Lousia Ovington independent investigation report ... - NHS North East

112
CHAPTER 5 – INVOLVEMENT WITH POLICE AND PROBATION
There appears to have been no formal referral made. The panel does not know
whether Social Worker 7 was aware of the referral process, but her several attempts
to raise this matter representing one of the Duty to Cooperate authorities amounted
to a request of the Responsible Authority (probation) to refer her for consideration of
putting MAPPA into place and this should undoubtedly have been acted upon.
In relation to anger management and alcohol control, there is no written evidence in
the notes for this CRO about whether, or how, the necessary work was completed.
This is of particular concern in relation to alcohol use; it was correctly identified as a
significant factor in the OASys assessments and in the management plan which is part
of OASys in January 2005 there is reference to alcohol misuse being dealt with by
‘ongoing monitoring’ and a programme entitled ‘Addiction VI 2’ but nothing more. (It
may be that the work was done but because of the structural difficulties in managing
this order it was not recorded.)
Sixth PSR dated 7 November 2005
On 7 November 2005 Probation Officer 5 prepared a PSR in relation to an offence of
criminal damage and breach of conditional discharge. The report concluded that the
likelihood of reconviction was high and the risk of serious harm was medium. The
report recommended a CO with a supervision requirement consisting of completion
of a compulsory citizenship module, including offence analysis and victim awareness
work. Louisa Ovington would also be required to liaise with both CMHT and the ESMI
programme in relation to her alcohol use.
Third CO (previously CRO)
At court on 22 November 2005 Louisa Ovington was made subject to a two year CO.
The previous CRO was revoked.
The file shows that Louisa Ovington attended regularly and there is evidence that she
started to complete the work required of her.
There is also evidence in the notes that the probation officer was aware of the
involvement of other agencies and kept in touch with Louisa Ovington’s care
coordinator.
Shortly after the commencement of the order it is noted that Louisa Ovington was
aggressive and abusive towards staff in the office and a decision was made not to visit
her at home. There is no record of this being communicated to the care coordinator,
however.