Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements
Multi-Agency Public Protection
Arrangements
In Practice
Shelley Scott
National Head of MAPPA - Ministry of Justice
Roy Ledingham
National MAPPA Police Lead – Ministry of Justice
Neil Prunnell
MAPPA Strategy Manager - Greater Manchester
Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements
Risk Management
“Each case is managed at the lowest appropriate
level that is consistent with providing a defensible
Risk Management Plan”
MAPPA Guidance (2009) Version 3.0, Section 21.5
Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements
MAPPA Management
Level 1 - Ordinary Agency Management
Used in cases in which the risks posed by the offender can be
managed by the agency responsible for supervision/case
management of the offender.
This does not mean that other agencies will not be involved, only
that it is not necessary to actively manage through multi-agency
meetings.
Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements
MAPPA Management
Level 2 - Multi-Agency Public Protection Meeting
Used in cases where it is determined that the management
issues require active conferencing.
Offenders may also be referred to Level 2 after initially been
managed at Level 3.
Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements
MAPPA Management
Level 3 - Multi-Agency Public Protection Meeting
Used where it is determined that the management issues
require:

Active conferencing ..

Senior representation in order to be able to commit
significant resources at short notice .. AND / OR

Where there are significant media issues..
public interest in the case.
AND
AND / OR
Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements
Definition of serious harm
Serious harm is “defined as a risk which is
life threatening and/or traumatic, and from
which recovery, whether physical or psychological, can be expected to be difficult or
impossible”.

Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements
Defensible Decision Making
Ensuring decisions are transparent - embedding risk assessment with rigour
and risk management with robustness.
All reasonable steps have been taken; reliable assessment methods
have
been used;


Information has been collected and thoroughly evaluated;

Decisions are recorded (and subsequently carried out);

Policies and procedures have been followed; and
Practitioners and their managers adopt an investigative approach and
are
proactive.

Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements
Who attends Multi Agency Public
Protection (MAPP) meetings?
 Meetings at both MAPP Level 2 and 3 comprise of -
- Probation
- Police
- Representatives from the duty to co-operate agencies.
 The offender, offender’s family or legal representative are
NOT invited to MAPP meetings.
Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements
MAPPA Level 2/3 Meeting Standard Agenda
Items

Introduction & confidentiality

Subjects Legal & MAPPA Status

Referral Information

Risk Management Plan Review

Additional Information

Risk to Victims

Risk Assessment Summary

Risk Assessment Review
Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements
MAPPA Level 2/3 Meeting Standard Agenda Items









Risk Management Decision
Diversity Considerations
Risk Management Plan
Risk Management Plan (Revised)
Notifications & Disclosure: Decisions
/Recommendations
Communications: Press & Media Handling
Issues for reporting to MAPPA SMB
Review Date(s)
Summary of Risk Management Plan
Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements
Contribution to Meetings by agencies
 Come prepared & with up to date information
 Have knowledge of risks involved & how your
agency is managing that risk
 Be able to commit resources and carry out
actions
 Raise concerns about escalations of risk
 Provide continuity of personnel
Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements
Role of the MAPPA Coordinator
 Dedicated function on behalf of Responsible Authorities
 Accountable to the SMB
 To ensure that multi agency risk management is focused
on the right offenders in a timely and efficient manner
Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements
Tasks of the MAPPA Coordinator
 Identify and record all MAPPA eligible offenders
 Ensure there are effective arrangements in place for
information sharing between agencies
 Assess all referrals to MAPPA level 2 and 3
 Ensure that all agencies attend the MAPP meeting at the
right level
 Ensure that all agencies meet their information sharing
responsibilities
 Chair meetings
Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements
Case Study (1) - David 19 yrs

From a family with poor sexual boundaries - had himself been
abused by more than one family relative

He subjected his brother and sister to sexual & physical abuse

Was placed into a specialist unit for young sexual offenders

When his placement ended - MAPPA Meetings were held involving
key agencies including
- Child mental health services
- Social / children’s services
- Education
- Specialist police officers from sex offender management unit

Joint approach resulted in offer of a social services ‘trainer’ flat

He was still deemed high risk & requiring close supervision
Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements
Case Study (2) cont - David 19 yrs

Due to trust built with offender managers he admitted he still had
sexual feelings towards children and had been watching them at a
local supermarket - this resulted in a disclosure to management &
staff

After a while he became involved in a relationship with a female
pupil from the college he was attending - this also resulted in
disclosure to the girl and her parents.

Later statutory supervision ended - David admitted still having
sexualised thoughts towards children. An order (S.O.P.O) was
applied for preventing contact with children under 16.

At the end of the ‘trainer flat’ tenancy period through MAPPA Local
Housing assisted to find a suitable flat locally.

David became an adult, part way through supervision - the MAPPA
ensured a seamless transition from support of children’s services to
adult services.
Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements
Currently -
David continues to be closely managed and monitored in the community.
He is -

On a programme of ‘one to one’ support from mental health services

Has his own flat

Is in full-time education

His risks of re-offending have significantly reduced
Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements
Case Study (2) - John 48 yrs

Has a lengthy history of sexual offences and has spent long
periods in custody. He is subject of an order (S.O.P.O)

On his release into the community he was managed by MAPPA at
the highest Level - Level 3..

A place was found at a probation hostel (approved premises) to
initially offer very close supervision

This supervision led staff to spot.. at an early stage.. worrying
changes in his behaviour.

At a MAPPA Meeting all the agencies involved shared information
and it was decided to place him under police surveillance

Soon after the surveillance commenced John visited a previously
unknown address on more than one occasion.

A warrant was executed by police and it was discovered he had
committed a number of serious internet offences. He was arrested.
Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements
Currently -
John subsequently appeared at court and was sentenced to 4yrs
imprisonment.
Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements
Exercise
 Consider a case and how the management of the case
would be improved with MAPPA ?
 What are the benefits of a multi agency approach?
 What should be the first steps to implement in Latvia?
Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements
MAPPA in Latvia - Why ?









Increased Public safety
Gives authority / improves system of information exchange
Agencies no longer working in isolation or making critical
decisions alone.
Experts from different agencies contribute to overall risk plan
Provides support to perform current function
Learning skills and best practice from each other
Risk assessments more accurate - less mistakes
Support for disclosure decisions
Increased Public confidence
Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements
MAPPA in Latvia - How ?
MAPPA Co-ordinators
Administration
 Legislation








Start simple - clear objectives / criteria
Systematic Risk Assessment
Clear and consistent thresholding
Standard / consistent paperwork / documents
Protocol for all agencies / confidentiality agreement
Core Group
Performance targets for agency attendance
Annual report
Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements
Shelley Scott
National Head of MAPPA - Ministry of Justice
shelley.scott@noms.gsi.gov.uk
Roy Ledingham
National MAPPA Police lead- Ministry of Justice
Roy.ledingham@noms.gsi.gov.uk
Neil Prunnell
MAPPA Strategy Manager - Greater Manchester Police
neil.prunnell@gmp.pnn.police.uk