This report is based on evidence gathered as part of an evaluation of Enhanced Triage (ET)
which was undertaken by University Campus Suffolk (UCS) between January and December
2015. The evaluation demonstrates considerable support for the implementation of ET
throughout the county of Suffolk. There is clear evidence that through ET and the integrated
decision making process, disposal decisions concerning young offenders are more
consistent and through the assessment process, more likely to deliver improved outcomes
for young offenders as well as victims of crime and the wider community.
 Universal support for Enhanced Triage both in principal and practice, expressed by
police officers, Youth Offending Team (YOT) practitioners, young offenders and their
parents/carers.
 The use of ET helps to address underlying individual factors that Community
Resolutions (CRs) are able to identify.
 Allocating responsibility of the Victim Officer to a seconded police officer received
universal praise from practitioners as well as increasing the self-reported
satisfaction levels of victims of crime resulting from effective Restorative Justice (RJ)
processes.
 The seconded police officers attached to ET received considerable praise from
police officers and YOT practitioners for their willingness to deliver ET effectively
and increasing knowledge of the process.
 Young people and their parents/carers perceive that through ET, young people are
provided better opportunities to reflect on the impact of their behaviour and
reduce reoffending.
 Police Officers reported a lack of formal training in ET.
 There appears to be no identifiable, direct financial benefit of delivering ET,
however, the programme provides a potential for considerable improvements in life
opportunities thereby reducing risk and motivation to commit crime.
 No young person who received a triage intervention at level 1 has reoffended,
thereby reducing the number of ‘First Time Entrants’ (FTEs) into the Criminal Justice
System.
 The reoffending rate of those who received a triage intervention at level 2 or a
caution is reported to be lower than the national average when compared to figures
published by the Youth Justice Board.
 Young people and their parents/ carers reported concerns regarding the lack of
clarity relating to the ET process and the voluntary nature of the interventions. This
perception was supported by some police officers and YOT practitioners.
 Clear evidence demonstrated concerning consistency and efficiency in the decision
making process.