UK's Youth Justice System in 2024

‍

The landscape of the UK youth justice system in 2024 reflects an ongoing struggle to balance punitive measures with rehabilitative approaches. While there is a shift toward restorative justice and diversion programs, young people continue to face significant challenges within the system. Efforts to reduce the reliance on custodial sentences are ongoing, with a greater emphasis on community-based alternatives, such as education, mentorship, and social reintegration programs.

However, the system still grapples with high rates of youth incarceration, often for relatively minor offenses, contributing to overcrowding in detention facilities. This overcrowding can lead to poor conditions, lack of access to effective rehabilitation, and increased recidivism. Mental health issues, trauma, and socio-economic factors are often underlying causes of youth offending, but the system still struggles to adequately address these needs within detention centres.

‍

For over 30 years, the UK youth justice system has seen a troubling pattern where first-time offenders who commit crimes at the age of 16 are often imprisoned by the time they reach 24. This cycle has become a harsh reality for many young people, with the system routinely opting for custodial sentences rather than rehabilitation or alternatives. Despite calls for reform, young offenders who enter the system at 16 find themselves incarcerated for years, exacerbating the very issues mental health struggles, lack of education, and socio-economic disadvantages that led them to offend in the first place.

By the time these individuals turn 24, they are often deeply entrenched in the justice system, facing the long-term consequences of early imprisonment. The lack of support, rehabilitation, and educational opportunities within detention centers leaves them ill-equipped to reintegrate into society, perpetuating a cycle of reoffending. This pattern has persisted for decades, with the system's reliance on imprisonment rather than addressing root causes remaining a consistent issue.

‍

‍

Several key factors contribute to the ongoing challenges within the UK youth justice system, leading to high reoffending rates and over-representation of vulnerable youth.

Firstly, educational disengagement plays a significant role, with around 11% of students from lower school backgrounds disproportionately entering the youth justice system. Many of these young people face academic struggles, truancy, and behavioral issues, often leading to their involvement in crime due to a lack of support and opportunities.

Secondly, a significant proportion of offenders come from the children in care system, where instability and trauma make young people more vulnerable to criminal behavior. The absence of a stable family environment and support network increases the likelihood of involvement in crime and eventual entry into the justice system.

The rise in first-time entrants up 1% in recent years also contributes to the issue. Factors such as family breakdowns, peer pressure, and socio-economic disadvantages push these young individuals into the system, often leading to harsher sentencing without addressing the root causes of their actions.

Lastly, the high reoffending rate of 31.4% underscores the failure of the current system. Without effective rehabilitation, mental health support, and community reintegration programs, young offenders continue to cycle through the justice system, perpetuating criminal behavior.

‍

‍

The fragmentation and siloed nature of agencies within the UK youth justice system create significant barriers to developing trust between young offenders and the institutions meant to support them. Different agencies, including social services, education, mental health services, and the justice system itself, often operate independently, leading to inconsistent support and a lack of coordinated care. This disjointed approach can cause confusion, frustration, and a sense of abandonment among young people, who may feel like they are being passed between departments without clear guidance or understanding.

For many youths, this fragmentation contributes to resentment toward the system. They may feel targeted or unfairly treated by an impersonal and bureaucratic structure, leading to a breakdown in trust. When different professionals or agencies contradict each other or fail to communicate effectively, it sends the message that their well-being is not a priority.

‍

‍

‍

‍

Policy Analysis

‍

To gain a clearer understanding of how the youth justice system functions in practice, we conducted a policy analysis examining both its structural framework and operational challenges. This involved reviewing statutory guidance, government reports, and recent reforms, alongside assessing how these policies are experienced on the ground by young people and practitioners.

Our analysis highlighted that while the Youth Justice Board (YJB) sets the national strategy and oversees Youth Offending Teams (YOTs), implementation is often inconsistent across regions. Policies aimed at promoting diversion, restorative justice, and education-led interventions are present in theory, but in practice, resource constraints and fragmented agency collaboration undermine their effectiveness.

We also examined sentencing guidelines and custodial thresholds. Although policy frameworks encourage the use of custody only as a last resort, local courts frequently rely on custodial measures due to limited access to viable community alternatives. This results in a gap between policy ambition and operational reality.

Furthermore, our review of inter-agency coordination showed that policy documents consistently call for “joined-up services,” yet siloed funding streams and performance targets discourage true collaboration. This limits the ability of youth justice to address underlying issues such as mental health, trauma, and educational exclusion.

‍

Horizon Scanning

‍

Horizontal scanning refers to the process of exploring and analysing trends, patterns, or weak signals across multiple sectors, industries, or disciplines, rather than focusing solely on one area of expertise. It involves gathering insights from a variety of sources to identify emerging developments, shifts in behaviour, and potential disruptions that may not yet be fully recognised but could have significant implications in the future.

We look beyond the immediate scope of justice, law enforcement, or social services to incorporate insights from related fields such as education, mental health, technology, and community engagement.

This idea can dictate how we scan for weak signals by actively looking for signs of evolving ethical perspectives. Are there subtle movements in public opinion, policy discussions, or cultural shifts indicating that society is moving toward more equitable or restorative practices?

‍

‍

‍

We combine driver mapping and the Three Horizons framework to explore future trends and challenges, particularly within the youth justice system. By mapping key drivers that influence current systems, we identify emerging transitions and potential shifts. We use Horizon 1 to analyse the present state of the system, Horizon 2 to explore emerging trends and changes over the next 3-10 years, and Horizon 3 to envision long-term, transformative shifts. This approach allows us to anticipate future challenges and opportunities, ensuring that the solutions we design are adaptable, forward-looking, and aligned with evolving ethical standards.

‍

‍

In our approach, we also draw inspiration from "How to Future," particularly the concept of "pulling threads." This idea encourages us to follow emerging signals and trace their connections across various domains, helping us to uncover deeper insights and hidden patterns. By pulling these threads, we gain a more nuanced understanding of how small changes in one area, such as shifts in societal values or technological advancements, can influence larger systems like youth justice. This method allows us to map out interconnected trends and anticipate how they might converge, enabling us to design more proactive, holistic solutions that address both immediate needs and long-term transformations.

‍

‍

‍

‍

Scenario Development

‍

A future scenario is a narrative that outlines a possible future outcome based on current trends, emerging signals, and speculative factors. It helps us imagine what might happen in the future by considering various possibilities and exploring the implications of those possibilities.

‍

After pulling threads and identifying emerging signals, we further speculate on potential future outcomes using the Future Wheel framework. The Future Wheel is a visual tool that helps map out the possible consequences of a particular change or event, helping us explore both direct and indirect impacts.

The process begins with identifying a key event or trend like a shift towards restorative justice in the youth justice system. From there, we identify the immediate, first-order effects, such as changes in sentencing practices or the rehabilitation process. These are the direct consequences of the shift. Next, we expand to explore second-order effects, which are more indirect but still significant, such as how this shift might impact community relationships, perceptions of justice, or youth recidivism rates. Finally, we consider third-order effects, which are even more speculative but can have far-reaching implications, like changes in societal attitudes toward crime, rehabilitation, and justice, or the creation of new social support systems for offenders.

By using the Future Wheel, we can envision a range of potential outcomes and develop a more robust understanding of how different trends and drivers might shape the future of systems like youth justice. It allows us to see not just what could happen, but how it could ripple out into various sectors, helping us design more adaptable and future-proof strategies.

‍

‍

‍

In our approach, we recognize that youth offending cannot be understood in isolation from the broader systems that shape young people’s lives. To create a more comprehensive view of how youth offenders may evolve, we develop multiple scenarios that span beyond the justice system, considering factors like family , education, city, and society.

We explore how changes in family structures and support systems, such as better mental health services or more positive parenting approaches, could either mitigate or exacerbate youth offending. In the education system, we examine how improvements in early intervention, mental health support, or alternative learning models might reduce the chances of youth entering the justice system.

The urban environment also plays a crucial role, and we look at how changes in city design—such as safer spaces, more community programs, or greater youth engagement—could positively impact youth behavior. Finally, we consider society and the role of restorative justice, community-led rehabilitation, and evolving social attitudes toward crime.

By developing these interconnected scenarios, we gain a clearer picture of the factors influencing youth offenders and identify opportunities for cross-sector interventions, ultimately creating more holistic and adaptable solutions for the future.

‍

‍

‍

Future Vision

In developing our foresight work, we adapted elements from speculative design methodology to extend our scenario development. While traditional foresight approaches often emphasise plausibility, speculative design allows us to deliberately stretch into the imaginative space, provoking reflection and debate around what futures we ought to move toward.

For this project, our main scenario was constructed as a plausible scenario, grounded in current drivers, weak signals, and systemic dynamics. This scenario provides a realistic trajectory of how the youth justice system may evolve if present trends continue, highlighting both risks and opportunities.

In parallel, we developed a preferable scenario, a vision of the future we would actively want to create. This scenario deliberately reflects values such as equity, restorative justice, and systemic care. By exploring preferable futures, we anchor our design interventions not only in what might happen, but in what should happen.

Through this combination, the project creates a dual lens: the plausible scenario provides the evidence-based baseline, while the preferable scenario provides a future vision that can guide transformative policy and design. This approach helps us to bridge analysis and aspiration, enabling solutions that are both pragmatic in the short term and visionary in the long term.

‍

‍

Trust-based mentorship is a long-term, relationship-driven approach where the mentor focuses on building deep trust and personal connection with the mentee rather than just offering formal guidance or transactional support.

Unlike traditional mentorship programs that are goal-driven (e.g., employment, education) or authority-driven (e.g., caseworkers, probation officers), trust-based mentorship is youth-centered, emphasizing emotional connection, stability, and lived-experience guidance.

While mentorship and buddy-style programs do exist in various forms in the UK justice system. However, most existing models are either short-term, fragmented, or focus on specific issues like gang exit strategies or substance abuse recovery. If your idea is to create a holistic, trust-based mentorship system that truly sticks with young offenders long-term, then it could fill gaps that current programs don't fully address.

‍

‍

Mentors will play a critical role in helping first-time youth offenders overcome fear & trauma, stigma, and mistrust in a world shaped by AI-driven justice and digital vigilantism. The right mentors must be relatable, consistent, and trustworthy.

‍

The Buddy System is a trust-based mentorship program designed to support first-time youth offenders while ensuring their safety through strict safeguarding measures. It complies with UK safeguarding laws, including the Children Act 1989 & 2004, Keeping Children Safe in Education (KCSIE, 2023), and Working Together to Safeguard Children (2023).

To ensure mentor reliability and ethical engagement, all mentors undergo enhanced DBS checks, safeguarding training, and professional oversight. The program maintains strict boundaries—no private meetings, personal financial assistance, or social media contact. Mentor-mentee communication is supervised, and all disclosures related to abuse, exploitation, or criminal activity are escalated through formal safeguarding pathways.

The system integrates multi-agency collaboration, with regular check-ins between Youth Offending Teams (YOTs), social services, and probation officers. Structured public meetings, monitored communication, and feedback loops ensure accountability and risk prevention.

By combining trust-building with safeguarding compliance, the Buddy System provides a secure, ethical, and effective mentorship model, reducing reoffending while ensuring youth safety and rehabilitation.

‍

‍

Building trust in a short period is challenging, especially for first-time justice system entrants, who may be skeptical of authority figures and interventions. However, trust-based mentorship doesn’t require years, it can be established quickly with the right approach.

Trust isn’t built just because someone is "relatable" or "shows up." Many first-time justice-involved youth have been let down before, and some might actively reject help. A trust-based buddy system can't just be hopeful—it needs to be built for reality.

1. Expect skepticism. It’s normal for young people to reject the buddy at first don’t take it personally.
2. Prove reliability over time, even when they push back. Show up, but don’t smother them.
3. Let them dictate the pace. If they ignore you for weeks, don’t force engagement just stay present.
4. Keep boundaries firm. Being a mentor isn’t about being a “friend” it’s about being a steady, supportive figure even when they make mistakes.
5. Accept that some youth won’t engage, and that’s okay. The goal isn’t to save everyone it’s to be available when they’re ready

‍

‍

Psychological Theories Supporting the Rehabilitation Model

1. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs (1943) – Addressing Basic Needs First

• Stability must come before rehabilitation (food, shelter, healthcare).
• Ensuring basic needs are met reduces desperation-driven reoffending.

2. Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) & Moral Reconation Therapy (MRT) – Reflection & Accountability

• Helps offenders recognize their actions, process trauma, and shift criminal thinking patterns.
• Increases empathy and reduces impulsivity, preventing reoffending.

3. Hope Theory (Snyder, 1991) – Future Planning & Goal Setting

• Encourages clear goal-setting and motivation, helping youth see a path beyond crime.
• Strengthens self-efficacy and future-oriented thinking.

4. Desistance Theory (Maruna, 2001) – Community Reintegration & Identity Shift

• Offenders are more likely to reform if they develop a positive self-identity.
• Applying skills in real-world settings creates social belonging and purpose.

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍

Solution Development

‍

To guide our intervention strategy, we develop a Theory of Change framework, beginning with hypothesis stacks. This process helps us systematically map out the necessary steps, assumptions, and expected outcomes for achieving our desired change, particularly in the context of early intervention in the youth justice system.

‍

‍

These hypotheses form the foundation of our Theory of Change, guiding the design and evaluation of early intervention strategies. By testing and refining these hypotheses, we can create a more effective system that breaks the cycle of criminality early and fosters rehabilitation and reintegration rather than escalation and punishment.

‍

‍

‍

The Theory of Change (ToC) is a framework used to map out how specific actions or interventions lead to desired outcomes, providing a clear pathway from current challenges to future success. It’s a way of articulating the process of change by identifying key steps, assumptions, and expected impacts. The ToC framework helps organizations or initiatives design effective strategies, monitor progress, and evaluate results by outlining a logical progression of activities and outcomes.

In our context, the Theory of Change for youth justice focuses on creating a proactive, early intervention system that prevents young people from escalating into more serious criminal behavior. The ToC begins with the assumption that early intervention such as providing support services immediately after a first-time offense—can prevent further criminality and reduce the long-term impact of youth offending.

‍

‍

‍

‍

Service Artefacts

‍

Future Persona

‍

‍

‍

‍

‍

Scenario Artefacts

‍

‍

‍