Brief summary of a realist process evaluation of liaison and diversion services for children and young people

Liaison & Diversion (L&D) helps people, at the point of arrest, to access health or social care services. L&D services run across England, for anyone aged 10 and over (all-age model). Some research has shown that L&D is helpful, but the evidence is mixed and much of the research has...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:  
Bibliographische Detailangaben
VerfasserInnen: Lennox, Charlotte (Verfasst von) ; Smith, Lucy (Verfasst von) ; Hefferman-Clarke, Rebecca (Verfasst von) ; Senior, Jane (Verfasst von) ; Dyer, Wendy (Verfasst von) ; Chitsabesan, Prathiba (Verfasst von) ; Hughes, Nathan 1978- (Verfasst von) ; Shaw, Jenny (Verfasst von)
Medienart: Elektronisch Aufsatz
Sprache:Englisch
Veröffentlicht: 2025
In: The journal of forensic psychiatry & psychology
Jahr: 2025, Band: 36, Heft: 5, Seiten: 830-839
Online-Zugang: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Verfügbarkeit prüfen: HBZ Gateway
Schlagwörter:
Mental Health
children and young people
Youth Justice
police custody
Arrest
Liaison & Diversion
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Liaison & Diversion (L&D) helps people, at the point of arrest, to access health or social care services. L&D services run across England, for anyone aged 10 and over (all-age model). Some research has shown that L&D is helpful, but the evidence is mixed and much of the research has not focused on children. Here, we present a summary of the research and the recommendations presented to NHS England. The study aimed to look at how L&D was delivered for children. Part one was a Rapid Realist Review (RRR) of the literature and undertaking realist interviews with people involved in developing and evaluating L&D. Part two consisted of mixed-methods data collection from six providers of L&D in England to see how L&D works. The RRR identified within the literature seven programme theories (procedural justice, child-centred approach, trauma informed approach, non-labelling, trained workforce, coordinated response and partnership working). The process evaluation showed that delivery was variable and limited by resources, which contributed to gaps in provision and the L&D model was not always working for children and in particular some children, e.g. those already known to services. A series of short- and long-term recommendations were highlighted.
ISSN:1478-9957
DOI:10.1080/14789949.2025.2536259