Victims Taskforce papers: May 2022

Trauma informed workforce – progress update

The Draft Framework, “Trauma Informed and Responsive Justice Workforce for Witnesses, A Knowledge and Skills Framework” has been commissioned by the Victims Taskforce (VTF) in response to multiple recent reports highlighting the considerable and multiple ways in which victims and witnesses experience the criminal justice system as exacerbating the impact of their prior experiences of trauma, and the negative impact this has on their ability to give evidence effectively, and on their recovery.

This draft framework has the ambition of ensuring that across all staff in organisations who work with witnesses, there is a shared language and understanding around the aims of a trauma informed justice system for victims and witnesses, and to identify what staff in different roles need to know and are able to do to bring that about. This will allow training to be developed consistently across organisations titrated to the need of individual staff groups, depending on role in relation to their contact with witnesses affected by trauma.

Progress to Date

Over the course of 2021/2022, information and evidence were gathered from:

• interviews with 16 justice leaders;
• 12 members with relevant lived experience of respective Victim Support Scotland (VSS) and Rape Crisis Scotland (RCS) reference groups; and
• a range of evidence and literature reviews.

This evidence was used to identify the key elements of a trauma informed justice system for victims and witnesses, and the knowledge and skills required to fulfil those aims, from which the draft Knowledge and Skills Framework was constructed.

Consultation process

The draft framework was released for consultation and review on 8th March 2022, and all organisations represented on the VTF were invited to comment through a consultation session on 29th March. Invited to the event were representatives from the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS), Police Scotland, the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service (SCTS), the Scottish Prison Service (SPS), the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA), the Scottish Children’s Reporter Administration (SCRA), Community Justice Scotland, VSS, Scottish Women’s Aid (SWA), RCS, Children 1st, AMIS, the Law Society of Scotland, the Faculty of Advocates, COSLA, SG Justice Analytical Services, the Parole Board and the Scottish Community Safety Network.

On the day there were a total of 40 attendees, including representatives from COPFS, Police Scotland, SCTS, SPS, CICA, SCRA, Community Justice Scotland, VSS, RCS, Children 1st, AMIS, the Law Society of Scotland, the Parole Board and the Scottish Community Safety Network.

The consultation event had the main aim of enhancing engagement and familiarisation with the framework draft prior to VTF members completing a survey, in addition to garnering initial impressions and feedback from members of the VTF regarding the framework in its current form. Small group discussions were held in which participants were given the opportunity to discuss their overall impression of the framework and its aims and ambitions; their opinions of the structure, role groupings and language used; and the specific contents of each of the trauma informed, skilled and enhanced practice levels.

In addition to the consultation event, the 12 witnesses with relevant lived experience who were initially interviewed for this project were also invited to give feedback on the framework. Given its length and complexity, this was done flexibly, with some choosing to give verbal feedback and others written. In total, three people were able to give extensive feedback, two verbally in an interview, and one in written format. Four others were able to give more brief feedback by email or in interview, and five have asked for some further time to consider responses due to a range of current pressures.

VTF organisations were also invited to feedback via a formal survey which opened on the 8th March and closed on the 30th April (extended from 22nd April). A total of six organisations responded to the survey: SCTS, COPFS, Police Scotland, SPS, the Law Society of Scotland and VSS. Results of the survey were yet to be analysed at the time of writing.

Summary of consultation session findings

The small group sessions generated substantial discussion and engagement with the framework. Many organisations had not had the opportunity to review the draft framework in detail yet, and so gave more general feedback regarding the overall structure, aims and ambitions as opposed to detailed feedback at the various practice levels. Scribes took notes in each of the discussion groups.

Overall impression of the framework and its aims and ambitions

Overall there was agreement that that it is a useful and necessary document for embedding collective understanding, and in general the overall aims and ambitions set out in the framework were commended for being comprehensive. Attendees commented that engagement with witnesses with lived experience was well represented and the use of quotes throughout the document helped bring it to life and engage the reader.

The practice levels, staff role groupings and the cumulative approach of the framework were found sensible, helpful and applicable overall. It was noted that the framework is rather intimidating in terms of length, however the flow and structure does make sense and the value in having a detailed core document was seen. Across groups there was an indication that an executive summary or interactive document to aid comprehension and accessibility was needed.

The intended focus of the event was to gain feedback about the what - the nature and content of the framework itself. However most groups were keen to also move to the how – the implementation of the framework in practice – which was seen as a large and long term task. This would appear to indicate a general consensus and agreement that, having reviewed the draft, organisations see its merit and are keen to engage with the process of implementation once it is complete.

Overarching suggestions for change

• A range of specific points regarding specific wording and examples have been noted by the authors and will be incorporated into the final version.
• Not all workers will be doing the same roles or be bound by the same legal obligations. The use of the phrase “All workers can” could be changed to “Depending on nature of organisation and particular role, workers can/will… etc.”
• In order to reflect the nature of collecting and presenting evidence, Aim 2 should be amended from “prevent re-traumatisation” to “prevent re-traumatisation where at all possible” or “reduce the risk of re-traumatisation.”
• The language of rights could be amplified – especially children’s rights, as this needs to be a rights-based approach, and highlight where particular rights are engaged.
• Agree that children and young people should be included in the framework as victims and witnesses in their own right. Suggest including highlights of children and young people relevant competencies at the start of each section.
• The need for a glossary or explanation of terms, at the outset, for example explaining what is meant by “witness” and why it has been used throughout.
• A number of issues with regards to staff wellbeing and vicarious traumatisation were highlighted, including the potential conflicts between fundamental role responsibilities and operational functioning, and managing impact of exposure to traumatic narratives and material.
• The importance of recognising the impact of the pandemic in exacerbating the enormous pressure the workforce is under, and that this framework is regarded as a useful resource, not an extra pressure on staff.

Commentary on Practice Levels

Again, a range of points were made regarding specific wording which have been noted by the authors and will be incorporated into the final version. General feedback on the informed and skilled levels indicated a sense that the content was excellent and comprehensive. There was particular comment that the sections around potential misinterpretation of the impact of trauma and the impact of trauma on memory were useful.

Additional comments for Evidence Collection and Evidence Presentation sections included:

• Need to set in context of specific planned future measures for children.
• Impact of trauma on memory particularly important to consider when developing training that involves taking statements as evidence.
• Aim 4 (adapting processes and procedures) should keep delivery challenges in mind.
• ‘Evidence presentation in court’ section – a lot of detail around what workers are required to recognise in terms of trauma and it needs more flexibility.
• The information about impact of trauma on memory was seen as fundamental
• Limited reference to post-trial, where witnesses may leave with more questions than answers.

Additional comments for Advocacy/Support section included:

• Advocacy and support can mean very different roles, possibly a need to divide the two.
• Some confusion around the organisations this role grouping is intended to cover (e.g. statutory and third sector?).
• Is this an area where statutory and voluntary sector organisations may have difficulty working to a common framework?
• Need for clarity around aim 3 “avoid hindering recovery” - that this means the wider justice system, rather than simply in the course of advocacy.

Leadership and processes/procedures/environments

We asked attendees if they thought we should include a section on leadership and processes/procedures/environments in the framework. The general consensus was that having leadership engagement was essential to the success of the implementation of the framework, however people were divided as to if the leadership knowledge and skills should sit within the framework, or as a separate document/resource which is linked to the framework. Everyone was in agreement that leaders are critical to the implementation of not only a trauma informed workforce, but also trauma informed systems, policies and environments. They will, as such, require their own training and implementation support.

Summary of witnesses with relevant lived experience feedback

Three of the original 12 witnesses were able, within the timeframe, to give substantive feedback. These responses are yet to be systematically analysed, but quotes given below from each of the three witnesses who gave substantive feedback also reflect the wider picture of the briefer feedback received from a further four:

Witness 8

‘’It felt very validating, it felt like our experiences have been heard, acknowledged, showing how avoiding re-traumatisation, and trauma informed principles could be done. To be honest I don’t see anything missing. There has to be a lot in it – needs it all – it’s comprehensive and helpful. It was written extremely accessible, written in plain English, anyone could understand. Flows well, and separated out – and shows clearly from sidebar [aims] what you are looking at.”

Witness 3

“Overall reaction I had, overall response I had, I was really angry, about the response that I could have had from professionals within [named organisations], to what should be expected of them – realised that they could be doing these things that are recommended.’’

Witness 5

 “Really comprehensive, and if this is delivered it will make a huge difference to witnesses and the quality and efficiency of the justice system as it helps remove mistrust, hesitancy, complaints, delays where people do not wish to continue/engage. It is needed. Every part needs to work together as silos create gaps and that leads to errors and trauma”

Next steps

In addition to the feedback gained at the consultation event, we have received a total of seven responses to the survey. These were received at time of writing of this report so are yet to be analysed. We will use the feedback gathered from consultation and survey to amend and adapt the framework where at all possible, acknowledging that conflicting priorities and needs may not always be resolved completely. We will, where possible and necessary, contact respondents for further information or to discuss a strategic approach to accommodating suggested changes. We anticipate publication of this amended framework in September 2022

Questions for the taskforce

As we move towards the publication of the framework and start to think about implementation, the key question is whether and how members of the Taskforce wish to take forward the task of implementing the framework in their organisations, and what support they may require to do so. For example, creating shared training resources, developing and delivering skills based training, considering post training implementation supports, and the wider context of creating and delivering trauma informed systems, processes, environments and policies.

It would be helpful to understand from the taskforce what the next priorities for the trauma informed workforce workstream may be, and how we can support implementation. Some possible examples include collating/developing:

• Initial training resources to support the development of relevant informed and skilled knowledge through e-learning and/or case study resources at the informed and skilled levels
• Resources and/or training for leaders
• Skills based training for enhanced practitioners