Assessment in youth justice

The position of relationship based practice in youth justice

“…Indeed, by being respectful and listening attentively to children's 'life stories', barriers can be overcome, potentially resulting in lifestyle, social and behavioural change (Beyond Youth Custody, 2014; NYA, 2011). However, although there is evidence that developing a trusting relationship is 'effective' and that it is a key component of effective practice (Baker, et al, 2011) what is less clear is how to practically secure the engagement of a child (Prior and Mason, 2010).…”

Punishing Poverty: The ‘Scaled Approach’ and Youth Justice Practice

“…As Hudson (2003) points out, a focus on minimising the potential for harm inevitably presupposes a capacity to quantify and predict risk, tending to stimulate the development of actuarial measurements expressly designed for that purpose. Within the youth justice arena this tendency has been manifested through Asset , an assessment tool, completion of which is required for all children who enter the criminal justice system (Annison 2005; Baker 2005). …”

“…Until 2009, the use of Asset was, for practical purposes, confined to the identification of areas of ‘criminogenic’ need to inform the development of intervention planning (Baker 2005). In terms of the statutory framework, the extent of intervention was constrained by what would constitute a proportionate response; the statutory duty to prevent offending was then satisfied by ensuring that the content of intervention was consistent with an assessment of what needed to be addressed if the risk of further offending was to be reduced (Nacro 2003).…”

Promoting Shifts in Personal Narratives and Providing Structures of Support: Transitions of Incarcerated Children in England and Wales

“…Moreover, youth justice practice in England and Wales, including planning for resettlement, is predicated on centrally mandated, structured assessment. While this might be seen as mirroring the importance attached to assessment within the Taxonomy area of effective youth development, it is clear that assessing for resettlement is intended (primarily) to capture criminogenic need rather than educational aptitude or welfare privation (Baker, Kelly, & Wilkinson, 2011).…”