The Hull Adult
Female Triage Project
Iain Brennan and Simon Green in collaboration with Humberside Police
University of Hull, UK
Intervention overview
Pre-charge diversion for females with little or no past history
of offending who are arrested for low gravity offences
Eligibility assessment in custody suite
Referral to women’s charity, Together Women Project
Release and recorded as a triage disposal
Empirical basis for the initiative
Little research on value of adult pre-charge diversions but they
have been weakly effective with juvenile offenders (Schwalbe et al., 2012)
Little evidence that drug-related ‘diversion and referral’
schemes work
(Mayhurst et al., 2015)
Previous UK study of effectiveness of pre-custody diversions to
women’s centre for adult females was inconclusive (Jolliffe et al., 2011)
Intervention overview
1. Female enters Custody
2. TWP leaflet issued to prisoner
3. Overall Assessment of Needs conducted (HYJS)
1. Arrest
2. Assessment of criminogenic needs
3. Admission of guilt
4. Eligibility check – police record
5. Eligibility check – gravity score 1 or 2
6. Referral appointment made with
Together Women Project
7. Release from custody
8. Arrest recorded as ‘triage diversion’
9. Voluntary attendance at TWP
4. Assessment Details input on system
5. PACE Interview/Investigation
YES
PREV. CONVICTIONS/
CAUTIONS?
YES
No
No
Prisoner Processed nonTriage
See footnote
ELIGIBLE?
GRAVITY SCORE 1 OR 2?
YES
ADMISSION?
No
YES
No
6. Joint Agency
Assessment for Triage
DISPOSAL
7. Police Decision
SUITABLE FOR TRIAGE
DISPOSAL?
No
YES
8. HYJS make appointment at
TWP
11. Intelligence Recorded
onto system
10. Crime Report
Finalised as ‘Triage
Diversion’
9. Prisoner Released
‘NFA’
In exceptional circumstances consideration may be given for a triage
disposal if the female has pre-cons or cautions. For example, they were
given a caution 2 years ago.
The ‘Together Women’ project
Established in 2006 to provide a “safe women-only space in
which women can access support and services”
Thorough assessment of needs with key worker at initial
meeting
Tailored individual support with key worker: Drug and alcohol
misuse; prostitution; domestic abuse; mental health;
housing; deprivation; childcare
Evaluation overview
Design: Natural experiment (survival analysis; intention-to-treat)
Intervention: Pre-charge diversion and referral to TWP
Setting: December 2012-June 2013 with one-year follow-up in Hull, UK
Sample: Females arrested for low-severity offence
Exclusion: Any adult conviction; police caution within two years
Inclusion: Admission of guilt; acceptance of triage diversion
Outcomes: Rearrest (Yes/No); Days until rearrest; Number of rearrests
Control sample
25
Pilot nature of project
inadvertently created
control group
Number of arrestees
20
15
Intervention
Control
10
5
0
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
Month, 2012-2013
May
Jun
Jul
Study pathway
Arrestees
n=643
Not eligible
n=485
Eligible
n=158
Intention-to-treat
Per protocol
Not seen
(Control group)
n=114
Seen and referred
(Intervention group)
n=44
Did not attend
n=26
Attended
n=18
Results
Rate of rearrest was low for both groups: 14% vs 26%
Triaged arrestees were 46% less likely to be rearrested
but…when they were rearrested, they were rearrested
quicker and more frequently than the control group
Two years on…
Female triage ongoing and extended to ‘street triage’
Triage extended to male arrestees
Causes, types and volume of male arrests has required a
revision and evolution of the intervention
Cultural shift from ‘offence without punishment’ to ‘emphasis
on prevention’
Conclusions
Mechanism: No idea which part of the intervention was
the active ingredient – voluntary attendance was 41%
First step: These early findings from a pilot project should
not be taken as proof that this intervention works and the
eligibility criteria should be refined
Future work: Intervention should be trialled and
evaluated elsewhere with a larger sample and a Campbell
review of police-involved diversion schemes undertaken
Thanks!
i.brennan@hull.ac.uk