Scaled Approach and
Youth Rehabilitation Order
YOT 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
11. Mental Health Treatment
Requirement
12. Intoxicating Substance Treatment
Requirement
5. Curfew Requirement
13. Exclusion Requirement
6. Education Requirement
14. Prohibited Activity Requirement
7. Residence Requirement (16/17 year
15. Electronic Monitoring Requirement
olds only)
8. Local Authority Residence
16. Unpaid Work Requirement (16/17
year olds only)
Requirement
9. Drug Treatment Requirement
10. Drug Testing Requirement (14 years
old or over)
Custody Threshold
17. Intensive Fostering
18. Intensive Supervision and
Surveillance
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
YES
Asset
score
33-64 and/or
very high
ROSH
ASSET/
ROSH
undertaken
PSR
on
sentence
required
Custody
threshold
met
START
AND
Additional
criteria must
be met
*(1)
Is an extended
ISS the only
option to
prevent a
custodial
sentence?
Assessed
level of
intervention
required
NO
YES
Asset
score
24 – 32 and
/or high
ROSH
AND
Additional
criteria must
be met
*(1)
Is a High
Intensity ISS
the only
option to
prevent a
custodial
sentence? (1)
NO
Extended (12 month) ISS
with 180 days activity:
Months 1-4: 25 hours
Months 5-6: 15 hours
Months 7-12: 5 hours
High intensity ISS
with 90 days activity:
Month 1: 25 hours
Month 2: 25 hours
Month 3: 25 hours
Months 4-6: 5 hours
Medium intensity ISS
with 90 days activity:
Month 1: 20 hours
Month 2: 20 hours
Month 3: 10 hours
Months 4-6: 5 hours
ISS threshold
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
(1) e.g. where there has been multiple YRO's/ISS/previous custodial sentence/wilful and persistent failure to comply?
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
Draft transitional arrangements
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
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
Why introduce the Scaled Approach?
● 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
Anticipated benefits
More efficient and effective allocation of YOT resources
Fewer young people in custody
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
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
Principles of the Scaled Approach
● 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
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
Scaled Approach in practice –
an example
Court
requests
PSR
Court
indicates
likely
sentence
YOT
undertakes
assessment
Gather
Info from
range of
sources
Populate
Asset
(and ROSH
if applicable)
Determine
Scaled Approach
Intervention
level
Apply
professional
judgement if
applicable and
seek managerial
signoff
Determine
possible YRO
requirements
Prepare PSR
based on all
available info
Determining Likelihood of
Reoffending – static factors
Static factors
Scoring
Offence type
Motoring offences/vehicle theft/unauthorised taking = 4
Burglary (domestic and non-domestic) = 3
Other offence = 0
Age at first
Reprimand/Caution/
Warning
10 to 12 = 4
13 to 17 = 2
No previous Reprimand/Caution/Warning = 0
Age at first
conviction
10 to 13 = 4
14 to 17 = 3
No previous convictions = 0
Number of previous
convictions
4 or more = 4
1 to 3 = 3
No previous convictions = 0
Total static factors score (0-16)
Initial
score
Determining Likelihood of
Reoffending – dynamic factors
Dynamic factors/Asset section
Scoring
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
Initial
score
Overall assessed
likelihood of reoffending
Rating
Standard (score 0-14 inclusive)
Total dynamic factors score (0-48)
TOTAL SCORE (0-64)
Enhanced (score 15-32 inclusive)
Intensive (score 33-64 inclusive)
Determining intervention level
Child/young person profile
Low likelihood of reoffending (as indicated by Asset score
[dynamic and static factors] between 0 and 14 inclusive)
AND
Low risk of serious harm (as indicated by no risk of serious harm
assessment being required, or low risk of serious harm assessment)
Medium likelihood of reoffending (as indicated by Asset score
[dynamic and static factors] between 15 and 32 inclusive)
OR
Medium risk of serious harm (as indicated by risk of serious harm
assessment)
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)
Intervention
Level
Standard
Enhanced
Intensive
Statutory contacts for assessed
intervention level
Intervention Level
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
(likelihood of reoffending Score)
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.
Proposals to court
Intervention
level
Function
Possible proposal to court (not
exclusive)
Standard
Enabling compliance
and repairing harm
•
•
•
•
Enhanced
Enabling compliance
and repairing harm
AND
Enabling 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
AND
Enabling help/change
AND
Ensuring 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
Reparation
Supervision
Stand-alone unpaid work
Stand-alone attendance centre
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
Wales / Regional
Scaled Approach
and YRO leads
YOT Scaled Approach
and YRO Leads
Central
Implementation Team
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
Implementation approach: 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:
YOT Change Checklist (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:
What will happen to the checklists?
Checkpoint 1
Checkpoint 2
Checkpoint 3
YOT checklist
YOT checklist
YOT checklist
R/W checklist
R/W checklist
R/W checklist
Submission to: scaled.approach@yjb.gov.uk
YOT Change Checklist submission cc
Regional/Wales Lead
Central collation, analysis & reporting
Ongoing monitoring of system-wide implementation readiness
Implementation approach: Proactive
Upfront planning, based on
judgement, impact,
knowledge of business,
number of cases
Proactive Support
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
Implementation approach:
Identifying who needs proactive
support
Proactive support
Cap
Gemini
analysis
Heads of
Regions/
Wales
Regional/
Wales
leads
input
Confirmed
list of
YOTs
Compare
with
existing /
impending
Performance
Consultant
work
Wales / Regional
leads
Discuss
with
YOTs
Performance
Consultants
Central
Implementation Team
Submissions
from the
Change
Checklists
Ongoing monitoring and assessment of priorities
Implementation approach:
Delivering proactive support
Proactive support
• Wales / Regional
leads
• Performance
Consultants
• Central
Implementation
Team
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
Upfront planning, based on
judgement, impact,
knowledge of business,
number of cases
Proactive Support
STANDARD
Reactive Support
Request from
YOTs for
assistance
Information and query
management: Proposed method
YOTs submit queries to Wales/regional lead using appropriate mechanism
Wales / regional response to query
Central Implementation Team analysis of queries
Update FAQs
Revise model
(if necessary)
Revise guidance
and toolkits
Project timeline
Phase 1:
Phase 2: Preparation
Phase 3: Implementation
Project Initiation
April
09’
May 09’ –
Post
Implementation
June ‘09
Jul
Aug
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec +
Until April 11’
19 June
• Kick-off briefing events
•Support YOTs
•Support YOTs
• Scope of Case
Management technical
solution
•Delivery of further briefing events
•YOT Leads delivering
knowledge drop in
events for YOT staff
• First submission of
Change Checklist
•National Standards published
• First formal checkpoint
report
Phase 4:
• Second submission of Change
Checklist
•Case Management Guidance
published
•Case management technical
changes developed, tested and
deployment commenced
• Second formal checkpoint report
•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
Project timeline:
Post November 2009
● 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
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