Family group conferences
FGCs are an opportunity to support decision making following care and protection concerns, including disengagement from education and/or youth offending, and to put a plan in place that addresses those concerns.
When introduced in 1989, FGCs were a fundamental shift in the approach to child protection and youth justice and were a direct response to concerns of institutional racism raised in the 1988 report Pūao-Te-Ata-Tū.115 The FGC is not a kaupapa Māori practice but is grounded in whānau decision making and incorporates aspects of . At the time FGCs were introduced, they were described as “unprecedented”.116
In our 2023/24 community engagements, we heard that FGCs are not always carried out as intended. We heard from some Oranga Tamariki kaimahi that FGCs are not always valued despite the benefits they can bring, including access to resources that can address care and protection concerns and offending.
Financial restrictions, time pressures, limited whānau involvement and FGCs being held in Oranga Tamariki offices were described as barriers that limit the purpose and intent of the FGC process. Sometimes whānau and professionals feel their voices aren’t heard. Sometimes agencies can’t agree on a plan going forward, despite whānau involvement, and there can be a lack of services and supports to refer , and whānau to. This means their plans are not always followed through and actioned.
Considering the value that FGCs can deliver, supporting these appropriately offers a way of working that is likely to be beneficial for tamariki and rangatahi Māori and their whānau.
FGCs are for care and protection concerns, including disengagement from education and/or youth offending.117 Depending on the pathway of the FGC, they are usually attended by and , their and a range of professionals, including social workers and police. For youth justice FGCs, involving the victim of the offending enables the FGC to be a restorative process where rangatahi take accountability for their offending.
The FGC is intended to give whānau a key role in decision making to support the best interests of tamariki and rangatahi. First identified in the Children, Young Persons and Their Families Act 1989 (the precursor to the Oranga Tamariki Act), FGCs originate from a number of reports and inquiries that found Māori were being disadvantaged and marginalised by the social welfare system. This growing awareness culminated in Pūao-Te-Ata-Tū, a 1988 report that described institutional racism as the norm, and outlined “a profound misunderstanding or ignorance of the place of the child in Māori society and its relationship with whānau, , ”.118
The outcome of an FGC is a plan to address the needs of tamariki and rangatahi and their whānau and to secure services and supports from other government agencies such as learning support and mental health. As outlined in our Experiences of Care in reports, it is often through the FGC process that services and supports are identified to meet these needs for both care and protection and youth justice.
As well as being mandated in legislation, FGCs are the subject of several practice standards within Oranga Tamariki. As a minimum, FGCs must:
- be convened in a timely manner (youth justice FGCs have legislated time frames)
- have provision to share all required information and advice with the people attending FGCs
- include (or have taken reasonable steps to include) the views of anyone entitled but unable to attend an FGC
- be convened and facilitated in a way that enables the whānau to consider the concerns of anyone unable to attend and/or (for youth justice) the offending behaviour of tamariki and rangatahi
- be convened and facilitated in a way that enables participants to develop a plan to address the concerns, rights of the victim (for youth justice) and any accountability and public interest or safety
- have all decisions and recommendations documented and copies of the plan provided to anyone entitled to receive them
- have funding to support the delivery of the agreed plan.
A youth justice FGC is a restorative process that supports rangatahi to reduce or stop their offending. Youth justice FGCs can be more successful when victims attend.
"I’ve been going to FGC for 20 years. It’s much more powerful when victims are there, it’s raw and real. To hear from the victim themselves, it’s powerful and emotional. I can [read their statements], but it’s not the same. It’s good, it gives the victim some closure. It’s good for the young person to hear. It’s more effective and has more impact.”
ORANGA TAMARIKI KAIMAHI
Oranga Tamariki data shows around 4,500 and had a care and protection FGC in 2023/24, and more than 2,000 tamariki and rangatahi had a youth justice FGC.
Two-thirds of care and protection FGCs are for tamariki and rangatahi Māori
| Māori | Non-Māori | Ethnicity unknown | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019/20 | 3,704 (65%) | 1,918 (34%) | 1% |
| 2020/21 | 4,218 (66%) | 2,131 (33%) | 1% |
| 2021/22 | 3,404 (66%) | 1,653 (32%) | 2% |
| 2022/23 | 3,091 (65%) | 1,583 (33%) | 2% |
| 2023/24 | 3,019 (65%) | 1,490 (32%) | 3% |
Seventy percent of youth justice FGCs are for tamariki and rangatahi Māori
| Māori | Non-Māori | |
|---|---|---|
| 2019/20 | 1,329 (67%) | 646 (33%) |
| 2020/21 | 1,308 (68%) | 609 (32%) |
| 2021/22 | 1,209 (71%) | 489 (29%) |
| 2022/23 | 1,434 (70%) | 607 (30%) |
| 2023/24 | 1,482 (70%) | 627 (30%) |
The proportion of FGCs for tamariki and rangatahi Māori has remained stable for the past few years.
Oranga Tamariki has reported on the drivers of disparity as part of its most recent section 7AA report.119 When socio-economic disadvantage is taken into account, the disparity reduces.
Oranga Tamariki states that Māori aged 0–4 are 1.19 times more likely than NZ European and other ethnicities aged 0–4 to be referred to an FGC or family/ agreement before adjusting for socio-economic disadvantage, and just as likely after adjusting for socioeconomic disadvantage.
Among tamariki aged 5–9, Māori are 1.34 times more likely before adjusting for socio-economic disadvantage, and 1.04 times more likely after adjusting for socio-economic disadvantage.
Among tamariki and rangatahi aged 10–17, Māori are 1.2 times more likely before adjusting for socio-economic disadvantage, and less likely than non-Māori (0.93 times) to be referred to an FGC or family/whānau agreement after adjusting for socio-economic disadvantage.
We heard mixed views among Oranga Tamariki kaimahi about the use of FGCs. There was recognition that FGCs are important for formalising and resourcing support for , and . It was also recognised that, through this formal commitment to provide support, FGCs can prevent tamariki and rangatahi escalating further through the system.
We also heard that some Oranga Tamariki kaimahi had misinterpreted the practice shift as a move away from taking custody orders. This had resulted in some social workers viewing not proceeding to FGC as a “win”. However, FGCs are more than simply an entry point to care. They can be used to ensure that services are in place irrespective of whether tamariki or rangatahi come into care.
In contrast, some kairaranga ā-whānau in the Upper South region spoke positively about the ā-whānau process at their site, with one saying their “aim is to not go to FGC” but rather to bring wider whānau together in the hui ā-whānau space so that plans can be made and support addressed there.
A hui ā-whānau is a less formal whānau meeting, which can be used in multiple instances, including as a precursor to the FGC. However, it is not a substitute for an FGC. While hui ā-whānau are facilitated using a approach, they lack the statutory responsibilities of the FGC that make the chief executive of Oranga Tamariki accountable.
We heard from some Oranga Tamariki kaimahi that a reliance on hui ā-whānau as an alternative to FGCs raises concerns about how effectively care and protection needs can be addressed and supports resourced.
"[The difference is] that Oranga Tamariki chief executive must give effect to the reasonable decisions of their plan [from an FGC] … I have noticed that there are some social workers [who are] trying to get things done in a hui ā-whānau.”
ORANGA TAMARIKI FGC CO-ORDINATOR
"[However], at the hui ā-whānau, [the whānau] don’t have the finances to support ... If that [budget] was there [for hui ā-whānau], you won’t come to FGC.”
ORANGA TAMARIKI KAIMAHI
Not holding an FGC can lead to a reactive response later on. A practice leader from Oranga Tamariki said that, in some cases, urgent and reactive care entries could have been avoided if social workers hadn’t felt deterred from making decisions or “scared to go to family group conference”.120 This implies that an earlier FGC could have prevented entry into care or, in some cases, at least prevented the sudden (without notice) placement of tamariki and rangatahi out of their homes.
However, Oranga Tamariki has advised from case file analysis of 161 cases of tamariki who came into care121 that, in 58 percent of cases, there was evidence of either a prior FGC or a hui a-whānau. They also advised that, in 79 percent of cases, support services were provided or offered to whānau prior to coming into care.
Without knowing the nature of support offered or the quality of the FGC, including the resourcing of the plan, it is difficult to fully understand what this Oranga Tamariki analysis tells us. However, from our monitoring, it is clear there is a lack of clarity about the place of FGCs and hui ā-whānau, the purpose of both and how they work together, and how they are preventing escalation in the oranga tamariki system.
, and Māori told us about a range of experiences when it came to being involved in, listened to and supported to attend and understand FGCs. This was the same for both care and protection and for youth justice. As noted in our latest Experiences of Care in report,122 some whānau of tamariki and rangatahi in care or custody spoke of positive FGC experiences. This included examples of being financially supported to attend FGCs and being able to build relationships with key kaimahi in advance of the .
When we asked tamariki and rangatahi Māori about their FGCs, some felt they had a say in what went into their FGC plan and spoke of being supported by mentors, NGO kaimahi and Oranga Tamariki social workers to have a say and understand the process.
"I got to write down what my hobbies were, what I liked doing to find some of the stuff available to me. I chose something to do with boxing. They put it down as an option so I can choose it.”
RANGATAHI
"The main plan was to get me into boxing through Genesis. What helped me understand was [Oranga Tamariki social worker] explaining to me what the process was. What I want to do and how I want to do it and what’s going to work best for me. They made it easy for me to understand.”
RANGATAHI
However, some tamariki and rangatahi Māori felt they lacked involvement in their FGC plans and were not supported to have their views heard.
"I don’t really get the chance to talk much [in big meetings], they don’t let me talk really.”
RANGATAHI
Some said they were not supported to understand the process. One rangatahi in youth justice said they felt like they were “just expected to know things”.
For whānau Māori, there were also mixed experiences. Some whānau Māori felt they were not listened to in FGCs and not able to be involved in making decisions about FGC plans. For example, one whānau member felt they were only listened to in the FGC when they became visibly frustrated and things would get heated between themselves and professionals.
"When I’m frustrated and grumpy, that’s when they listen, and I feel my voice is heard. I don’t want to yell. To have to yell, it’s not nice … It’s frustrating to get to that point.”
In contrast, some whānau who attended youth justice FGCs spoke more positively, and said they were supported by professionals, mainly NGO and marae kaimahi, to have a voice and have their views reflected in FGC plans.
"For [rangatahi], it was his choice [what went into his plan]. We would give him the ideas and he would make the choice, and because it was his choice, he would do it. Like school – we asked what he wanted to do. We looked at courses. He didn’t like many of them. He picked a course to do this year, I said I would help him do that. He said he wanted to work, so he found himself a job and did it himself. He did his CV and got a job straight away, so I was really proud.”
WHĀNAU
"[Someone] from Oranga Tamariki reached out to me and came to see me a day or two after. Really lovely woman. I was quite scared to meet her because you hear Oranga Tamariki, and you get scared they are going to come take [tamariki]. But she said she was there to offer help to get him on track and we made a really good plan.”
WHĀNAU
"I did [get a say in the decisions being made] ... It was talked through to us step by step and anything I didn’t understand I did ask … Nothing couldn’t go past me if I had a concern or not. Without me agreeing or understanding.”
WHĀNAU
Youth justice kaimahi told us about their strong commitment to upholding child and whānau voice in the FGC process. However, we heard from some professionals that there is a lack of funding to support attendance at FGCs. This includes funding for whānau and victims (in the case of youth justice) to attend FGCs, as well as basic hospitality for those who do attend.
"I have an FGC coming up that will run from 10am until 3pm ... I need to get approval [for expenditure that is over $30]. The process to get approval is bigger than Ben Hur. The FGC will run for a long time, hence kai is needed and it is a bad look if we can’t provide.”
ORANGA TAMARIKI KAIMAHI
Having victims attend youth justice FGCs is a critical part of the restorative process. Oranga Tamariki data indicates that, in most cases, victims of crime are being contacted about FGCs.123 However, published data from 2023/24 doesn’t show whether victims attended. This would be good to know in future given their attendance is a known success factor.124
What did make a positive difference was the support of , Māori providers and professionals. We heard numerous examples of these kaimahi playing a key role in advocating and walking alongside rangatahi and whānau Māori in the FGC.
"[Papakura Marae kaimahi] make it all about you and not them. They help you with ideas and what to say but it is all about you not them. That’s your say.”
WHĀNAU
When Oranga Tamariki professionals prepare tamariki, rangatahi and whānau for an FGC either for care and protection or for youth justice, it ensures that their voices are heard and they understand the process. However, a lack of information sharing and communication during the FGC process impacts on the engagement of whānau and the support community agencies can provide them.
In many of our engagements with professionals involved in the oranga tamariki system, we heard about the increasing levels of complex need and have. When we asked professionals about FGCs, we heard about the need for disability-related supports to help them engage in the FGC.
We particularly heard about organisations such as Talking Trouble, which provides support for speech, language and communication needs to ensure tamariki and rangatahi can have a say in the FGC and understand the process. We heard that, when rangatahi understand the youth justice FGC process, it can be a “beautiful ... and restorative process”.
However, we also heard that it can be difficult to get approval within Oranga Tamariki for funding to access the Talking Trouble service. Some Oranga Tamariki social workers told us about the help they have received from their regional disability advisor, who were seen as crucial in ensuring disabled tamariki and rangatahi are supported in the FGC process although they are not always available to attend FGCs due to capacity constraints on the one role.
The 2022 report, How we fail children who offend and what to do about it: A breakdown across the whole system,125 refers to a lack of cross-agency collaboration around the FGC process in youth justice. The report also refers to a reliance on the dedication of individual professionals rather than a system that is working well and youth justice FGC plans that are of variable quality and overly focused on offending rather than welfare. The high proportion of who offend who have unmet care and protection needs is discussed later in this report.
Many professionals told us it is not always easy to agree to a plan made at an FGC, or to deliver on the plan. We heard from some social workers who felt that their voices were not heard at youth justice FGCs and who said there are sometimes disagreements between agencies about the content of youth justice FGC plans.126 We heard examples of police kaimahi taking a more punitive approach than other agencies, resulting in plans not being agreed. We also heard examples of police prosecutors advocating in court for decisions that did not reflect the agreements made, including by police kaimahi, in the FGC.
Most kaimahi across and Māori providers and NZ Police, felt their professional opinions and expertise were not listened to in FGCs. Some said they were not invited to the FGC in a timely manner, and others told us they were not given an opportunity to contribute to plans.
"[Oranga Tamariki] just don’t hear us. They turn their back on you like we’re nothing. In FGCs, they will talk to other professionals about their contributions but do not include us in the FGC space. There are very few Māori social workers in [Oranga Tamariki].”
KAUPAPA MĀORI ORGANISATION KAIMAHI
"Sometimes we are invited to FGC straight off the bat, sometimes we don’t hear about things until after. It’s a really mixed relationship with [Oranga Tamariki].”
NGO KAIMAHI
Some kaimahi felt they could contribute to FGC plans due to the strong relationships they had with individual Oranga Tamariki kaimahi, and some said that they provide written advice in advance of the FGC to make sure they have their opinions heard. For instance, an NGO kaimahi said they submit reports to the FGC coordinator and Oranga Tamariki social workers.
"We do submit reports, and the report is fed into the FGC and then the decision is made. That’s how we contribute to the decision-making process. Our support is recognised through the reports.”
NGO KAIMAHI
Some Oranga Tamariki youth justice kaimahi spoke of working alongside police to get FGC plans over the line and agree on what needs to be in plans. They said consultation with agencies prior to the FGC allows opportunities to consider police perspectives.
"We have robust discussion with police, and it is a respectful relationship where we can disagree. Purely professional and nobody takes it personally.”
ORANGA TAMARIKI YOUTH JUSTICE KAIMAHI
"We don’t have a lot of kids whose FGC plans aren’t agreed to, which is really cool, so that’s good and we’ll try in that space, but we are coming from different views and sometimes the police want to be really punitive and we don’t and that’s all right. It’s okay to do that, but we talk and there may be times we feel like we’re not in the same spot but that’s very rare because we get on quite well.”
ORANGA TAMARIKI YOUTH JUSTICE KAIMAHI
A police leader in Auckland said the positive relationships between Youth Aid kaimahi and Oranga Tamariki FGC co-ordinators ensures information is shared and professional views are listened to, enabling a successful FGC.
Overall, what we heard was that those attending – whether , , rangatahi or professionals – felt they were not always heard. This could indicate that FGCs are not always facilitated well, limiting their effectiveness and ultimately negatively impacting on tamariki and rangatahi.
and Māori providers can make a positive difference for tamariki, rangatahi and whānau Māori attending FGCs.
During our community engagements, we heard about the devolution and/or delegation of FGC roles to iwi social service providers as part of the Oranga Tamariki Future Direction Action Plan.
"We support whānau during FGC. We guide them, deliberating the best move forward for their rangatahi. We help them to make decisions and be heard … it’s vital that they are part of the decision.”
KAUPAPA MĀORI ORGANISATION KAIMAHI
"We started to educate the whānau that FGC is a kind of thing in government language. But we make sure the whānau are the centre. We say get your plan and bring the right people into the FGC to support your situation.”
IWI SOCIAL SERVICE LEADER
We also heard about barriers to increasing delegation to iwi social service providers, including a lack of funding to support the change and the time it takes to develop “trust and confidence in partners”. Kaimahi from a Māori organisation told us they receive requests to attend FGCs without sufficient information or being given a chance to meet with whānau prior. We were told this means they have to determine what support they can provide to whānau on the spot. We also heard this poses challenges in building relationships and consulting with whānau during the FGC process.
When FGCs are run in more neutral environments such as those hosted by Māori providers or iwi, including in whare and marae, rangatahi and whānau Māori are more likely to feel comfortable and safe in engaging with the FGC process.
"We’ve done three FGCs over [at Raukawa]. Also some at Muaūpoko at their whare as it is where the kids feel safe. That’s their comfort zone.”
ORANGA TAMARIKI YOUTH JUSTICE KAIMAHI
"It’s a nicer environment [at Muaūpoko] in terms of the building – across many offices. Their office is much more homely, more welcoming than [the Oranga Tamariki site].”
ORANGA TAMARIKI YOUTH JUSTICE KAIMAHI
We heard there is lack of funding to resource FGC plans, by both Oranga Tamariki and other government agencies. This limits support for , and and risks escalation through the system. Compounding this is a lack of services and capacity, which also creates barriers to implementing FGC plans.
Some kaimahi in Oranga Tamariki and in other agencies spoke about the lack of funding, and some attributed this to the financial constraints introduced in late 2023. Examples given were a young person declined funding for trauma counselling despite it having been recommended by a professional and absences of funding for intervention services (including mentoring) and drug testing.
A care and protection FGC co-ordinator said the tension over funding between agencies results in gaps in support for tamariki and rangatahi, with Oranga Tamariki often having to foot the bill for things they feel would be better managed by other agencies.
"There are tensions between the government organisations, so there’s always scraps over funding … Those battles mean that there sometimes end up being gaps that we, Oranga Tamariki, can’t fill. There are things that are too specialised for us to fill in, so we fill in gaps for education all the time. We will fund things for disability or for trauma that aren’t our specialist area and can be better managed by other agencies but aren’t.”
ORANGA TAMARIKI KAIMAHI
A police Youth Aid leader from Auckland also noticed that funding had recently reduced, which had impacted access to support and the quality of support put in place for rangatahi in youth justice. They gave an example of funding being removed for a programme that was set up for a group of rangatahi.
"There are new barriers because of the Government. Politics should not get in the way of what we do, but it does. Because of the new Government coming in, they have turned the tap off for the funding. The social workers from youth justice cannot physically work with the kids, they need to get the community involved and get their support … With this new programme and the 10 boys on it, we put them in the gym and had staff there for this programme at the gym. Oranga Tamariki said they would fund these kids for the duration of the family group conference plan. That is getting cut. There is no money for that now.”
POLICE LEADER
Some police leaders also said they are using their Children’s Flexi Fund to fund assessments and support for FGCs that cannot be funded through Oranga Tamariki. Some police kaimahi in Canterbury, for example, spoke about the “battle” to get resources through Oranga Tamariki because it can’t pay for services.
"I’ve got an FGC coming up and I’m looking at getting a literacy assessment funded through Flexi Fund. I don’t think it should sit there but Oranga Tamariki don’t have the money and we need to get them back in education so the Flexi Fund is a lifesaver for us.”
POLICE LEADER
We also heard that, if whānau can be adequately resourced, there is potential to prevent tamariki and rangatahi from entering care. However, there is currently inadequate funding to resource plans.
"We love FGCs. If families can be resourced, we have potential to stop kids going into care, but we cannot resource a plan. As an organisation, that needs to change.”
ORANGA TAMARIKI KAIMAHI
In every region we visited, we heard from kaimahi about a lack of services and capacity in existing services as barriers to implementing support for tamariki, rangatahi and whānau. We heard about long waitlists for counselling services, with the wait times not aligning with FGC timeframes, and some services not provided to tamariki and rangatahi due to catchment areas.
"We’re just expected to come up with FGC plans and have some good robust stuff in them and you just can’t. We got a prime example in Masterton with a really high-risk rangatahi and there’s no mentoring services available.”
ORANGA TAMARIKI SITE LEADER
"I think when we don’t have the right and enough services, it results in reoffending. The biggest impact is that rangatahi are in custody [in a secure facility] for longer than they need to be. They will be back into the community. We are retraumatising them [by keeping rangatahi in secure residence longer]. It has a huge and negative impact.”
ORANGA TAMARIKI YOUTH JUSTICE KAIMAHI
"Being really short on services and not having the quality of services prolongs [time rangatahi spend in the youth justice system].”
ORANGA TAMARIKI YOUTH JUSTICE KAIMAHI
As well as a shortage of services and supports, we also heard about issues between NZ Police and Oranga Tamariki around the completion of community hours stipulated in youth justice FGC plans.
While NZ Police was described as inflexible in one region we visited, in another region, Oranga Tamariki and NZ Police had found a way to manage shortages. Oranga Tamariki kaimahi told us they can negotiate with police and be creative about how rangatahi will complete community hours. Examples included:
- rangatahi creating artwork for a community group
- rangatahi making bird feeders to donate to the community
- rangatahi being able to make a financial donation to a community organisation in lieu of community hours if there are conflicts with their employment hours and responsibilities.
A group of Youth Aid officers and a police leader in Auckland said they are flexible with how community hours are completed and try to ensure that youth justice FGC plans are achievable. One police leader said they have moved away from rigid plans, and that it is important they “look at the big picture and be very flexible around that” to inspire change in rangatahi.
One of the measures highlighted in the 2023/24 Oranga Tamariki annual report is the proportion of aged 14–17 (all ethnicities) who have no further engagement with youth justice following their first youth justice FGC.127
This measure indicates an improvement. For rangatahi with one prior FGC, the proportion who had no further engagement with youth justice increased from 32 percent in June 2019 to 40 percent in June 2022.128 Oranga Tamariki states this means the support provided in their first FGC is helping to prevent reoffending. This proportion dropped to 37 percent in 2023/24.
However, for rangatahi with multiple prior FGCs, the data shows an increase in the rate of reoffending. The proportion who had no further engagement with youth justice (no evidence of further offending) has continued to decrease proportionally from 28 percent in June 2019 to 23 percent in 2023/24.
Another measure used by Oranga Tamariki is the percentage of rangatahi Māori referred for another youth justice FGC in the six months following completion of a youth justice custodial sentence. This has remained stable over the last few years at 63 percent in 2020 and 62 percent in 2023.129
These measures are important tools for Oranga Tamariki to measure the success of FGCs. However, until agencies work more effectively together and with to agree plans that are in the best interests of and rangatahi and have appropriate services and supports available to refer them and their whānau to, the effectiveness of FGCs remains at risk.
115 See footnote 51.
116 Introducing a 2012 review, the Ministry of Social Development states: “When Family Group Conferences (FGCs) were implemented in New Zealand 25 years ago, this approach to helping vulnerable children and young people, as well as victims of young offending, was unprecedented.” https://www..govt.nz/about-msd-and-our-work/publications-resources/evaluation/review-family-groupconferences/ index.html
117 The Oranga Tamariki Act sets out circumstances where FGCs should be convened. This includes section 19, which refers to FGCs being convened as a result of concerns raised by government agencies, agents of the Crown and local authorities.
118 See footnote 51 (p. 7). Macrons were omitted in the original quote.
119 See footnote 53.
120 The Oranga Tamariki Act requires FGCs to be convened prior to a custody order. In cases where this happens without notice, or where temporary care arrangements are made, the FGC must be convened once and have been brought into care.
121 Under a section 78 interim custody order between 1 July and 31 December 2023.
122 See footnote 49.
123 The 2023/24 Oranga Tamariki Annual Report shows that 7,754 victims of youth offending where legally required to be consulted during the reporting period. Of those, 356 were unable to be consulted (for unknown reasons) and a further 1,014 were not recorded as being consulted. This leaves 6,384 victims of youth offending recorded as being consulted. The data doesn’t show whether victims attended youth justice FGCs, but Oranga Tamariki also records that four complaints were made in 2023/24 by victims related to youth FGCs and that these complaints were about communication, support and privacy. See footnote 72 (pp. 30–31).
124 Research suggests that justice and recidivism outcomes are better when victims participate in justice processes, particularly restorative justice processes. For example, Oranga Tamariki Evidence Centre. (2020). Maximising victim participation and engagement: Evidence brief. Oranga Tamariki. https://www.orangatamariki.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/About-us/Research/Latestresearch/ Maximising-victim-participation-and-engagement/Maximising-victim-participation-and-engagement.pdf
125 See footnote 61.
126 As noted later in this report, there has never been a non-agreement in youth justice FGCs convened by Whakapai Hauora as part of its delegation by Oranga Tamariki.
127 See footnote 77 (p. 47).
128 ibid
129 See footnote 53 (Measure 5A). The measure has a six-month reporting lag.