Jersey Multi Agency Public Protection Arrangements: Annual Report 2024

JMAPPA

JERSEY MULTI AGENCY PUBLIC PROTECTION ARRANGEMENTS

Annual Report 2024 R.41/2025

Contents   Page

JMAPPA 2024 Statistic Headlines  4

1. Introduction by the JMAPPA SMB Chair    6

1. What is JMAPPA?  8
2. Who is managed under JMAPPA?  9
3. JMAPPA Management Levels  9
4. JMAPPA Governance 10
5. JMAPPA Global Impact  11
6. Budget 11
7. Annual Audit  11

2. Key Findings  16
3. JMAPPA 2024 Management  18

1. Category 1 – Registered Sex Offenders   19
2. Category 2, 3, 4 and PDP – Violent or Potentially Dangerous Persons  20

4. JMAPPA Process  22

1. JMAPPA Referrals  22
2. JMAPPA Meetings  23
3. Individuals subject to JMAPPA  24

5. Reconviction  26

1. General Reconvictions  26
2. Breaches of Notifications Requirements for RSOs  26
3. Serious Further Offending  26

6. Risk Register  27
7. JMAPPA Coordinator's Summary  31

1. Integrated Offender Management (IOM)  31

2. JMAPPA Guidance  31
3. Multi-Agency Tasking and Co-ordination (MATAC)  31

8. Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conferencing (MARAC)   32
9. Conclusion   33

Jersey Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements 2024

Total individuals managed at Level 1 as of 31 December 2024

207

During 2024 the total number

Individuals  individuals who received

  Total  subject to a  coordinated multi-agency risk  Total individuals

individuals  Sexual  management plans at level 2  who were

  managed at  Notification  or level 3  subject to a

Level 2 as of  Order  108  screening or

  202  review JMAPPA

31 December  meeting

  2024  Number of active cases as  throughout 2024

70  o2f 3717December 2024  89

As of 31 December 2024, there were 34 Category 1, 23 Category 2, 12 Category 3, 1 Category 4 and 1 Category PDP managed at Level 2.

*Please note that 1 individual is represented under Category 1 and Category 4.

Cat 2, 3, 4 and PDP

60 40

20 0

2020 2021 2022 2023 2024

Cat 2 Cat 3 Cat 4 PDP

Levels 1, 2 and 3

300 200 100 0

2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Level 1 Level 2 Level 3

As of 31 December 2024, JMAPPA held 189 meetings and received 70 referrals.

Meetings Referrals 189 200

150 126 132 126

100 9428 58 70 36

50 26

0

2020 2021 2022 2023 2024

The main aims of JMAPPA are to protect the public and  help individuals not to offend or reoffend.  

JMAPPA  allows  agencies  to  assess  and  manage  individuals on a multi-agency basis by working together,  sharing  information  and  meeting,  as  necessary,  to  ensure that effective plans are put in place.  

1. Introduction by the JMAPPA SMB Chair    6

1. What is JMAPPA?  8
2. Who is managed under JMAPPA?  9
3. JMAPPA Management Levels  9
4. JMAPPA Governance 10
5. JMAPPA Global Impact  11
6. Budget 11
7. Annual Audit  11

1. Introduction by the JMAPPA SMB Chair

On behalf of the Strategic Management Board (SMB) for Jersey Multi Agency Public Protection Arrangements (JMAPPA), it is my pleasure to submit and introduce the Annual Report for 2024.

The key aim of JMAPPA continues to be to ensure protection of the public through robust assessment and management of those individuals in our communities who have committed serious acts of violent or sexual offending. This cannot be delivered by one agency alone, hence the need for the co- operation of agencies across a full range of disciplines.

This is my second term as Chair of the SMB, having been the inaugural Chair in 2010. I would like to thank my predecessor, Susie Richardson for her leadership and it is apparent that the work of JMAPPA has developed considerably since 2010 including a commitment to JMAPPA by more agencies and a streamlining of work that allows for better prioritisation -an important factor given finite resources. I was delighted that the quality of multi-agency public protection work was recognised in the recent prison inspection. A great deal of credit is owed to the JMAPPA Co-ordinator, Mike Swain who is a seconded probation officer. He is ably supported by Jean Hart who manages the administration of the arrangements.

An audit of professionals who have participated in meetings (details on page 11) revealed accounts of well  chaired  and  purposeful  meetings  that  assisted  public  protection.  This  has  been  my  own experience of attending meetings where a framework has been developed that allows analysis of the following areas required to manage risk: supervision, monitoring and control, treatment and safety planning for victims. It is always important to strike a balance between external controls that are necessary  and  working  purposefully  with  JMAPPA  clients  to  promote  desistance  from  further offending. Similarly, in a small island it is particularly important to reduce the impact of repeated trauma for victims and we welcome the perspective brought to meetings by Victims First and the Jersey Domestic Abuse Service.

Whilst key agencies accept the responsibility of leading public protection work, it is important to note that risk management is likely to be enhanced when JMAPPA clients are provided with opportunities to integrate into the community – public inclusion assists public protection. The SMB have worked throughout 2024 to identify and address key risks. The difficulty in ex-offenders finding suitable accommodation and employment remains a challenge and some impressive initiatives are being introduced by the Employment, Social Security and Housing department and Andium Homes. The business and ethical case for employing ex-offenders will need to be a feature of our work in 2025 alongside the opportunity of shaping plans to introduce post custodial supervision in Jersey.

Our report depicts a rising workload with more meetings held than in 2023 including a rise in clients managed  at  a  Level  2  multi-agency  level.  Once  again,  the  number  of  sex  offenders  subject  to notification requirements rose in 2024. These numbers can place pressure on agencies and require decisions to  be made  about  prioritisation.  JMAPPA  partners  remain  committed,  innovative  and professional although the SMB will review workload demands to examine whether extra resources could be made available at pinch points'.

It was unnecessary to invoke our serious further offence review arrangements in 2024. Although this reflects well on agencies working together to help clients reduce their risk of reoffending, the work of the SMB and JMAPPA partners is underscored by a thread of reality that acknowledges that risk cannot be entirely eliminated. Our work is to help JMAPPA members produce relevant, timely and defensible assessments and interventions that manage risk most effectively. It is my privilege to lead many colleagues who undertake this work which can be challenging, stressful and, at times, distressing. This is my opportunity to acknowledge their efforts and thank them for the work they carry out to assist public protection in Jersey.

Mike Cutland

Jersey Probation and After Care Service Chair of JMAPPA SMB

March 2025

1. What is JMAPPA?

JMAPPA stands for Jersey Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements. It is the process through which criminal justice, statutory and voluntary agencies can share information, make plans and work together to manage the risks posed by individuals who have committed, or are assessed as likely to commit, acts of violence or sexual offences.

Jersey's Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (JMAPPA) were implemented in 2011 when the Sex Offenders (Jersey) Law 2010 came into force. In pursuance of Article 28 of that law, arrangements to assess and manage sexual, violent and dangerous offenders, together with potentially dangerous persons were made. The purpose of JMAPPA is to protect the public by coordinating the management of individuals assessed as posing a risk of serious harm to others.

These arrangements were made with the agreement of the Ministers of the departments and with the cooperation of Office Holders', departments who have a Duty to Cooperate' and Interested Parties' as detailed in the aforementioned law.

The Office Holders are the Chief of Police, Chief Probation Officer, Prison Governor and the Chief Officer of Customs and Immigration. The Ministers of the departments who are identified as agencies who have a Duty to Cooperate' are Justice and Home Affairs, Health and Community Services, Children, Young People, Education and Skills and Employment, Social Security and Housing. Interested Parties' includes, but is not restricted to, the Connétable s, Comité des Chefs de Police, together with organisations  that  provide  rented  housing  accommodation,  accommodation  for  the  homeless, support for children in need or at risk and support for victims of domestic and sexual abuse.

JMAPPA is not a statutory body; rather it is a mechanism through which agencies can, in a coordinated manner, discharge their statutory responsibilities and wider obligations with reference to protecting the public.

The JMAPPA Guidelines were premised on the MAPPA Guidance which is applied in England and Wales. The JMAPPA process is overseen by the Strategic Management Board (SMB) which consists of Chief Officers or their representatives from the Police, Prison, Probation, Customs and Immigration, Employment, Social Security and Housing (ESSH), Strategic Policy, Planning and Performance (SPPP), Children,  Young  People,  Education  and  Skills  (CYPES),  and  Health  and  Community  Services Departments, Victim Service and Andium Homes.

The  period  an  offender  remains  a  JMAPPA  offender  varies  significantly.  Some  will  be  JMAPPA offenders for life (for example someone subject to Notification Orders who never applies or is not successful in de-registration) and some for less than 6 months. The period will be dependent upon the offence committed and the sentence imposed and any ongoing risks.

Individuals remain subject to JMAPPA for three months after the latest date of each and any of the following:

• Release from custody.

• End of post-custodial licence.

• End of Probation or Community Service Order.

• Reduction to Level 1 management.

• Removal of sex offender notification requirements.

• Removal from the domestic abuse notification requirements.

• End of Andium Homes supported Partnership Pathway

2. Who is managed through JMAPPA?

There are five categories of JMAPPA-eligible offenders:

• Category 1 Offenders (Sex Offenders): All offenders subject to notification requirements under Sex Offenders (Jersey) Law 2010.

• Category 2 Offenders (Violent Offenders): An offender who has been sentenced for their most recent violent offence to:

12 months in custody or longer or a Treatment Order (with or without restrictions) or a Guardianship Order under the Mental Health (Jersey) Law 2016.

• Category  3  Offenders:  Individuals  with  a  criminal  conviction  (current  or  historic)  or  a defendant who does not have capacity to participate effectively in court proceedings as determined under the Mental Health (Jersey) Law 2016

and

is assessed as posing a risk of serious harm but does not meet Category 1 or 2 criteria.

• Category  4  Offenders  (Terrorist  Offenders):  Individuals  who  are  suspected  to  have committed, been charged or convicted of a terrorism related offence (Jersey or abroad) or may be at risk of involvement in a terrorism related activity. Any case eligible for Category 4 must enter JMAPPA at level 3.

• Potentially Dangerous Persons (PDPs): Individuals with no criminal conviction but assessed as posing a risk of serious harm.

The criteria for Category 1 2 and 4 cases are unambiguous. All offenders within these categories must be identified as JMAPPA cases and managed through the JMAPPA process at one level or another.

The thresholds for Categories 3 and PDP are more subjective and are based on the referring agency's assessment of the risk of serious harm posed.

Category 4 offenders were introduced towards the end of 2021 and if an offender is eligible for JMAPPA under more than one category, the JMAPPA Coordinator will decide the most appropriate category of management.

Serious harm can be defined as an event, which is life threatening and/or traumatic, from which recovery, whether physical or psychological, can be expected to be difficult or impossible. Risk of serious harm is the likelihood of this event happening. It should be recognised that the risk of serious harm is a dynamic concept and should be kept under regular review.

3. Management Levels

All JMAPPA clients are assessed to establish the level of risk of harm they pose to the public. Risk management plans are then agreed for each client to manage those risks.

JMAPPA  allows  agencies to  assess  and  manage  individuals  on  a  multi-agency  basis  by  working together, sharing information and meeting, as necessary, to ensure that effective plans are put in place.

There are three levels of JMAPPA management. They are mainly based upon the level of multi-agency cooperation required but higher risk cases tend to be managed at levels 2 and 3. Clients will move up and down the levels as appropriate.

The management level does not directly correspond with severity of offending behaviour.

There are many cases involving serious harmful offending that are managed at the lowest JMAPPA level – Level 1.

• Level 1 Management

At any one time, the majority of JMAPPA cases are managed at Level 1.

There should be the same level of cooperation and information sharing between partners at Level 1 as there is at the higher management levels (2 and 3).

At Level 1 management, it is assessed as defensible for the case to be managed within the risk management protocols of one identified agency. Typically, this will be the States of Jersey Police, Jersey Probation and Aftercare Service and the States of Jersey Prison Service though other agencies may be identified as the lead agency on a case-by-case basis.

It is important to highlight that the Level 1 lead agency is not solely responsible for the risks posed by the identified individual. Regardless of the management level and identified lead agency,  all  partner  agencies  at  all  times  retain  their  full  statutory  responsibilities  and obligations to public protection.

• Level 2 Management

At Level 2, the level of risk is assessed as sufficiently high to require a coordinated information sharing, assessment and risk management approach. Level 2 management arrangements are framed around a formal multi-agency meeting structure. The purpose of the JMAPPA Level 2 meeting is to enhance, not override, the continuous multi-agency risk management of a case. It is vital that professionals are empowered to react to dynamic changes in circumstances and risk regardless of JMAPPA status or management level.

• Level 3 Management

Level 3 is the highest level of JMAPPA management and is reserved for the management of the critical few very high-risk public protection cases.

The key difference between Level 2 and Level 3 is the requirement for exceptional resource allocation or strategic level intervention in the risk management arrangements. Attendees at Level 3 are senior management level – e.g. Detective Superintendent of the States of Jersey Police, Chief Officer or Team Manager of the Jersey Probation and Aftercare Service and member of the Jersey Prison Service Management Board.

All category 4 offenders will enter the JMAPPA process at level 3 due to the specialist nature of this type of offence.

4. Governance

The Strategic Management Board (SMB) is responsible for overseeing JMAPPA activity. This includes reviewing its operations for quality and effectiveness and planning how to accommodate change as a result of legislative progress, international best practice examples or local developments.

The SMB consists of senior management representatives from all agencies specified under Article 28 of the Sex Offenders (Jersey) Law 2010.

The SMB meets on a quarterly basis. Standing SMB agenda items include empirical review of JMAPPA business,  resolution  of  issues  arising  from  operational  JMAPPA  meetings  and  consideration  of reoffence incidents.

The SMB Chairperson is a senior management representative from the States of Jersey Police, Jersey Probation and Aftercare Service or States of Jersey Prison Service. The designation of Chairperson is reviewed at SMB level on an annual basis.

As of 31 December 2024, the following individuals formed the SMB.

The Chair SMB, Probation  Mike Cutland  

JMAPPA Coordinator, Probation  Mike Swain

JMAPPA Administrator, States of Jersey Police  Jean Hart

States of Jersey Police   Alison Fossey and Craig Jackson

States of Jersey Prison Service   Artur Soliwoda

Jersey Customs and Immigration  Andy Allan

Health and Community Services  Andy Weir

Jersey Adult Mental Health Service  Claire Ryder

Strategic Policy, Planning and Performance  Chay Pike and Jack Norris

Employment, Social Security and Housing  Sindy Stopher-Richford and Heather McManus  Victims First  Laura Osmand  

Andium Homes  Nikki Hayward  

Honorary Police  Mark Hutcheson

Children, Young People, Education and Skills  Tracey Scott

5. Global Impact

JMAPPA relies on professional intervention and commitment rather than physical resources that can impact the environment. Meetings are held as a "hybrid format" of in person and Microsoft Teams thus allowing representatives to attend via teams if they do not wish to travel. Meetings are held at the probation offices in St. Helier which is within walking distance of most of the key agencies.

6. Budget

The  post  of  JMAPPA  coordinator  is  funded  through  the  probation  service  and  is  offered  on  a secondment basis. The JMAPPA administrator is funded as part of the Public Protection Unit and the chair of the SMB is offered as additional duties to either the head of the Police, Prison or Probation service.

Any additional expenditure for travel, personal development, training etc is requested out of existing budgets.

7. Annual Audit

All agencies represented at JMAPPA meetings were invited to complete the audit form. 9 agencies completed forms and returned, the same number as in 2023.

The audit was completed as an online survey sent out in a link. This allowed the survey to be anonymous if the person decides not to provide any personally identifying information.

Results with a selection of comments.

8 out of 9 agencies reported either being satisfied or very satisfied with the JMAPPA partnership. Encourages working together and information sharing.  

Useful information shared in an appropriate way.  

Satisfied Limited  involvement,  but  good  communication  and  support   Neutral

available.

8 out of 9 agencies reported feeling satisfied or very satisfied, the meeting was a good use of their time.

High risk cases are very valuable, but I will probably stop attending screenings as they are less necessary.

My organisation has limited involvement, but attending when we are involved, can support or to discuss potential risk to our service users is valuable.

All agencies reported they felt satisfied or very satisfied, JMAPPA is valuable to improve outcomes. Information sharing and best outcome for the client.

8 out of 9 agencies felt satisfied or very satisfied the decisions held at JMAPPA were appropriate. 8 out of 9 agencies felt satisfied or very satisfied that attendees are comfortable contributing.

8 out of 9 agencies felt satisfied or very satisfied that attendees are comfortable to professionally challenging each other.

Every person at the meeting is expected to contribute to the conversation regarding the risk, the chair will encourage the views of the professionals at the meeting.

As scored above, all issues are identified and addressed appropriately.

In my experience I have always felt comfortable and supported if information needs to be challenged or potentially difficult information shared.

Some attendees don't really contribute to the process, take actions or offer opinion.

Appropriate  discussions,  regular  attendance  by  same  representatives  allows  for  professional relationships and challenge where appropriate.

8 out of 9 agencies felt satisfied or very satisfied that information is presented and summarised clearly.

8 out of 9 agencies felt satisfied or very satisfied that appropriate actions are set.

8 out of 9 agencies felt satisfied or very satisfied that all identified risks are comprehensively addressed.

All agencies agreed meetings considered if a disclosure was appropriate.

6 out of 9 agencies felt satisfied or very satisfied that victim issues were addressed.

7 out of 9 agencies felt satisfied or very satisfied that diversity issued were identified and addressed.

Due to the Chair's knowledge, background and professional approach the meetings are conducted in the best way with the subject at the core of the meeting and risk being fully assessed.

Plan is discussed, but actions not always set.

Thoroughly discussed, not all issues can always be addressed and there are other factors that impact this.

I feel slightly more time should be given to discussing victim issues.

8 out of 9 agencies reported to be satisfied or very satisfied with the JMAPPA Coordinator

Meetings are managed excellently. Everyone is given their opportunity to contribute but conversation is kept on task.

The coordinator appropriately manages the way information is managed at the meeting, in a timely manner and ensures everyone has time to discuss any matters and ensures further opportunities to discuss matters outside the meeting if necessary.

Meeting is clear and concise. Coordinator is skilled at keeping the meeting on track and bringing it back to focusing on risk to the public.

All agencies felt the meetings were well structured.

Meetings are well structured and follow the same format each time. I would say all relevant information is openly shared at meetings.

The diversity statement is always read, information sharing is appropriately managed, and introductions done even if everyone is likely to know one another.

Although sometimes meetings run over due to people going off on a tangent, chair needs to keep order in the meetings.

Always on the same day (Wednesday), can join in person or via teams, invites and pre-meeting info shared in advance.

When asked to comment on barriers and improvements agencies commented; - Improved due to settlement following the COVID changes.

Improvements have already been made re accommodation pathway and identifying needs prior to release.

Accommodating offenders continues to present issues on the island.

No suitable accommodation or work placements available. Not having everyone required at the table,

Managing expectations from prisoners regarding accommodation & benefits, reintegration plans not being completed 6 months prior to release.

JMAPPA hostel run independently.

Only those who can provide relevant information or have active involvement should be invited to the meetings. clear actions need to be allocated. agencies need to be encouraged to make referrals.

2. Key Findings    16

2. Key Findings 2024

• On 31 December 2024, there were 277 offenders under JMAPPA management in Jersey.

• Of these, 202 were Category 1 offenders, 39 were Category 2 offenders (mainly violent offenders) and 36 were Category 3, 4 or PDP offenders.

• On 31 December 2024, there were 207 offenders under Level 1 single agency management and 70 under Level 2 multi-agency management.

• The population of JMAPPA offenders on 31 December 2024 has increased from 246 in 2023 to 277 in 2024.

Categories of offenders

• The number of Category 1 offenders under JMAPPA has been growing yearly. The total as of 30 December 2024 was 202 as opposed to 189 in 2023.

• The number of Category 2 offenders under JMAPPA as of 31 December 2024 was 39 an increase of 10 from 29 in 2023.

• The number of Category 3 or PDP offenders increased in 2024 by 7 to 36 from 29 in 2023.

• Category 4 was introduced towards the end of 2021 there is currently one case being under Category.

Management level

• As of 31 December 2024, there were 70 individuals being managed at level 2, compared to 65 in 2023.

Registered Sex offenders

• There were 202 Registered Sexual Offenders as of 31 December 2024. This is an increase from 190 on 31 December 2023 and continues a trend of successive annual increases.

• There were 21 new registered Sex Offenders in 2024. This represents a increase from the previous year, when there were 14 new registered Sex Offenders in 2023.

• The number of de-registrations has decreased from 10 individuals de-registered in 2023 to 6 during 2024.

Serious further offences

• There were no serious further offences committed by individuals being managed at JMAPPA level's 2 or 3 during 2023. There were no Serious Case Reviews commission by JMAPPA.

3. JMAPPA 2024 Management  18

1. Category 1 – Registered Sex Offenders   19
2. Category 2, 3, 4 and PDP – Violent or Potentially Dangerous Persons  20

3. JMAPPA 2024 Management

Some individuals can be referred to JMAPPA more than once due to changing circumstances. As an example, because cases are being referred sooner into JMAPPA, this could mean a case could be archived before a Court sentencing. If the sentence falls within JMAPPA Category 1, 2 or 4 then the individual  will  be  referred  to  JMAPPA  again  so  that  up-to-date  information  is  received  by  the coordinator.

On 31 December 2024, 277 offenders were being managed under JMAPPA. Most of the offenders were Category 1 offenders managed at Level 1.

*Please note that 1 individual is represented under Category 1 and Category 4.

The total number between Registered Sex Offenders and JMAPPA Category 1 offenders can be different as individuals remains under JMAPPA for 3 months post deregistration or receive Notification Orders from the Court prior to JMAPPA registration. See "What is JMAPPA" for further information.

Management of Offenders 2024

 250 200 150 100 50

 -

Cat 1 Cat 2 Cat 3 Cat 4 PDP

Level 1 Level 2 Level 3

Changes to sentencing guidelines and sex offenders registered in other jurisdictions moving to Jersey has contributed to changes in the number of Registered Sexual Offenders. The number of people convicted of sexual offences increased steadily in 2024. Additionally, many sex offenders have to register for long periods of time, with some offenders being registered for life (although they do have a  right  of  apply  for  de-registration  after  completing  a  minimum  period  of  time  subject  to  the notification requirements). This has a cumulative effect on the total number of sexual offenders managed under notification requirements.

1. Category 1 - Registered Sex Offenders

In the course of 2024, 21 people were convicted of offences under the Sex Offenders (Jersey) Law 2010 and were made subject to notification requirements. Over the same period, 6 applications were successful in their de-registration.

Registered Sex Offenders 2018 to 2024

250 200 150 100 50 0

2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024

As of 31 December 2024, the age range of all these offenders spanned from 19 to 84 years of age.

As of 31 December 2024, 98 Registered Sexual Offenders reside in the community, 62 Registered Sex Offenders reside outside of Jersey on a temporary or permanent basis and 44 registered sex offenders were serving sentences within HMP La Moye.

Management of Registered Sex Offenders 2024

21%

Community 48% Relocated

HMP

31%

As a prescribed jurisdiction under the law, Registered Sex Offenders travelling to Jersey from the United Kingdom also require statutory management with the Police Offender Management Unit as lead agency.

2. Category 2, 3, 4 and PDP – Violent or Potentially Dangerous Persons

As of 31 December 2024, there were 23 Category 2 cases being managed at level 2 and 16 being managed at level 1.

At the same time, there were 12 Category 3 cases being managed at level 2 and 18 at level 1. There was 1 Potentially Dangerous Person (PDP) case being managed at level 2 and 5 at level 1. There was 1 Category 4 case being managed at level 2.

Overall, there were 36 category 2,3,4 or PDP cases being managed at level 2 and 39 at level 1 as of 31 December 2024.

4. JMAPPA Process  22

1. JMAPPA Referrals  22
2. JMAPPA Meetings  23
3. Individuals subject to JMAPPA  24

4. The JMAPPA Process

Under JMAPPA, offenders can be managed at 3 levels, which reflect the level of multi-agency co- operation required to effectively implement the individual offender's risk management plan. Levels are dynamic and offenders can be moved between levels dependant on the risk assessment and risk management plan.

Regular formal multi-agency meetings are held at levels 2 and 3. The number of offenders managed at level 2 and 3 over the year is recorded. This indicates the number of cases that require the increased oversight that level 2 and 3 management provides.

When a case is referred to JMAPPA, it is the responsibility of the JMAPPA Coordinator to decide if and how that case should be accepted into the process.

1. JMAPPA Referrals

During the year of 2024, there were 70 referrals. This was a significant increase compared to 2023 when there were 57 referrals and 2022 when there was 26. 18 were related to domestic abuse, 16 related to general violence and 36 related to sexual offences or concerns.

From those 70 referrals, 5 cases went directly to Level 1, 19 cases went directly to Level 2, 34 went for a screening meeting. (See below). 5 referrals remain pending and 7 cases did not meet the JMAPPA criteria.

44 referrals were received from the Police, 23 from Probation and 3 from Jersey Adult Mental Health Service.  

Referral Outcomes 2024

40 34

35

30

25 19

20

15

10 5 4 7 5 1

0

Direct to Direct to Screening Decision to Pending Criteria Level 1 Level 2 Meetings be Court not met

confirmed outcome

Screening Meeting Outcomes 2024

14 13

12

10

8 6 6

6 5 4

4

2

0

Level 1 Level 2 Screening Pending Criteria not

meeting Court met pending outcome

Referral by Type 2024 Referral by Agency 2024

4% 16 18

33%

63%

36

Domestic Abuse Sexual Abuse Violent Crime Police Probation JAMHS

2. JMAPPA Meetings

The screening process consists of a brief structured meeting attended by the JMAPPA Coordinator and Level 2 representatives from States of Jersey Police, Jersey Probation and Aftercare Service, States of Jersey Prison Service and Children's Service as a minimum. Representatives from other involved partner agencies may attend on invitation or by request.

Screening attendees consider the referral information, make an initial assessment of the risks and agree on the level of management at which the case enters the JMAPPA process or decline the referral if the criteria is not met. Screening meetings aim to ensure that only individuals whose assessed risk requires  management  at  the  higher  levels  progress  to  this  stage  thereby  limiting  the  over management of cases and the unnecessary allocation of multi-agency resources through the JMAPPA process.

There was an increase of JMAPPA meetings at all levels in 2024 with 189 in comparison to 126 in 2023.  

JMAPPA Meetings 2024

160 141 140

120

100

80

60 46

40

20 2

0

Screening Level 2 Level 3

3. Individuals Subject to JMAPPA

During 2024 the total number of individuals who were subject to any level of JMAPPA meetings was 89. This includes screenings, level 2 and level 3 meetings. 48 individuals were subject to more than one meeting.

5. Reconviction  26

1. General Reconviction  26
2. Breaches of Notifications Requirements for RSOs  26
3. Serious Further Offending  26

5. Reconviction

1. General Reconviction

JMAPPA endeavours to manage and reduce serious risk presented by certain individuals. The risks posed through serious violent and sexually harmful behaviour can never be entirely eliminated. In the event that a serious further offence is committed such as that of murder, manslaughter or rape, a Serious Case Review would be required by the Strategic Management Board.

Reconvictions 2014 - 2024

120 100 80 60 40

20 0

2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024

Not reconvicted Reconvicted

Reconviction  rates  for  JMAPPA  clients  remain  consistently  low.  Offences  range  from  disorderly conduct and harassment, breach of notification order, larceny, malicious damage to common and grave and criminal assault.

Reconviction rates only record offences convicted during the 12-month period, whilst under JMAPPA level 2 or level 3 management (excluding any offences indicated in the referral) and do not include offences committed or convicted outside of this period.

2. Breaches of Notification Requirements for Registered Sexual Offenders

The States of Jersey Police including the Offender Management Unit actively investigate any breaches of Notification or Restraining Orders.

3. Serious Further Offences

JMAPPA endeavours to manage and reduce serious risk presented by certain individuals. The risks posed through serious violent and sexually harmful behaviour can never be entirely eliminated. In the event that a serious further offence is committed such as murder, manslaughter or rape, a Serious Case Review would be required by the Strategic Management Board.

It is positive that during the course of 2024, there were no such serious offences committed by clients managed under JMAPPA.

6. Risk Register  27

6. JMAPPA Risk Register

7. JMAPPA Coordinator's Summary  31

1. Integrated Offender Management (IOM)  31
2. JMAPPA Guidance  31
3. Multi-Agency Tasking and Co-ordination (MATAC)  31

7. JMAPPA Coordinator's Summary

1. Integrated Offender Management (IOM)

There are no cases being managed under IOM and the scheme is currently on pause. Effective communication  and  information  sharing  between  the  principal  Criminal  Justice  agencies  which underpins the IOM theory remains routine as best practice in Jersey. In the absence of mandatory Post Custodial Supervision, IOM would rely solely on voluntary engagement and therefore becomes redundant as a separate entity to the regular voluntary post custodial support and intervention that is offered through the Criminal Justice agencies and associated partners.

Post Custodial Supervision remains a strategic priority for the JMAPPA Strategic Management Board.

2. JMAPPA Guidance

Last year work was undertaken to update the JMAPPA Guidance in line with recommendations following consultation from MAPPA UK, to include the new Category 4 - clients convicted or suspected of terrorism related offences and a stronger emphasis on managing perpetrators of domestic violence to include coercive and controlling behaviour.

In 2023 the JMAPPA guidance was expanded to include that all JMAPPA nominals on the Andium Homes partnership pathway will now remain under level 1 management until 3 months past the end of their partnership pathway agreement. This is agreed to offer more multi-agency support and security to Andium Homes in providing the accommodation needed for this hard to house group of individuals. In 2024 the guidance has been further expanded to included all individuals who received notification orders under the Domestic Abuse (Jersey) Law 2022.

The JMAPPA Coordinator continues to chair both the JMAPPA and MARAC forums, this allows for more joined up work and offers a coordinated insight into both forums.

The information sharing agreement which is in place to ensure the safe sharing of lawful information between JMAPPA agencies for the purposes of public protection was re-signed in 2022.

3. MARAC/MATAC

There are currently no cases under MATAC and this has been made redundant by other forums including the daily domestic abuse meeting. A new daily meeting for any cases that include children was also introduced during 2021 by Police, IDVA, Children Services and partner agencies in order to act quicker in cases where children are involved.

A risk matrix similar to MATAC is proposed to select specific domestic violence offender intervention for high impact management under the JMAPPA structure, in conjunction with the domestic Abuse (Jersey) law 2022.

MARAC has significantly improved in function and effectiveness due to the new meetings structure introduced and work continues to be benchmarked against relevant similar authorities sharing best practice.

The recent introduction of the Domestic Abuse (Jersey) Law 2022 and the additional resources of increased offender managers within the offender management unit will further enhance the MARAC and public protection arrangements

8. Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conferencing 32

8. Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conferencing (MARAC)

A MARAC is a meeting where information is shared on the highest risk domestic abuse cases between representatives of a number of agencies, Justice and Home Affairs, Health and Community Services, Children, Young People, Education and Skills, Employment, Social Security and Housing, Andium Homes, Freeda, Independent Domestic Violence Advisors and other statutory and voluntary sectors.

After sharing all relevant information, they have about a victim, the representatives discuss options for increasing the safety of the victim and turn these into a coordinated action plan. The primary focus of the MARAC is to safeguard the victim.

MARAC meetings continue to be chaired by the JMAPPA Coordinator with the purpose of providing a greater synergy between the two different multi-agency forums.

Since its introduction in January 2014, the Jersey MARAC has become the established multi-agency process for the safeguarding of domestic abuse victims.

MARAC Referrals 2024

60 51.5

50

40

29.5

30

20

10 5.5

0.5

0

Police IDVA Probation Freeda Police IDVA Probation Freeda

A total of 87 cases reviewed at MARAC in 2024.

Out the 87 victims, 75 were female and 12 were male.

Of the 87 cases discussed at MARAC in 2024 there were 22 cases with children in the household. 15 of the victims were represented within the BAME communities.

9. Conclusion   33

9. Conclusion

The  risks  posed  through  serious  violent  and  sexually  harmful  behaviour  can  never  be  entirely eliminated. Nevertheless, all evidence indicates that the assessment and management of those risks is best achieved through the coordinated drawing together of information, expertise and action from all available sources; this is the overarching aim of JMAPPA.

The JMAPPA process is continually evaluated and evolves in line with best practice and research, new laws and guidelines.

Jersey is fortunate to have the commitment of a large number of agencies from both statutory and non-statutory agencies. Its partners include those that work with both offenders and victims including children. Through their ongoing commitment and cooperation, the JMAPPA process continues to make a vital contribution to Jersey's public safety.