Page contents
Introduction
Return to youth justice service page
The AIM (Assessment, Intervention, Monitoring) Project provides a suite of models, frameworks and practice guidance to support the assessment of and interventions for children who have displayed harmful sexual behaviour. For the purposes of this resource, the most relevant are:
- AIM3 Assessment Model: Assessment of Adolescents and Harmful Sexual Behaviour
- AIM Assessment Model for Children Under 12 years old with Problematic or Harmful Sexual Behaviours
Each of these assessment models provide a structured approach to assess risk, identify needs, and coordinate interventions for these children (who may also be at risk of or affected by child sexual abuse themselves). The models seek to:
- assess the child’s current risks and vulnerabilities, including risk of harm to themselves or others
- identify safeguarding needs and risk factors that require intervention
- inform referral pathways, intervention plans and ongoing monitoring
- document relevant information in a structured format that can be accessed by appropriate partner agencies
- support monitoring of progress and outcomes, in order to guide ongoing risk management and safeguarding decisions.
They take a holistic approach, considering the child’s risks, needs, strengths and protective factors, alongside their family and environmental context. Decisions and actions recorded in the assessment should reflect professional judgement, multi-agency input, and the child’s individual circumstances.
As noted above, the ability to share relevant information with other practitioners is a key element of AIM, and the information recorded in an AIM assessment can help to inform an effective multi-agency response to concerns about child sexual abuse. Equally, input from other agencies improves the effectiveness of the AIM assessment.
When completing an AIM assessment, youth justice service practitioners should ensure that the information they record is accurate, proportionate, and relevant to safeguarding and intervention planning. This may include:
- background information – personal details, previous safeguarding concerns, family and social context, and any relevant history of abuse or trauma
- risk factors – indicators of potential harm, environmental or behavioural vulnerabilities, and parental or familial risk factors
- protective factors – strengths, supportive relationships, engagement with education or community activities, and stabilising influences
- interventions and outcomes – previous and current interventions, referrals to services, and progress towards agreed goals
- multi-agency contributions – input from social care, police, health, education, and community services that informs safeguarding and risk management.
The sharing of information around an AIM assessment is multi-directional, with different agencies sharing and receiving information at different stages – but at all times it should be purposeful, proportionate, and guided by the child’s best interests.
Before the assessment: Relevant historical information from children’s social care, health practitioners, the police, education and possibly other agencies should be shared with the practitioner completing the AIM assessment, to support a comprehensive understanding of the child’s needs and risks.
During the assessment: The practitioner should record risks, protective factors and intervention needs, forming a reference for multi-agency safeguarding discussions.
After the assessment: Key findings, risk evaluations and recommendations should be shared with relevant agencies to inform safeguarding decisions, intervention planning and ongoing monitoring. This information might be useful to agencies in different ways:
- For children’s social care it can provide insight into safeguarding risks, support planning of protective actions, and identify unmet health or emotional needs.
- For the police it can inform investigative strategy, risk monitoring, and safeguarding actions.
- For education practitioners it can guide safeguarding arrangements in school, identify potential risks to the child’s wellbeing, and inform pastoral or support planning.
- For health services it can support continuity of care, coordination of physical and mental health interventions, and identification of vulnerabilities.
- For organisations in the voluntary and community sector it can provide context for early interventions, enable targeted support, and inform monitoring of the child’s progress and safety.
However, not all information recorded within an AIM assessment is suitable for sharing beyond the immediate practitioner network involved in completing or overseeing the assessment. For example, it is unlikely to be appropriate to share detailed formulation notes, practitioner reflections, verbatim session material or sensitive background information that does not directly inform safeguarding decisions. Reviewing individual pieces of AIM information in isolation – without reference to the full assessment, the child’s circumstances or the guidance on interpretation – can lead to misunderstanding or over‑statement of risk. And practitioners should be cautious about sharing information that is personal to the child and may be damaging or harmful to them if incorrectly understood or interpreted.
When AIM information is shared within a multi‑agency context, it is therefore important that it is presented within a clear structure and accompanied by clear professional analysis explaining what the information means, its limitations, and how it should (and should not) inform safeguarding or intervention decisions.