By Storm Ervin, Lily Robin, Lindsey Cramer, Paige Thompson, Rod Martinez, Jesse Jannetta

Aspects such as community engagement, partnerships, flexible eligibility criteria, credible messengers, and relationships with law enforcement are critical to successful implementation of youth antiviolence interventions. Urban conducted a scan of practice of 14 interventions intended to reduce youth group and gun violence implemented across the country to learn more about implementing antiviolence strategies and to identify critical elements of implementation often missing from the research base. In this report, Urban aims to lift up the tactics, approaches, and methods intervention staff and partners, law enforcement professionals, justice system personnel, and community members deemed essential for successful implementation. The findings from the scan of practice informed the recommendations identified in Urban’s accompanying practice guide.

Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 2022. 86p.

By Natalie Beck and Jennifer S. Wong

The purpose of the present meta-analysis was to determine the effectiveness of wilderness therapy in addressing youth delinquency. A systematic review of the literature was conducted using 27 electronic databases and numerous gray literature sources, surveying literature published from 1990 to 2020. The search identified 189 potential studies for inclusion, resulting in a final study pool of 11 studies contributing 14 effect sizes from a total sample of 1,874 treatment youths. Both self-reported delinquency and caregiver-reported delinquency were examined using separate random-effects models. Pooled analyses yielded large, positive, and significant effects of 0.832 and 1.054 respectively, indicating that wilderness therapy is potentially an effective tool for addressing delinquent behaviors among youth. Limitations of the study include a lack of moderator analyses due to the small sample sizes. Wilderness therapy is a promising form of diversion programming and further investigation into this treatment modality is warranted.

Criminal Justice and Behavior, Volume 49, Issue 5, May 2022, Pages 700-729

By Caitlin Cavanagh

Adolescents are developmentally distinct from adults in ways that merit a tailored response to juvenile crime. Normative adolescent brain development is associated with increases in risk taking, which may include criminal behavior. Juvenile delinquency peaks during the adolescent years and declines in concert with psychosocial maturation. However, current U.S. approaches to juvenile justice are misaligned with youth's developmental needs and may undermine the very psychosocial development necessary for youth to transition out of crime and lead healthy adult lives. In this article, I discuss empirically supported and efficacious responses to juvenile crime in the United States, as well as opportunities for further developmental reform of the juvenile justice system. Developmentally appropriate responses to juvenile crime prioritize community-based corrections and engage youth's social context in the rehabilitative process. The juvenile justice system shares the responsibility to prepare youth to live fulfilling, productive adult lives; that responsibility can be achieved by partnering with developmental scientists to inform juvenile justice practice and policy.

Child Development Perspectives, Volume 16, Issue 3 Sept. 2022 pages 125-187

By Kirsten Russell

Research aims and overview

Youth violence, which occurs between individuals aged 10 to 29, can take many forms and has health, social, and economic consequences for individuals, families and communities (World Health Organisation, 2015). When considering figures relating to young people’s involvement in violence in Scotland alongside concerns that the indirect social and economic consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic may lead to an increase in youth violence (Irwin-Rogers, Muthoo, & Billingham, 2020), it is clear that there is a pressing need to better understand which strategies can be implemented to address violence in youth. This report was undertaken to draw together high-quality international evidence about what works to prevent youth violence and is intended to inform policymakers and practitioners about the extant evidence base and effectiveness associated with different approaches and interventions.

Key Findings

• There is evidence to suggest that school and education-based approaches are effective in reducing youth violence. These include both bullying prevention programmes (e.g. Olweus Bullying Prevention Program, KiVa) and social and emotional learning programmes (e.g. PATHS).

• Interventions that have been identified as promising include: school-based programmes which seek to prevent violence in dating and intimate partner relationships, parenting and family-focused approaches, mentoring programmes, and community-based coalitions.

• There is mixed evidence about the effectiveness of out-of-school activities and early childhood home visitation programmes.

• Deterrence and fear-based approaches have been identified as having no effect on youth violence outcomes and, at worse, are potentially harmful to young people.

• Due to a limited body of evidence, it is not yet possible to draw reliable conclusions on the effectiveness of programmes that specifically aim to prevent gang involvement and subsequent gang violence. As a result, the evidence is inconclusive.

Moderating factors: Key Findings

Across this report, the importance of accounting for the moderating factors, potential facilitators, and potential barriers for prevention interventions for youth violence have been highlighted where evidence is available. Accounting for these factors can encourage effective implementation of these evidence-based interventions.

According to the Early Intervention Foundation the “key principles of effective programmes” for preventing youth violence include:

• Strategies that seek to create positive changes in the lives of youth and/or their families, as well as reduce risk factors and prevent negative outcomes

• The involvement of trained facilitators who are experienced in working with children and families

• Working with young people in their natural setting (e.g. school or home)

• Ensuring that programmes are delivered as originally designed, specified and intended (i.e. high implementation fidelity)

• Regular and/or frequent contacts (e.g. regular weekly contact delivered over the school term or year)

• Encouraging positive interactions between young people, families and teachers/schools (i.e. addressing violence at individual and relationship levels)

• Regular and/or frequent contacts (e.g. regular weekly contact delivered over a school term, the school year or longer)

• Delivery though interactive sessions that provide the opportunity for skills-based demonstrations and practice

In addition, it has been emphasised within the literature that programmes should be theory-driven (Nation et al., 2003; Kovalenko et al., 2020). That is to say that interventions should be based on an explicit theoretical model that describes and justifies how and why an intervention may lead to a change in violence-related outcomes.

Conclusions

The impact of the COVID-19 crisis has the potential to contribute to a rise in youth violence. Moreover, the direct and indirect consequences of violence are broad, extending beyond victims and perpetrators to families and communities. As such, the evidence presented within this report can contribute to decision-making in work to prevent youth violence. School and education-based approaches have been shown to be effective, and the factors that influence their effectiveness have been highlighted. It has been noted, however, that there is limited evidence regarding who is more likely to change (e.g. in relation to age, gender, and sociodemographic status) and when programmes should be implemented. Moreover, it remains to be seen whether interventions of this nature influence youth violence outcomes when delivered out-with education settings or within non-school-aged samples (e.g. those aged 19-29).

Overall, much of the available high-quality evidence on the effectiveness of interventions to prevent youth violence has come from high income countries (such as the USA). As such, it is important to account for cultural context when considering the application of interventions within a Scottish context (Annex B of the report outlines implementation fidelity and associated issues).

Some interventions have been identified as out of scope for this report (see Annex E for a full out of scope list). While these interventions have not been included within this report, this does not necessarily indicate that they do not work. Rather, they have been excluded due to limited available evidence (e.g. high-quality evaluations) or they are beyond the primary prevention focus of this report (e.g. topic out of scope).

Edinburgh: Scottish Government, 2021. 70p.

By Melissa M. Labriola, Samuel Peterson, Dulani Woods, Michael J. D. Vermeer, Brian A. Jackson

Based on a one-day count, the number of youth held in juvenile justice facilities declined 77 percent between 2000 and 2020. As a result, the number of residential placement facilities has also decreased, by 50 percent. This decrease is starkest among large facilities, which have decreased 74 percent from 1997 to 2019. Facility closure has gained attention and support for several reasons, such as investments in alternative rehabilitation and community-based programs, cost savings, and recognition of the need to treat youth involved in the juvenile justice system with a focus on rehabilitation rather than punitive measures. The decisions to close these facilities are complex.

This report presents findings and recommendations from an expert panel that explored challenges and opportunities associated with closing juvenile residential facilities and implementing community-based alternatives. The highest-priority needs centered on equity and disparity and the need for family engagement throughout the punitive process. These results are pertinent to a wide audience, including justice-system stakeholders, community corrections practitioners, the research community, and funders or grant-making organizations

Rand. 2024. 24p.

By Carey Marr, Sara Singh, Claire Gaskin, John Kasinathan, Trisha Lloyd & Kimberlie Dean

Past research suggests that diverting young people away from the criminal justice system and into mental health services can reduce subsequent reoffending, but the impact of such programs on the rates of timely mental health service contact are largely unknown. In this study, we examined a sample of 523 young people who were deemed eligible for mental health diversion between 2008 and 2015. Around half (47%) of these young people were granted diversion by a Magistrate. Overall, the levels of timely mental health service contact after court finalization, even for those who were granted diversion, appeared low given that the purpose of diversion is to facilitate such contact for all those diverted. Specifically, only 22% of those who were granted community-based diversion and 62% of individuals granted inpatient-based diversion had mental health service contact within 7 days of court finalization. Rates of health contact were much lower for those who were not granted either type of diversion (8% and 23%, respectively). Diversion was associated with a significant reduction in reoffending rates, but the impact of early mental health service contact was less clear. There is a need to understand the reasons why many young people are not accessing appropriate mental health services following diversion in order to improve outcomes and fully realize the intended benefits of mental health court diversion.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FORENSIC MENTAL HEALTH, 2024, VOL. 23, NO. 3, 204–216https://doi.org/10.1080/14999013.2023.2276961

By the Vera Institute of Justice and Young Women’s Freedom Center

This report is the product of a two-year, multidisciplinary, mixed methods study by Young Women’s Freedom Center (YWFC) and the Vera Institute of Justice (Vera). The work leading to this report was a community-based research project that included outreach, quantitative data collection, collaborative analysis, and original qualitative data collection in the form of interviews with 50 system-involved women, girls, and gender-expansive young people across the state. The report offers policymakers, funders, advocates, and communities the data and evidence they need to understand the scope of girls’ incarceration in California. The report › provides background on the history and context of girls’ incarceration, › lays out the key findings from quantitative and qualitative analyses, and › provides a roadmap of how communities and state leaders can work together to end the incarceration and criminalization of girls and gender-expansive youth. This analysis shows that it is possible for every county in California to end girls’ incarceration with bold and decisive action.

New York: Vera Institute of Justice, 2024. 89p.

By Alliance for Youth Justice, et al.

The establishment of a distinct secure estate for children has been government policy for nearly 25 years. This endeavor began with the transfer of commissioning and oversight of children’s custodial institutions to the Youth Justice Board (YJB) in 2000, and the coming into force of the prison service policy ‘Regimes for prisoners under 18 years old’ in the summer 1999.[1] In September 2017, the Youth Custody Service in the Ministry of Justice was established “as a distinct part of HM Prison and Probation Service” and YJB’s responsibility for child prisons was duly moved across.[2] Over the past 25 years, the number of children in custody at any one time has decreased significantly – from 3,000 at its high point in the early 2000s to under 450 today.[3] However the majority of children are still detained in institutions whose history, culture, and practices originate and in many respects replicate the confinement and punishment of adults. Only 19% of children in custody today are living in secure childcare establishments; the remainder are in prisons.[vii] Moreover, despite successive promises of transformation, children in prison continue to experience significant harm and neglect.[4] Within the overarching, recurring policy goal of transformation, there have been consistent, discrete government and YJB pledges focused on individual aspects of children’s safety and welfare. We have selected 10 pledges for review and analysis: Children will be kept safe Children’s relationships with their loved ones will be supported Looked after children will have their needs met, and their rights fulfilled Solitary confinement will not be used for children Restraint will only ever be used on children as a last resort. Pain-inducing techniques will be reserved for extremely grave incidents Children will have at least 30 hours of education and purposeful activity a week Meals will meet the needs of growing children, and mealtimes will be a social activity All staff will be properly vetted, trained, and supported to enable them to carry out skilled work with children who have multiple needs Children will receive the help and support they need whilst in custody, so they can thrive once they return to the community YOIs and STCs will be permanently closed  

London: Alliance for Youth Justice, 2024. 40p.

By Karen Freeman and Neil Donnelly

The NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research (BOCSAR) has released a new paper examining interactions between young people aged 10 to 13 years and the NSW criminal justice system. The study finds that most 10- to 13-year-old children who appear in court are from a disadvantaged background, have been a victim of violence, have had significant contact with the child protection system, and have a parent with a history of offending. Aboriginal children and children living in regional and remote NSW are disproportionately affected.

In terms of their criminal justice pathway, the study found that:

• Most young people aged 10 to 13 years are dealt with under the Young Offenders Act which aims to divert young people from the court system were possible. In 2023, NSW Police commenced 4,662 legal proceedings against young people aged 10 to 13 years; two-thirds (63) were formal court diversions.

• Of the 719 criminal court appearances finalised in 2023 involving defendants aged 10 to 13 years, only 20% resulted in a proven outcome; half (53%) had all charges withdrawn and a quarter (25%) had a not-guilty finding. Even where an offence was proven, half (50%) resulted in a court ordered caution or youth justice conference. 

• There were 171 distinct young people aged 10 to 13 years who had an episode of youth detention in 2023. These young people all entered detention on remand, and three quarters (74%) of detention episodes were for 24 hours or less.

PARRAMATTA NSW, The NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research (BOCSAR) , 2024. 23p.

By Garner Clancey, Cecilia Drumore and Laura Metcalfe

The University of Sydney and Youth Justice New South Wales signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) in July 2021. This MoU builds on various prior collaborative activities between the two organisations and related work in other jurisdictions. This paper reflects on the progress and challenges of collaboration of this kind. Specifically, there has been tentative progress in engaging non-traditional parts of the university in youth justice projects.

The initial stage of the collaboration highlighted challenges, including structures within the university which can frustrate interdisciplinary work. Time lines, staff turnover and resources also impacted this collaboration. We conclude with an outline of what might be achieved through ongoing collaboration and signal the importance of ongoing research to capture data and insights regarding the nature of this relationship as it develops.

Trends & issues in crime and criminal justice no. 691. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology. 2024.

By David B. Wilson, Mark W. Lipsey

Research summary

The primary outcome desired for juvenile delinquency programs is the cessation of delinquent and related problematic behaviors. However, this outcome is almost always pursued by attempting to change intermediate outcomes, such as family functioning, improved mental health, or peer relations. We can conceptualize intermediate outcomes that are related to reduced delinquency as change levers for effective intervention. A large meta-analysis identified several school-related change levers, including school engagement (i.e., improved attendance and reduced truancy), nondelinquent problem behaviors, and attitudes about school and teachers. In addition, family functioning and reducing substance use were also effective change levers. In contrast, effects on youth getting/keeping a job, peer relationships, and academic achievement were not associated with reduced delinquency.

Policy implications

Only a small percentage of rehabilitative programs provided to youth involved in the juvenile justice system have been established as evidence based. Moreover, there are constraints on what local policy makers and practitioners can do regarding the selection, adoption, and implementation of programs from the available lists of evidence-based programs. Adopting programs that focus on effective change levers and avoiding those that concentrate on ineffective ones has the potential to increase the likelihood that a local agency is engaged in effective programming. Based on our data, programs known to improve family functioning, attachment to and involvement in schooling, and reducing substance use are justified by the change lever evidence, even if these programs’ effectiveness in reducing delinquency has not been directly proven. In contrast, programs focusing on vocational skills, academic achievement, and peer relations are less likely to be beneficial. Furthermore, a change lever perspective can help frontline staff select appropriate programs for different juvenile offenders and focus their quality control efforts on those aspects of a program that are likely to be essential to maintaining effectiveness.

Criminology & Public Policy Volume23, Issue2. May 2024.

David C. Pyrooz

This final summary overview describes a research project aimed at evaluating a gang intervention program, led by the Gang Reduction Initiative of Denver (GRID), which has historically coordinated around two dozen strategies with partners emphasizing prevention, intervention, and suppression. The focus of GRID’s efforts is their use of juvenile and adult multidisciplinary teams (MDT) to facilitate coordination and individual case management of gang-involved youth who have been referred for services. A process and impact evaluation was undertaken between 2019 and 2022, and the project was pre-registered on the Open Science Framework before data collection. The evaluation was guided by two core questions: if the MDT-based approach achieves its stated purpose of providing comprehensive, coordinated services to gang members with fidelity; and if the MDT-based approach achieves its stated goals of producing disengagement from gangs and desistence from crime. The first question was the focus of the process evaluation, and the second question was the focus of the impact evaluation. This report provides details about the evaluation’s methodology and informs that evaluation findings were mixed. Findings showed: there is clear evidence, from the process evaluation, that GRID delivered a range of high-quality services with efficacy; GRID clients were nearly 70 percent less likely to engage in violence than individuals in the control group; and GRID clients were more than three times more likely to claim a current gang status than control group participants.

Boulder, CO: Institute of Behavioral Science , University of Colorado, 2023. 28p.

Edited by Richard Rosenfeld, Mark Edberg, Xiangming Fang, and Curtis S. Florence

How do economic conditions such as poverty, unemployment, inflation, and economic growth impact youth violence? Economics and Youth Violence provides a much-needed new perspective on this crucial issue. Pinpointing the economic factors that are most important, the editors and contributors in this volume explore how different kinds of economic issues impact children, adolescents, and their families, schools, and communities. Offering new and important insights regarding the relationship between macroeconomic conditions and youth violence across a variety of times and places, chapters cover such issues as the effect of inflation on youth violence; new quantitative analysis of the connection between race, economic opportunity, and violence; and the cyclical nature of criminal backgrounds and economic disadvantage among families. Highlighting the complexities in the relationship between economic conditions, juvenile offenses, and the community and situational contexts in which their connections are forged, Economics and Youth Violence prompts important questions that will guide future research on the causes and prevention of youth violence. Contributors: Sarah Beth Barnett, Eric P. Baumer, Philippe Bourgois, Shawn Bushway, Philip J. Cook, Robert D. Crutchfield, Linda L. Dahlberg, Mark Edberg, Jeffrey Fagan, Xiangming Fang, Curtis S. Florence, Ekaterina Gorislavsky, Nancy G. Guerra, Karen Heimer, Janet L. Lauritsen, Jennifer L. Matjasko, James A. Mercy, Matthew Phillips, Richard Rosenfeld, Tim Wadsworth, Valerie West, Kevin T. Wolff Richard 

New York: London: New York University Press, 2013. 341p.

By Suzanne Mooney, Stephen Coulter, Lisa Bunting and DLorna Montgomery

This paper is drawn from an original report (Mooney et al., 2019) commissioned by the Safeguarding Board Northern Ireland as part of a cross-departmental initiative to support the development of trauma-informed practice in Northern Ireland. The original report used the ‘Sequential Intercept Model’ or SIM as a framework to undertake a selective review of practice innovations at different stages of the justice process as a means to consider how to divert young people and adults with complex needs from the criminal justice system (CJS) . Awareness of the SIM had emerged from a rapid evidence review which had summarised the evidence relating to the implementation of trauma-informed practice across multiple systems and settings (child welfare, health, education), including justice (see Bunting et al., 2018a-e; Bunting et al., 2019). International recognition of the strong connections between a trauma history and involvement with the justice system (Bellis et al., 2015), continued traumatic experiences within the justice system (Kubiak et al., 2017), and the relationship between harsh punishments and continued offending (Ko et al., 2008) has led to the adoption of trauma-informed approaches in secure settings both internationally and in the UK (e.g. D’Souza et al., 2021). Although not specifically named by its developers as a trauma-informed approach, the SIM was identified as a promising framework promoted by the US federal government Substance Abuse and Mental Health Administration Agency (SAMHSA), highlighting opportunities to implement community-based intervention for justice-involved individuals suffering mental ill health and/or substance use as a means of minimising CJS involvement (Munetz and Griffin, 2006, p.320). It is argued that such diversion has the potential to reduce costs to society and deliver appropriate services without increasing the risk to public safety (Heilbrun et al., 2015). Justice-involved persons with complex needs It is well established in international literature that young people and adults involved with the justice system are disproportionately affected by adversity and trauma (Miller et al., 2011), with exposure to childhood adversity identified as a key risk factor for subsequent justice involvement (Kerig and Becker, 2010; Bellis et al., 2015). UK research indicates the scale of the increased risk with population-based adverse childhood experience (ACE) surveys demonstrating that English adults exposed to four or more ACEs were 11 times more likely to be imprisoned at some time in their lives (Bellis et al., 2014) while Welsh adults experienced a 20 times greater likelihood in comparison to adults with no ACEs (Bellis et al., 2015). More recently, research in Manchester found that justice-involved children typically had multiple ACEs (see Academic Insights paper 2021/13 by Gray, Smithson and Jump). The complex links between health, social inequality and crime are also increasingly recognised (for example Public Health England, 2018) with justice-involved persons known to suffer significantly worse health than the general population and more likely to be the victims of crime (Anders et al., 2017). Although much of the US SIM literature refers specifically to people impacted by ‘mental health and substance use disorders’, this paper uses the overarching term of persons with ‘complex needs’ to better capture the range of adversities common in justice-involved young people and adults. These include: different forms of abuse; family breakdown and care experience; domestic violence; homelessness; lack of education and employment; as well as mental ill health and substance use problems (see Table 1). UK policy developments have recognised these challenges with adult and youth justice processes striving to take account of these intersecting influences on offending behaviour and promote cross-sector partnership to enable upstream intervention to prevent or mitigate the underlying causes of offending (see, for example, Public Health England, 2018; Department of Health and Department of Justice, 2019).

Academic Insights 2024/01, Manchester, UK: HM Inspectorate of Probation, 2024. 17p.

By Alliance for Youth Justice  

This briefing explores how racially minoritised young people experience particularly destabilising transitions due to deficits in support before and after turning 18. It highlights the crucial role the ‘by and for’ voluntary and community sector plays in addressing these shortfalls, arguing for reforms to better facilitate and fund the sector’s involvement in racially minoritised young people’s lives.

London: Alliance for Youth Justice, 2024. 53p.

By Anna Laura Baraldi, Erasmo Papagni and Marco Stimolo 

Organised crime tightens its corrupting influence on politics through violent intimidation. Anti-crime measures that increase the cost of corruption but not of the exercise of violence might accordingly lead mafia-style organizations to retaliate by resorting to violence in lieu of bribery. On the other hand, this kind of anti-crime measure might also induce criminal clans to go inactive, owing to the lower expected payoff from the "business" of influencing politics, which would reduce violence. To determine which of these possible effects is prevalent, we undertake an empirical assessment of the impact of city council dissolution for mafia influence in Italy as prescribed by Decree Law 164/1991 in discouraging violence against politicians in the period 2010-2019. Our difference-in-differences analysis shows that in the dissolved municipalities the enforcement of the Law reduces violence and that the effect persists (at least) for two electoral rounds. The most likely driving channel of this result is the renewed pool of politicians elected after compulsory administration. These findings are robust to a series of endogeneity tests.

Working Paper No. 010.2023

Publisher: 

Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM), Milano

By Jamie Bergin  

Various customs administrations have reported that their officials are physically threatened by organised criminal groups to abuse their power and facilitate illicit activities, such as drug trafficking. This Helpdesk Answer conceptually analyses how organised criminal groups use corruption and physical threats to influence customs officials and enable their profit-making activities, before describing how applying certain integrity measures could potentially prevent and counter the emergence of such threats.

Berlin: U4 Helpdesk Answer. U4 Anti-Corruption Resource Centre and Transparency International , 2023. 18p.

By Barry Goldson

This article analytically excavates youth justice reform (in England and Wales) by situating it in historical context, critically reviewing the competing rationales that underpin it and exploring the overarching social, economic, and political conditions within which it is framed. It advances an argument that the foundations of a recognisably modern youth justice system had been laid by the opening decade of the 20th Century and that youth justice reform in the post-Second World War period has broadly been structured over four key phases. The core contention is that historical mapping facilitates an understanding of the unreconciled rationales and incoherent nature of youth justice reform to date, while also providing a speculative sense of future prospects.

Howard Journal of Criminal Justice 59(3): 317-334, 2020

By Aaron Brown and Nina Vaswani

The Glasgow Youth Court is a judicially-led initiative which has been supported by Glasgow City Health and Social Care Partnership (GCHSCP) and which has been operational since June 2021. Functioning within the Glasgow Sheriff Court, it operates on a problem-solving basis, covering those aged between 16 and 24-years-old. Where the presiding Sheriff is satisfied, the Glasgow Youth Court caters for the use of Structured Deferred Sentencing (SDS), which combines multi-disciplinary intervention and support in the community, with regular court reviews to monitor and encourage young people’s progress. The Children and Young People’s Centre for Justice (CYCJ) was commissioned by GCHSCP in late 2021 to undertake research into the Glasgow Youth Court, with the purpose of: 

Documenting the implementation, design and operation of the Youth Court; Evaluating data relating to Youth Court outcomes; Evidencing how the Youth Court is experienced by a range of key stakeholders. 

This report, through examination of the above themes, provides insight into how the Youth Court has been operationalised, how it has been experienced, and its key outcomes.    

Glasgow: Children and Young People's Centre for Justice,  2023. 56p.

By Tim Bateman 

The National Association for Youth Justice (NAYJ) campaigns for the rights of, and justice for, children in trouble. It seeks to promote the welfare of children in the youth justice system and to advocate for child friendly responses where children infringe the law (NAYJ, 2019). The Association has, more recently, endorsed the Youth Justice Board’s adoption of a ‘child first’ model, first articulated in its Strategic Plan, published in 2018 (Youth Justice Board, 2018). The subsequent revised edition of National Standards for children in the youth justice system, published in 2019, is intended to provide a framework to support agencies in delivering a child first provision, by ensuring that they: • ‘Prioritise the best interests of children, recognising their needs, capacities, rights and potential; • Build on children’s individual strengths and capabilities as a means of developing a prosocial identity for sustainable desistance from crime. This leads to safer communities and fewer victims. All work is constructive and future-focused, built on supportive relationships that empower children to fulfil their potential and make positive contributions to society; • Encourage children’s active participation, engagement and wider social inclusion. All work is a meaningful collaboration with children and their carers • Promote a childhood removed from the justice system, using prevention, diversion and minimal intervention. All work minimises criminogenic stigma from contact with the system’ 

London: Ministry of Justice/Youth Justice Board, 2019: 6)