Section two Focus on detention issues Conclusions The experience of these YOIs, four SCHs in England and the Woodlands Juvenile Justice Centre in Northern Ireland, suggest that there is considerable thought and planning behind most transitions. However, it is noticeable that though there are similarities in the approaches employed by different establishments (providing information to children, bringing staff from the receiving establishment to meet the child prior to transfer) they differ in some significant aspects. In particular, the approach to gradually restrict a child’s regime and privileges in one SCH is in contrast to the approach in another where they seek to keep children in the least restrictive form of custody possible for as long as possible. Through this work, the NPM and its members aimed to strengthen their understanding of the transitions that exist, the variation between them and the processes behind them. It will feed into discussions at the NPM’s children and young people’s sub-group on how to strengthen NPM monitoring of these processes. The significant resources committed to planning the transition to adult custody can only impact positively on outcomes if they inform the provision of services to young adults during their induction and first few months in the adult estate. The findings from NPM members in England and Wales show that because there are a large number of institutions accepting young adults from the children’s estate, there are also wide variations in how they are received. Institutions that regularly receive prisoners from the children’s estate should have robust arrangements in place to develop individualised plans for their induction and early days in the adult estate. The case of Joshua Collinson highlights the risks that arise from any transfer process when the vulnerabilities of young detainees are not considered or information passed on between establishments. 55