Skip links and keyboard navigation

Positive behaviour management and incident prevention recommendations

The Review made 83 recommendations. These have been sorted into work programs for implementation.

Our objectives

We will recognise that challenging behaviour may have developed as a response to past traumatic experiences.

We will build positive, trusting relationships with young people, and encourage them to make appropriate decisions by promoting positive behaviours.

The way forward

To achieve this we will:

  • improve the way we use rewards and consequences to encourage good behaviour
  • strengthen behaviour management and de-escalation
  • make better use of post-incident supports such as restorative justice approaches and debriefs to reduce the risk of further incidents
  • streamline our procedures for managing incidents, ensure they work well and staff have a good understanding of them
  • provide intensive therapeutic support to young people who are a high risk to the safe operation of the centre
  • improve individual risk assessment processes
  • improve the way we assess security risks
  • better manage the dynamics of young people in accommodation units.

Recommendations

Recommendation 1 (status: completed)

The Review recommends that Youth Justice should create a consistent uniform standard to apply at both BYDC and CYDC. The uniform standard should not reflect a police style uniform. (1.R1)

Youth Justice has implemented a consistent uniform standard at both youth detention centres.

Recommendation 2 (status: yet to commence)

The Review recommends that Youth Justice should create a consistent standard regarding access to clocks to apply at both BYDC and CYDC. (1.R2)

Recommendation 20 (status: in progress)

The Review recommends that access to programs, particularly those which relate to education and culture, should not be restricted on a punitive, behaviour management basis. (9.R4)

Recommendation 33 (status: completed)

The Review considers that security dogs should not be used in youth detention centres as a means of responding to incidents or disciplining young people. (11.R1)

The use of security dogs at Cleveland Youth Detention Centre ended in October 2015. We do not intend to reintroduce security dogs at youth detention centres.

Recommendation 34 (status: yet to commence)

The Review recommends that staff should seriously consider a range of options to address misbehaviour by young people, and consider whether a BDP, or a BDP imposing separation and isolation, is the best option for addressing misbehaviour for a particular young person. (12.R1)

Recommendation 35 (status: yet to commence)

The Review recommends that BDPs should be a tool to address misbehaviour in an individual way that attempts to redress and reduce individual misbehaviour and the underlying causes of it. (12.R2)

Recommendation 36 (status: yet to commence)

The Review recommends that additional training should be provided to multi-disciplinary teams and staff creating interim BDPs to ensure that a BDP for a young person is personal and individually tailored to meet the needs identified in response to the young person’s misbehaviour. (12.R3)

Recommendation 37 (status: completed)

The Review recommends that the imposition of periods of separation or isolation should not be a default condition on a BDP. Staff should ensure that any decision to impose separation is in accordance with the law and policies and supported by evidence showing how the requirements of both are satisfied for each separation. (12.R4)

Recommendation 38 (status: in progress)

The Review recommends that the Chief Executive or delegate should ensure that each young person at a youth detention centre has access to education appropriate to the child’s age and must ensure that adequate training is provided to detention centres staff about their legal obligations to ensure a child receives education material in accordance with Youth Justice principle 20(g). (12.R5)

Recommendation 52 (status: in progress)

The Review recommends that staff who are no longer required to manage an incident should leave the area. (16.R2)

Appropriate advice has been given to staff. We will reinforce this with enhancements to policy, procedure and training.

Recommendation 59 (status: completed)

The Review recommends that the responses in relation to incidents under the Protective Actions Continuum should be revised in order to remove inconsistencies in response to varying categories of risk. (17.R1)

The relevant policy and procedures have been reviewed and amended.

Recommendation 60 (status: completed)

The Review recommends that the relevant policy and operations manual should be updated to state specific circumstances as to when handcuffs are to be applied to a young person’s hands in front of their body or behind their back. (17.R2)

The relevant policy and procedures have been reviewed and amended.

Recommendation 61 (status: completed)

The review recommends that the inconsistency in the policy and the operations manual regarding who is authorised to apply restraints should be resolved. (17.R3)

The relevant policy and procedures have been reviewed and amended.

Recommendation 62 (status: in progress)

The Review recommends that the CYDC management should require the recording of the classification of the force used along with a justification of the force used in accordance with the PAC:

  • to show that adequate justification for the use of force is included in the DCOIS report; and
  • to allow the Inspectorate to conduct a review into whether the use of force in an incident was justified. (17.R4)

Recommendation 63 (status: completed)

The Review recommends that all CYDC staff responsible for the classification of incidents in DCOIS at CYDC should undergo additional training in appropriate classification rating of incidents within 6 months of the date of this report.

Such additional training should be approved by both the ADG and ESU Inspectorate as being sufficient to address the concern that incident classification is accurately recorded in future.

Such training should satisfy both the ADG and ESU Inspectorate that the approved retraining will ensure that all external oversight bodies are informed of all higher level incidents as required in future. (17.R5)

Training was provided to relevant Cleveland Youth Detention Centre staff in July 2017. Further DCOIS training and support will be provided to staff at both youth detention centres.

Recommendation 64 (status: yet to commence)

The Review recommends that the use of PAC level 3 and 4 responses should be reviewed by the Executive Director of the Centre and ESU Inspectorate to decide whether the response was appropriate in the circumstances (including whether, because of the nature of the incident, it may have been classified as a PAC level or 2 risk). (17.R6)

Recommendation 65 (status: completed)

The Review recommends that the policy relating to the use of force, including ground stabilisation, should be amended to emphasise that ground stabilisation is to be used as a last resort, and only for an incident requiring a PAC level 4 response, and only if there is no other way of managing the situation and securing the young person’s safety, cooperation or to ensure the safety of another person.

All staff involved in the care and management of young people should be made aware through training that the use of force, including ground stabilisation, is to be used as a last resort in cases where a PAC level 4 response is appropriate. (17.R7)

The relevant policy, procedures and training materials have been reviewed and amended.

Recommendation 66 (status: completed)

The Review recommends that all staff should be train in de-escalation techniques.

All use of force, which includes any actual physical contact with a young person, should be classified at a minimum of PAC level 3 response. (17.R8)

Youth Justice has reviewed and amended the relevant policy, procedures and training materials.

Recommendation 67 (status: in progress)

The Review recommends that continuous separations based on factors in the Youth Justice Regulation 2016 should be supported by contemporaneous evidence justifying the separation. (17.R9)

Youth Justice will review separation records to ensure appropriate evidence is provided. Quality assurance and incident review processes will also be examined.

Recommendation 68 (status: yet to commence)

The Review recommends that the food provided to a young person whilst they are in a separation room or subject to a BDP should be accurately recorded. If adequate food or prescribed medication is not provided, the reason for the failure to provide either essential should be recorded and justified by evidence explaining why it was appropriate to withhold the provision of food or medication. (17.R10)

Recommendation 69 (status: in progress)

The Review recommends that all records relating to the application of restraints should contain a sufficient basis for objective determination of the reasonable grounds upon which the decision to apply restraints to a young person was made. (17.R11)

Recommendation 70 (status: in progress)

The Review recommends that additional training should be provided to people on multi-disciplinary teams and people creating interim BDPs to ensure that a BDP for a young person is personal and individually tailored to meet the needs identified in response to the young person’s misbehaviour. (17.R12)

Recommendation 73 (status: yet to commence)

The Review recommends that staff should be counselled and trained on the legislation and policy outlined in this chapter of the report. (17.R15)

Recommendation 74 (status: completed)

The Review recommends that the use of force at CYDC should be reviewed and staff be train in de-escalation techniques and other alternatives to the use of force, including instruction that the use of force (ground stabilisation) and mechanical restraints (handcuffs) are to be used only when all other measures have failed, and otherwise limited to use in emergency situations only. That training should include cultural sensitivity training regarding physical intervention and shame. (18.R1)

Youth Justice has reviewed and updated the relevant training.

Recommendation 77 (status: yet to commence)

Staff who authored the documentary records identified in this chapter (Chapter 19) should be retrained in minimum standards of documentation requirements to provide accurate documentary entries reflecting all interventions (including methods of restraint) and incidents. (19.R2)

Recommendation 78 (status: completed)

The Review recommends that Youth Justice policies, procedures and manuals should be amended to positively preclude the use of restraints to ‘hog-tie’ (or restraint by means of a similar description) a young person. Alternatively, the Youth Justice legislation should be amended to reflect that where a number of restraints are used in combination (except transport restraints – ie approved handcuffs and ankle cuffs) each specific combined use should be approved by the Director-General of DJAG with concurrent approval from the Director-General of Queensland health. (19.R3)

While the existing policy and procedures did not support the use of restraints in this manner, for clarity Youth Justice has amended the relevant policies and procedures. The use of leg cuffs on centre are now strictly prohibited.

Recommendation 79 (status: completed)

The Review recommends that in addition to a list of approved restraints, Youth Justice policies should provide clear descriptions of how they are to be used (e.g. whether they may be used in combination, and if so the method by which this combination is achieved). This is particularly important given that, upon its commencement on 26 August 2016, the Youth Justice Regulation 2016 required individual staff members to hold the reasonable beliefs necessary to exercise the power pursuant to Section 19(1). This is in contrast with Sections 20(2) and (3) of the Youth Justice Regulation 2003 (repealed), which entrusted delegated managers only. (19.R4)

The restraints policy has been updated to provide clear descriptions on how restraints are to be used.

Last reviewed
27 September 2017
Last updated
27 September 2017
 
Close window

Send this page to a friend