.
2
THE RESPONSIBLE AUTHORITIES
PRISONS Ian Lockwood CBE – Area Manager, HM Prison Service North West
The inclusion of HM Prison Service as part of the Responsible
Authority for MAPPA has been an important one. The Prison Service
has a long history of protecting the public by holding securely those
individuals sentenced to custody by the Courts. The statutory
involvement in MAPPA brought about by the Criminal Justice Act
(2003) has provided a springboard for greater collaboration with
colleagues in the Police, Probation and ‘duty to co-operate’ agencies.
By preparing thorough risk assessments, managing robust sentence
planning and working closely with MAPPA in the crucial period prior to an offender
returning to the community, the Prison Service has been able to discharge its duty to
protect the public from those individuals who present the most significant risk.
3
THE NEW ROLE OF THE PRISONS
One of the important ways in which the Criminal Justice Act (2003) strengthened the
MAPPA was to make the Prison Service part of the Responsible Authority with police
and probation in each of the 42 Areas in England and Wales. The Prison Service has
been given the enhanced role in recognition of the important part it plays in protecting
the public by keeping offenders in custody, helping them to address the cause of their
offending behaviour, and by undertaking other work to assist their successful
resettlement.
As part of the Responsible Authority the Prison Service is now represented on each of
the Strategic Management Boards (SMBs) in the 42 Areas. The Prison estate is
configured differently from Police/Probation areas in that its establishments are
contained within only twelve geographical areas and two functional areas - the High
Security estate and the Contracted Prisons. For this reason arrangements for Prison
Service representatives on SMBs vary across the country, but each Prison Service Area
Manager has entered into an agreement with the SMBs on how the Service will
contribute both strategically and operationally to the MAPPA. The main focus of the
Prison Service contribution is at operational level. A number of measures have been put
into place across the prison estate to ensure that this will be effective, viz:
■ At least three months notification to police and probation of the expected release
dates of those offenders who have been referred to the Multi-Agency Public
Protection Panel (MAPPP), and at least six weeks notification of those being
managed at Level 2 risk meetings.
4
KEY ACHIEVEMENTS
All community/custodial sentences passed by the Courts are now involved in a nationally
recognised risk assessment process called OASys (Offender Assessment System).
This is a detailed and complex process that focuses on the potential risk any offender
may cause to others. It then concentrates on the interventions that are required during a
period of supervision which are strictly enforced.
Both the Prison and Probation Services now use this single risk assessment system.
In fact the two Services have now been brought together under a single structure called
the National Offender Management Service (NOMS). This approach offers the
consistency of one integrated system to manage an offender from the day the Court
passes sentence, to the day the sentence/supervision period has been completed.
Throughout the year senior managers in the relevant agencies and organisations have
met as the Strategic Management Board for the Multi-Agency Public Protection
Arrangements to ensure best practice is operating across the Merseyside Area. For
example a single information sharing protocol has been agreed by the SMB, and is now
in the process of being agreed by all the relevant agencies.
In May 2004, colleagues in Merseyside took part in a North West Regional seminar
entitled 'MAPPA and Mental Health'. This was pursued as there is now a 'duty to co-
operate' expectation on health colleagues (along with other relevant agencies) to share
information on patients who may pose a risk to others.
Quote from Marian Bullivant, Deputy Director of Nursing, Mersey Care Health
Trust:
"The Mersey Care Trust has continued to work within, and be supported by, the
MAPPA process. We have agreed to sign up to the information sharing protocol. In
2004/5 22 Mersey Care service users came under MAPPA, totalling 45 inter-agency
meetings. The majority of patients were suffering from mental illness e.g.
schizophrenia, or from a personality disorder - the main concern being the potential
for violent behaviour".
The MAPPA process in the Merseyside Area has very close links with the community
psychiatric services and more specialist forensic psychiatric services, which are closely
linked to the facilities at Ashworth Special Hospital in Maghull and the Secure Unit, Scott
Clinic in Rainhill. Health colleagues also hold their own risk assessment meetings to
assist with MAPPA cases. Excellent working relationships exist between health
colleagues and those in the criminal justice agencies.
In 2004/5 the courts and the criminal justice agencies dealt with thousands of cases.
The critical few are managed via the MAPPA process and broken down into 3 levels.
5
Level 1
Where a single agency, e.g. the Probation Service, can safely manage an individual.
Level 2
Where the combined forces of at least 2 agencies are required to manage an individual.
Level 3
This is the highest level of risk, reserved for the 'critical few' who pose a particular risk to
the public,requiring input from a range of agencies. Senior managers come together to
allocate significant resources to manage each individual.
In 2004/5 a total of 141 individuals were managed at either Level 2 or Level 3. Each
case is reviewed regularly throughout the year, totalling over 500 meetings. Of that
number only three were charged with a new serious offence. In addition, 31 were
returned to custody for failing to co-operate to the required standard.
In the same period Merseyside Police recorded 941 offenders on the sex offender
register of which 25 were cautioned or charged with a failure to register within required
timescales etc. The annual figure will increase year on year, as some offenders will
remain on the register for the rest of their natural lives. Merseyside Police have specialist
units concentrating on this work and, in addition, in January 2004 introduced a central
Public Protection Unit to co-ordinate area activities.
The authority for MAPPA activities was formalised (as a statutory duty) in the Criminal
Justice and Court Services Act 2000. That same Act also brought victim issues into the
centre of the criminal justice process, and for the first time gave statutory rights to victims
of sexual or violent crime where the offender received a prison sentence of one year or
more.
A Victim's Experience:
George is retired, and was assaulted while out doing some voluntary
work during which he had his wallet stolen. He was pushed to the
floor, and sustained an injury in the process. He was especially
concerned for his grandson who was with him at the time. After
being visited by a Probation Victim Liaison Officer, George said:
"I did not know this service existed, but I am glad it does, it makes me feel
that someone still believes that the victim matters and is not forgotten,
when the offender has a network of people who are waiting to assist them.
I felt isolated at the end of the trial and did not even know how to get out of
the court room. I am glad that you have come to give me information that I
feel I should have, to enable me to try to get on with my life, instead of
wondering when the offender is coming out of prison and feeling no-one
cares. I am also glad that I have a voice by way of being part of the
release plan. I now feel better in myself and in a better position to cope
with things".
All MAPPA work has the protection of the public and victims as its driving influence, and a
new Victims’ Charter is due out in late 2005.
6
An Offender Case Study (Alan, aged 30)
Alan had a long, escalating record of violent crime - robbing victims to gain money to buy
drugs, and spending between £50 and £100 per day on his drug habit. He had been in
care and served a number of prison sentences. Even in prison he was difficult, not
wanting to confront his offending. His family had disowned him, he had nowhere to live
and fully expected to return to his life of crime on release from prison. All the risk
assessments showed him to be a high risk to the public, and consequently he came to
the attention of MAPPA. The relevant Criminal Justice representatives met to plan for
his return to the community. All effort was focused on preventing Alan re-offending and
minimising opportunities for him to do so. This included intensive and disruptive tactics.
As Alan was regarded as a high risk, prolific offender, he came under the supervision of
an inter-agency group who give intensive oversight to such offenders. The team is made
up of police, probation, health and drug treatment colleagues - with access to other
relevant support services such as accommodation providers. Alan had to report four to
five times per week, and was tested regularly to see if he had returned to drug misuse.
At first Alan was difficult and demanding, seeing himself as 'the victim' and had no
appreciation of the misery caused by his previous offending behaviour. Some drug tests
showed Alan had returned to drug misuse so extra oversight was put into place. After
receiving a formal warning Alan started to co-operate with the agencies concerned.
He responded well to his prescribed medication and soon his drug tests were negative.
Alan's life started to stabilise for the first time in years.
Alan has a long prison licence yet to complete and after a rocky start, meaningful and
sustained improvement has been seen. So far so good - but criminal justice
representatives remain alert and vigilant. They know Alan well and will quickly pick up
any sign of deterioration in his behaviour.
7
STATISTICAL INFORMATION No. of Offenders
ia. The number of registered sex offenders per 100,000 head of population: 67
ii. The number of sex offenders having a registration requirement who were either 25
cautioned or convicted for breaches of the requirement, between 1 April 2004
and 31 March 2005:
a) Applied for: 0
b) Imposed: 0
Category 2 – MAPPA Offenders: Violent Offenders and Other Sexual Offenders (V&OS)
vi. The number of Violent and Other Sexual Offenders (as defined by Section 327 (3), 684
(4) and (5) of the Criminal Justic Act (2003)) living in the Merseyside area between
1 April 2004 and 31 March 2005:
8
Category 3 – MAPPA Offenders: Other Offenders (OthO)
vii. The number of Other Offenders (as defined by Section 325 (2) (b) of the 4
Criminal Justice Act (2003)) living in the Merseyside area between 1 April 2004
and 31 March 2005:
viii. The number of MAPPA offenders in each of the three categories who have been Level 3 Level 2
managed through MAPPP (Level 3) and through Local Inter-Agency
Management (Level 2) between 1 April 2004 and 31 March 2005
viiii. The number of MAPPA offenders between 1 April 2004 and 31 March 2005, Level 3 Level 2
managed at Levels 2 or 3 that were
Murder
Attempted murder
Arson (where there is an attempt to endanger life
Manslaughter
Rape
Kidnap/Abduction or Attempted Kidnap/Abduction
Any other very serious violent or very serious sexual offence
Armed robbery (defined as robbery involving a firearm)
Assault with a deadly weapon or hostage taking
Any other violent or sexual offence where the offender/offence is likely to attract
significant media interest or which raises wider issues of national interest.
9
STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT BOARD (SMB)
NB: The Strategic Management Board will expand in 2005/06 to include two Lay
members; recruitment is currently underway. This is an important development which
has worked well in pilot areas around the country. The Lay members will bring a helpful
public view to MAPPA work in Merseyside.
10
CONCLUSION
This annual report has attempted to explain current arrangements that are in place to
bring all the relevant agencies/organisations together to jointly manage difficult, high risk
offenders. These offenders are ones that tend to hit the headlines and can quickly come
to seem the norm, when in fact this is far from the case.
This report includes all the latest statistical information, and gives actual examples of
high risk offenders who have been safely managed within the community. We hope this
report has reassured you, whilst recognising there will always be concerns and worries,
especially by individuals who feel particularly vulnerable. The SMB members would
welcome any comments or queries concerning the content of this report.
11
Printed by Lancashire County Council
Printing Services, County Hall, Pitt
Street, Preston, Lancashire PR1 8XJ
Tel: 01772-531000
Fax: 01772-263645
12