Page contents
Introduction
Return to Police page
The Active Risk Management System (ARMS) is a structured tool used primarily by the police to assess and manage the ongoing risk posed by adults cautioned for or convicted of sexual offences, including those who may present a risk of sexual harm to children.
It is a dynamic tool, meaning that it focuses on current factors that increase or decrease the likelihood of future sexual harm. ARMS does not predict risk on its own; instead, it informs professional judgement, risk management planning, and safeguarding activity.
When it is necessary and proportionate for child protection, information from ARMS can and should be shared with other practitioners, in order to improve their understanding of the risk posed and enhance their decision-making.
ARMS explores two types of factor that affect the risk posed by an individual:
1. Risk factors (things that may increase risk)
Examples include:
- a sexual interest in children, or problematic sexual thoughts or behaviours
- use of pornography, including any concerns about illegal content
- opportunities to offend, such as unsupervised access to children
- relationship instability
- emotional regulation difficulties or impulsivity
- non-compliance with previous court orders or supervision.
2. Protective factors (things that may reduce risk)
Examples include:
- stable and pro-social relationships
- motivation to change and engage with interventions
- positive social support networks
- consistent cooperation with probation and police
- purposeful activity, such as work or education.
The ARMS assessment then feeds into a risk management plan, which outlines recommended controls or restrictions, rehabilitation pathways, monitoring strategies, and any multi-agency actions needed to protect children.
When assessing concerns of child sexual abuse, information from ARMS can help other agencies understand:
1. Known or emerging risk indicators, such as:
- whether the individual has previous sexual offences, particularly involving children
- patterns in behaviour or triggers identified by the Probation Service or the police
- evidence of access to children
- non-compliance with supervision or licence conditions.
2. The individual’s current level of cooperation and insight, as indicated by:
- their level of engagement with probation
- indicators of minimisation, denial or hostility
- their willingness to follow safeguarding restrictions.
3. Current protective and stabilising factors, such as:
- the presence of protective adults in the home
- supportive family members who understand and can help manage risks
- engagement with treatment or behaviour-change programmes.
4. Risk management actions already in place, such as:
- licence conditions preventing contact with children
- restrictions on internet access
- active monitoring by police sexual offender managers.
Awareness of these helps to avoid duplication and ensures consistent safeguarding.
Practitioners should use information from ARMS to:
- support a holistic understanding of risk in the family or community context
- inform decisions about child protection plans, safety planning, contact arrangements and supervision levels
- cross-check the individual’s self-reported information
- ensure that risk management plans are aligned across the Probation Service, the police and children’s social care
- identify gaps or inconsistencies in protective factors.
Practitioners should not:
- treat ARMS as a standalone predictor of risk
- share the full report unnecessarily
- assume ARMS replaces other types of assessment.
ARMS assessments are restricted documents owned by the police. Access is limited to:
- police offender managers (in MOSOVO or ViSOR units)
- safeguarding practitioners in other agencies, but only where there is a clearly identified need to know in order to protect a child or meet statutory safeguarding duties.
Other agencies will not usually receive an individual’s full ARMS record, but risk-relevant information (contained within the assessing practitioner’s analysis and explanation of what the assessment indicates in practice) can and should be shared when necessary and proportionate for child protection.
ARMS information is usually shared via processes such as MAPPA, MASH discussions or strategy meetings, but is sometimes shared directly with other practitioners.