The Regulation operationalises and constrains the youth offending conferencing framework established in the Act through a set of recurring regulatory techniques: mandatory information flows, prescribed forms and records, time limits, offence-specific plan content, disclosure gates and authorised recipient lists.

Key concepts in the Regulation, with the clause references used to define them, are:

• Referral notification and notice forms: where the DPP or a court refers a matter under the Act to a conference administrator, the referral must be accompanied by a notice in the form approved by the Secretary (cl 5(1)-(3)). Further, the DPP or court must notify, in writing, the Police Area Commander or Police District Commander of the police area or district in which the offence was alleged to have occurred when referring a matter under s 40 of the Act (cl 4(1)). Notices must include reasons and explain how those reasons relate to matters in s 40(5) of the Act (cl 4(2)).
• Approved forms and consultation: the Secretary’s power to approve a referral notice form is qualified by an obligation to consult specified authorities depending on the person making the referral, including the Commissioner of Police, the DPP, the Chief Magistrate and the President of the Children’s Court (cl 5(3)).
• Records and COPS: the Regulation specifies granular fields for records of conferences (cl 10) and for records of warnings and cautions (cl 15(1)-(2)), and mandates that records of warnings and cautions be kept on COPS (cl 15(3)). COPS is defined in cl 3 as the Computerised Operational Policing System database of the NSW Police Force.
• Outcome plan duration and community service limits: maximum time for implementing an outcome plan is six months by default, or longer if the Secretary approves in a particular case (cl 6); community service hours imposed in an outcome plan cannot exceed the maximum hours that may be imposed for the same offence under the Children (Community Service Orders) Act 1987 (cl 7).
• Offence-specific outcome plan content: for bush fire or arson offences, outcome plans must include attendance at an educational program on the harmful effects of fire and measurable reparation such as clean-up assistance or comparable community service, and payment of compensation consistent with court maxima (cl 8). For graffiti offences, an outcome plan must provide for at least one of specified reparative steps, a program, or obligations suggested by a victim in attendance consistent with the Act’s objects (cl 9).
• Disclosure gates and controls: disclosure of records of cautions and conferences to Department of Justice authorised officers is permitted only where strict written requests and declarations are made (cl 11). Anonymous or de-identified records may be disclosed without meeting those formalities (cl 11(2)). Disclosure to particular research/statistical bodies is permitted where data will only be used for research/statistics and publications do not identify the child (cl 12-13).
• Limited scope of delegated powers and authorised officers: delegation of Secretary functions and prescription of authorised officers is limited to specified senior Juvenile Justice roles and other named positions (cl 17-18).
• Penalty notice consideration: the Regulation prescribes particular offences under other Acts as those where an investigating official must consider the Act’s statutory factors before issuing a penalty notice (cl 14).

These concepts structure information flows between courts, the DPP, police, conference administrators and the Department of Justice; set bounds on the content and duration of restorative outcome plans; control access to identifiable records; and require specific data fields to be collected and retained.

The Regulation allocates duties and informational obligations across public agencies and private participants in the youth offending process. The affected actors include the following categories, with the specific provisions that create duties or affect them:

• Children who are the subject of warnings, cautions and conferences: the Regulation prescribes what must be recorded about them (cl 10; cl 15), limits on the duration and content of outcome plans that apply to them (cl 6-9), and constraints on victim statements used in conferencing involving them (cl 16).
• Conference administrators and convenors: referrals must be accompanied by an approved notice and prescribed supporting material, including criminal history summaries and copies of charge sheets and COPS records where available (cl 5(1), (2), (4)(a)-(d)). Conference administrators must keep conference records containing specific fields (cl 10).
• The DPP and courts: the DPP or a court that refers a matter to a conference administrator must provide notices that include reasons tied to s 40(5) of the Act and must notify the relevant Police Area or District Commander when a matter is referred to a conference administrator under s 40 (cl 4(1)-(2); cl 5(1), (2)).
• NSW Police Force: the Regulation requires formal notification to police commanders on referrals (cl 4); requires that certain records be kept on COPS (cl 15(3)); and allows copies of COPS records to be attached to referral notices where the DPP or specialist youth officer possesses them (cl 5(4)(c)-(d)(ii)). Police are therefore recipients of information and custodians of data in COPS.
• Secretary of the Department administering the Act (the Secretary): the Secretary has approval powers over notice forms and discretion to approve extensions of outcome plan implementation periods beyond six months (cl 5(2)-(3); cl 6). The Secretary also can authorise persons with direct responsibility for youth justice conferencing policy to be authorised officers for disclosure purposes (cl 18(f)).
• Department of Justice authorised officers: disclosure of identifiable conference and caution records to Department of Justice officers is permitted only to those who meet the authorised officer definition and who follow the procedural requirements for requests (cl 11; cl 18). The Regulation prescribes specific roles in the Department that may be delegated functions (Regional Director, Executive Director Juvenile Justice) and specific officers who are authorised officers (cl 17-18).
• Research and statistical bodies: the Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, the Australian Bureau of Statistics and the Australian Institute of Criminology are permitted recipients of records, but only for research, statistics and reporting, and only where publications do not identify the child (cl 12-13).
• Investigating officials issuing penalty notices: the Regulation prescribes that offences under s 11C of the Summary Offences Act 1988 and s 199 of the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 are offences in respect of which the investigating official must consider the matters in s 9(2) of the Act before issuing a penalty notice (cl 14). Investigating officials are therefore required to apply the statutory gateway in those contexts.
• Victims who prepare written statements: the Regulation prescribes format and content limitations for written victim statements tendered under the Act, including page limits and prohibitions on compensation requests and medical reports (cl 16).

Who pays: the operational costs fall on multiple public bodies. Courts and the DPP must prepare and supply particular documents when referring a matter; police must receive and handle referral notifications and maintain records on COPS; the Department of Justice must process disclosure requests under the prescribed formalities; Juvenile Justice roles are assigned delegated authority and may need to absorb record-handling responsibilities. Private individuals affected are the children recorded, victims preparing statements under the constraints in cl 16, and victims who will or will not attend conferences and thereby influence outcome plan content under cl 9(2)(c).

This section summarises the Regulation’s principal mandatory duties and the rights or permitted actions it creates for specific actors. Every duty noted below is grounded in the clause citations.

Duties imposed:

• DPPs and courts: must notify, in writing, the Police Area Commander or Police District Commander when referring a matter under s 40 of the Act to a conference administrator, and that notification must include reasons and how they relate to s 40(5) of the Act (cl 4(1)-(2)). The DPP or court must also ensure a referral to a conference administrator under s 38(1) or s 40(1) is accompanied by a notice in the Secretary-approved form (cl 5(1)-(2)).
• Secretary (form approval function): must consult particular persons when approving the referral notice form, with the list depending on the type of referrer (specialist youth officer, DPP, Local Court, Children’s Court) (cl 5(3)). The Secretary also has the discretion to approve extensions to the six-month outcome plan implementation period (cl 6).
• Conference administrators: must keep a conference record containing specified fields (cl 10), and record outcome plan particulars, responsible person, and completion status among other items (cl 10(k)-(m)).
• Persons issuing warnings and cautions: must create records containing specified personal and offence information, and keep these records on COPS (cl 15(1)-(3)). Records of cautions must include details such as the name and address of the child, date of birth, cultural background, and persons present when the caution was given (cl 15(2)(a)-(h)).
• Investigating officials: must consider the matters in s 9(2)(a) and (b) of the Act prior to issuing a penalty notice for offences prescribed in cl 14 (cl 14).
• Appropriate custodians and officials handling disclosure: must comply with the written-request formalities before divulging records of cautions and conferences to authorised Department of Justice officers, including making the specified declarations and providing full identifying particulars of the person to whom the record relates (cl 11(1)(a)-(f)). An exception allows non-identifying records to be divulged without those formalities (cl 11(2)).

Permitted actions and rights:

• Department of Justice authorised officers: may receive records of cautions and conferences from police if the formalities in cl 11 are met; they may also receive non-identifying records without those formalities under cl 11(2). The Regulation prescribes which Department roles are authorised officers (cl 18).
• Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, ABS and AIC: are permitted to receive records for research and statistical purposes provided the use and publication conditions are met and publications do not identify the child (cl 12-13).
• Secretary: may approve longer implementation periods for outcome plans than six months in particular cases (cl 6).

Constraints on content and form:

• Outcome plans must not exceed community service hour maxima set elsewhere (cl 7). For particular offences, outcome plans must include specified reparative or educational steps (cl 8, cl 9).
• Victim statements must be legible, limited to two A4 pages, signed and dated, omit medical or psychological reports, avoid offensive content and must not request compensation or reparation (cl 16).

Rights of the child under the Act are referenced but not restated in the Regulation. The Regulation preserves the Act’s requirements that outcome plans are subject to the agreement of the child and victims where the Act so requires; the Regulation’s special outcomes clauses state they do not affect Act requirements relating to agreement (cl 8(4); cl 9(4)).

The Regulation also creates administrative delegation and authorisation frameworks: the Secretary may delegate functions to a Regional Director or Executive Director Juvenile Justice (cl 17) and may designate specified Juvenile Justice roles as authorised officers (cl 18). These are both statutory delegations of executive functions rather than conferral of private rights.

The Regulation itself does not create new criminal offences or specify monetary fines within its clauses. Its enforceability is primarily administrative and procedural: compliance with the Act’s processes and with the Regulation’s notice, record-keeping and disclosure rules will be enforced under the statutory framework created by the Act and by the administrative structures that operate conferences and juvenile justice programs. The Regulation does, however, create specific compliance points that can produce enforcement consequences through other statutory mechanisms:

• Procedural non-compliance and evidentiary consequences: if the DPP, courts, police or conference administrators fail to comply with referral, notice or record-keeping requirements (cl 4-5; cl 10; cl 15), consequences will flow from the Act’s provisions about conferences and cautions as the Act governs admissibility of records, the validity of conferences, and the operation of outcome plans. The Regulation repeatedly cross-refers to provisions of the Act (see cl 3 definition). The Regulation therefore makes breaches relevant to the administration of the Act, but does not itself impose a penalty quantum.
• Disclosure breaches: cl 11 prescribes strict conditions for disclosure of identifiable records to Department of Justice authorised officers. Improper disclosure of identifying records outside these gates could expose the disclosing body to administrative sanction under the Act’s confidentiality and disclosure limitations or other statutory privacy frameworks; the Regulation itself does not state the sanction, it prescribes the permitted safe harbour conditions.
• Delegation and authorisation breaches: the Secretary’s power to delegate functions to the prescribed roles (cl 17) and to designate authorised officers (cl 18) means that acts performed by persons outside those prescribed classes could be open to challenge on administrative law grounds, as ultra vires or invalid. The Regulation defines who is authorised for the purposes of sections of the Act; acts done by unauthorised persons could be invalidated or their decisions set aside, with remedial consequences, even though the Regulation does not set a fine.
• Penalty notice gatekeeping: cl 14 requires that for certain offences an investigating official must consider matters under s 9(2) of the Act before issuing a penalty notice. Failure to do so could mean the issuing official did not comply with the Act as modified by the Regulation, potentially exposing the notice to challenge; the Regulation itself does not provide a penalty but changes the decision-making conditions.
• Record retention obligations: cl 15(3) requires that records of warnings and cautions be kept on COPS. Non-compliance could create problems for disclosure requests, internal audits, and accountability processes; again the Regulation does not set a discrete penalty but ensures record-keeping obligations which underpin other enforcement mechanisms.

In short, the Regulation creates mandatory administrative processes and evidentiary structures whose non-observance will generally produce administrative, procedural and possibly judicial consequences under the Act and related statutes, rather than penal fines contained expressly within the Regulation. The Regulation’s own enforcement relies on the Act and on standard public law remedies where improper administrative acts occur. Specific enforcement outcomes therefore depend on the Act’s enforcement provisions and on other applicable statutes and administrative practice, not on direct penalty clauses in the Regulation text.

The Regulation is explicit about its statutory references and cross-links to other primary and subordinate legislation. The interactions it creates are procedural, evidentiary and definitional. The following is a clause-by-clause mapping of interactions evident in the text:

• Relationship with the Young Offenders Act 1997 (the Act): the Regulation repeatedly operates to implement and give content to provisions of the Act. For example, it prescribes how referrals under sections 38 and 40 of the Act are to be accompanied by a Secretary-approved notice (cl 5(1)); provides the maximum time for the implementation of outcome plans for the purposes of s 52(6)(b) of the Act (cl 6); prescribes the maximum period of community service work pursuant to s 52(6)(c) of the Act by linking it to the Children (Community Service Orders) Act 1987 (cl 7); and specifies the content of records for purposes of s 59(2), s 17(2) and s 33(2) of the Act (cl 10; cl 15).
• Children (Community Service Orders) Act 1987: cl 7 links the maximum hours of community service that may be imposed in an outcome plan to the maximum hours available under that Act. The Regulation therefore defers to the community service order regime for quantifying a sanction-equivalent community service cap.
• Graffiti Control Act 2008: cl 9 applies to offences against ss 5 and 6 of the Graffiti Control Act 2008 and to other graffiti crimes; for such offences it prescribes certain reparative or programmatic elements for outcome plans. The Regulation thus integrates restorative outcome plan design with the substantive offence categories in the Graffiti Control Act 2008.
• Summary Offences Act 1988 and Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (LEPRA): cl 14 explicitly prescribes that offences under s 11C of the Summary Offences Act 1988 and s 199 of LEPRA are offences where the investigating official must apply the young offenders decision criteria under s 9(2) of the Act prior to issuing a penalty notice. This creates a cross-act procedural gate that affects how investigating officials apply the penalty notice scheme for those specific provisions.
• Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987: cl 11 requires a declaration that the request for disclosure relates to a child subject to supervision under s 33 of that Act when seeking records from police, thereby connecting disclosure to supervision status under the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987.
• COPS (Computerised Operational Policing System): cl 3 defines COPS and cl 5(4)(c), cl 5(4)(d)(ii), and cl 15(3) create explicit interactions with COPS by requiring copies of COPS records be included with notices in some cases and mandating that records of warnings and cautions be kept on COPS. This places the Management and security practices of COPS at the centre of compliance for record-keeping and disclosure.
• Subordinate Legislation Act 1989 and repeal of prior regulation: cl 2 note records that this Regulation replaces the 2010 Regulation, and that repeal was effected under s 10(2) of the Subordinate Legislation Act 1989. The savings clause (cl 19) maintains continuity for acts done under the former regulation.
• Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, ABS, AIC: cl 12-13 permit disclosure to these bodies but only in a manner consistent with their research/statistics functions and with non-identification constraints, aligning statistical research access rules across the regulatory and statistical landscape.

The Regulation therefore functions primarily as an implementing instrument that sets process-level requirements and data flows between courts, prosecutors, police, conference administrators, Juvenile Justice/Department of Justice and research/statistical agencies. Where the Regulation defers to other Acts (for example community service maxima), it does so by explicit cross-reference, thereby ensuring that the Regulation’s administrative limits are anchored to substantive sanctioning regimes elsewhere.

Note the Regulation is silent in its text about interaction with privacy or data protection statutes beyond the strict non-identification conditions for statistical disclosure in cl 12-13; any compliance assessment that invokes privacy law will need to consult the Privacy Act 1988 and relevant NSW privacy instruments, and consider how the Regulation’s mandated record-keeping on COPS aligns with those frameworks. The Regulation itself does not address national privacy obligations or data breach reporting requirements in its clauses.

The Regulation’s text contains explicit milestone annotations that indicate key changes and replacement events. These are the recorded amendments and the commencement timeline visible in the provided text:

• Commencement and replacement: the Regulation commenced on 1 September 2016 and was required to be published on the NSW legislation website. The commencement note also records that it replaces the Young Offenders Regulation 2010, which was repealed on 1 September 2016 under s 10(2) of the Subordinate Legislation Act 1989 (cl 2 note).
• 2018 amendment to clause 4: cl 4 carries an amendment note "Am 2018 (450), cl 3". This indicates a 2018 amending instrument altered clause 4. The text does not set out the prior wording, but the amendment note signals that the current requirement that DPP or a court must notify a Police Area Commander or a Police District Commander when referring a matter under s 40 was subject to change in 2018.
• 2019 insertion and repeal of clause 13A: the Regulation records that cl 13A was inserted in 2019 (Ins 2019 (92), cl 3) and repealed later in 2019 (Rep 2019 No 10, Sch 1.22). The current text therefore includes a placeholder noting the insertion and repeal. The content of cl 13A is not present in the text provided because it was repealed. The annotation records the path of the amendment.
• Other cross-references and established linkages remain current in the text, for example references to the Act and to other statutes such as the Children (Community Service Orders) Act 1987, Graffiti Control Act 2008, Summary Offences Act 1988 and LEPRA 2002. These are part of the Regulation as enacted in 2016 and as subsequently amended where noted.

The Regulation itself does not include a consolidated amendment table beyond the inline notes. For a practice setting, practitioners should confirm currentness by consulting the NSW legislation website’s consolidated version and any later amendment instruments that post-date the provided text. The savings clause (cl 19) preserves the effect of acts done under the 2010 Regulation, which is relevant to any matters that were in progress at the time of transition.

The Regulation as provided does not list or discuss any cases, judicial decisions or tribunal determinations. There are no judicial authorities cited in the text. The absence of litigation citations in the Regulation itself means the document does not supply a litigation history; it is purely a legislative instrument setting procedural rules. From the Regulation’s provisions one can, however, identify categories of disputes that could generate litigation or administrative review once the Regulation operates in practice. Those categories, grounded in the clauses, include:

• Disputes over compliance with referral and notification obligations: cl 4 and cl 5 impose written-notification duties and prescribed form requirements. Litigation or administrative review could arise where a party alleges a DPP, court or specialist youth officer failed to comply with those duties in a way that affected the fairness or legality of a conference or the child’s procedural rights.
• Confidentiality and disclosure challenges: cl 11 restricts disclosure of identifying records to Department of Justice authorised officers subject to strict form and declaration requirements. Misuse or improper disclosure of identified records could produce claims under administrative law, and challenges to the lawfulness of decisions made on the basis of improperly obtained records. Conversely, cl 11(2) allows non-identifying records to be divulged without those conditions; litigation could arise over whether a record was in fact non-identifying.
• Interpretation of indeterminate phrases: the Regulation uses language such as "unless it is not reasonably practicable to do so" in cl 5(4). Litigation commonly tests the meaning of such phrases in statutory instruments; disputes could focus on whether it was "reasonably practicable" to include certain items with a notice, for example COPS material.
• Delegation and authorisation: cl 17 and cl 18 set out classes of persons to whom the Secretary may delegate functions and who are authorised officers. Administrative law challenges may occur where functions were purportedly exercised by persons outside those classes, or where delegation instruments do not comply with the law.
• Validity and content of outcome plans: clauses 6-9 prescribe maximum implementation times, maximum community service hours by reference to another Act, and mandatory content for certain offence categories. Affected parties could challenge the validity of an outcome plan on the ground it fails to comply with those prescriptions or exceeds permitted maxima.
• Records and privacy: cl 10 and cl 15 require the collection of sensitive personal details including cultural or ethnic background and gender. While the Regulation itself does not spell out privacy law compliance, third-party claims or judicial review could arise where record-keeping or disclosure breaches privacy or procedural fairness principles.

The Regulation gives no case references and does not summarise any reported litigation. For an authoritative litigation history, practitioners must search case law databases for decisions referencing the Regulation or the relevant sections of the Act. The Regulation’s text identifies the precise statutory hooks and the concrete procedural steps that will most likely feature in disputes, but it does not offer any judicial interpretation itself.

The Regulation contains several operational, evidentiary and compliance pitfalls that can affect how agencies and practitioners administer the youth justice conference system. These are practical risk points grounded in the text:

• Strict form and consultation requirements for referral notices: cl 5(2) requires the notice to be in the Secretary-approved form; cl 5(3) requires the Secretary to consult particular officials before approving a form depending on the referrer. If the Secretary’s approved form does not reflect current practice, or consultation has been incomplete, there may be delays in approving or updating forms. Practitioners should note that a referral that is not on the approved form may fail to satisfy the Regulation’s procedural requirements.
• Notification to police commanders on DPP or court referrals: cl 4(1) requires DPPs or courts to notify the Police Area Commander or Police District Commander in the area where the offence occurred. Courts and the DPP must therefore develop processes to ensure these written notifications occur. Failure to notify the correct commander, or to include reasons that relate to s 40(5) of the Act as required by cl 4(2), could be criticised on procedural fairness or administrative law grounds.
• "Reasonably practicable" caveat for attaching information: cl 5(4) says the notice is to include specific material "unless it is not reasonably practicable to do so". Whether a given omission is "reasonably practicable" is fact-sensitive and may be contested. The lack of a statutory definition creates uncertainty for referrers when deciding whether omitted items are justified.
• COPS dependency and data management: cl 15(3) mandates that records of warnings and cautions are to be kept on COPS. That central reliance on COPS raises questions about access control, data accuracy and cross-agency sharing. Practitioners must ensure that COPS entries comply with cl 15(1)-(2) and that agencies have protocols to export or attach COPS records when cl 5(4)(c)-(d)(ii) requires copies.
• Outcome plan time limit and Secretary discretion: cl 6 sets six months as the maximum implementation time for outcome plans unless the Secretary approves more. Conference administrators and responsible officers must track timelines and requests for extensions; reliance on Secretary discretion introduces a potential bottleneck if extensions are required frequently.
• Community service hours capped by another Act: cl 7 ties community service hours in outcome plans to the maximum under the Children (Community Service Orders) Act 1987, meaning that changes in that other Act will affect the practical maxima available in young offender outcome plans. Practitioners must check the linked Act for current maxima.
• Offence-specific mandated content: cl 8 (bush fire/arson) and cl 9 (graffiti) require particular educational or reparative components. Conference convenors must ensure outcome plans meet these prescriptions or risk non-compliance. Additionally, cl 8(2)(b)(ii) and cl 9(2)(a)(ii) limit compensation to amounts not exceeding court-imposed maxima, which requires familiarity with sentencing maxima for those offences.
• Victim statement constraints: cl 16 imposes strict form and content limits on written victim statements used under s 24A(2) of the Act; statements cannot include medical reports or requests for compensation. Victims may be unaware of these limits, and providing disallowed material could create admissibility or process problems at the conference.
• Disclosure procedural formalities to Department of Justice: cl 11 requires a request on Department of Justice letterhead, inclusion of a reason and use-case, identification of the authorised officer, and a statutory-style declaration that the child is subject to supervision under the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 when relevant. Failure to meet any formal requirement may be a lawful basis for refusing disclosure, but the Regulation allows non-identifying records to be disclosed without those formalities (cl 11(2)). Misunderstanding the distinction between identifying and non-identifying records can lead to inadvertent privacy breaches.
• Delegation and authorisation boundaries: the Regulation prescribes particular classes of persons to whom the Secretary may delegate functions and identifies authorised officers (cl 17-18). Agencies must ensure delegation instruments are properly executed and that only prescribed persons exercise delegated functions; otherwise decisions may be vulnerable to legal challenge.

Each gotcha arises from a textual requirement or corollary in the Regulation. Addressing them requires clear inter-agency SOPs, document templates aligned with the Secretary’s approved form, timely record-keeping on COPS, and trained staff who understand when and how to request Secretary approvals or to make formal disclosure requests under cl 11.

Below is a practical compliance checklist organised by actor and process, with precise clause references so implementation teams can map steps to the Regulation’s requirements.

For DPPs and courts (referrals to conference administrators)

• Ensure every referral under s 38(1) or s 40(1) of the Act is accompanied by a notice in the Secretary-approved form, cl 5(1)-(2).
• Where the referral is under s 40, notify in writing the Police Area Commander or Police District Commander for the area in which the offence was alleged to have occurred, including reasons and how those reasons relate to s 40(5) of the Act, cl 4(1)-(2).
• Where available, attach a summary of the child’s criminal history, records of prior warnings or cautions, COPS records or equivalent, and charge sheets/cover sheets/facts sheets if the DPP or court has them, cl 5(4)(a)-(d). If it is not reasonably practicable to include these, document why not, cl 5(4).

For the Secretary and form management

• Maintain and publish the approved referral notice form; ensure the approval process includes consultation with the listed authorities depending on the referrer (cl 5(3)).
• Maintain a system for approving extensions to outcome plan implementation timeframes beyond six months when justified and record decisions under cl 6.

For conference administrators and convenors

• Keep a complete conference record that contains the items prescribed in cl 10(a)-(n): name, address, date of birth, gender, cultural background, nature of offence, referral receipt date, convenor, administrator, date and place of conference, attendees and capacities, outcome plan particulars, person responsible, completion status, and any other relevant matters.
• When drafting outcome plans, observe the six-month maximum default and apply to the Secretary for any extensions (cl 6).
• Ensure community service components do not exceed the hours allowed under the Children (Community Service Orders) Act 1987 (cl 7).
• For bush fire or arson offences, include educational attendance and reparative measures consistent with cl 8(2). For graffiti offences, include at least one of the specified options in cl 9(2).
• Observe that the Act’s requirements about agreement of the child and victims remain in force; cl 8(4) and cl 9(4) note that these clauses do not affect those Act requirements.

For police and COPS administrators

• Keep records of warnings and cautions on COPS as required by cl 15(3).
• Ensure caution records contain the fields in cl 15(2)(a)-(h) and warning records the fields in cl 15(1)(a)-(e).
• Implement secure processes to produce copies of COPS records or equivalent records when requested for referral notices per cl 5(4)(c)-(d)(ii), ensuring that any disclosure complies with cl 11 if the recipient is a Department of Justice authorised officer.

For Department of Justice authorised officers and those seeking disclosure

• When requesting identifiable records of cautions or conferences, submit a written request on DoJ letterhead to the Manager, Criminal Records Section, NSW Police Force, including the reason for the request, how the information will be used, the authorised officer’s full name and work location, the required declaration that the child is subject to supervision under s 33 of the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 if applicable, and the person’s full name and date of birth and any court order relevant to the request, cl 11(1)(a)-(f).
• If seeking de-identified records, rely on cl 11(2); ensure the records do not identify the child.
• For BOC, ABS or AIC requests, ensure a commitment to use the information only for research, statistics and authorized reporting, and that publications do not identify the child, cl 12-13.

For victims preparing statements

• Provide written statements compliant with cl 16: legible, typed or hand-written, not longer than two A4 pages, identify the victim(s), include preparer’s full name and signature and date, include only the victim’s description of the incident and its impact, and do not attach medical or psychological reports, include offensive content, or request compensation.

For delegation and authorisation

• Ensure formal delegation instruments are made to prescribed roles listed in cl 17 where the Secretary delegates functions under the Act. Maintain records of delegations and any limits placed on them.
• Ensure that only the persons listed in cl 18 are treated as authorised officers for the purposes of disclosure under s 66(4) of the Act. If additional individuals are to be authorised under cl 18(f), obtain written authorisation by the Secretary as required.

Data governance and record retention

• Implement audit trails for entries on COPS that satisfy the fields in cl 15 and cl 10, ensure secure access controls, and maintain retention policies aligned to any statutory retention obligations under the Act and related legislation. The Regulation’s requirement to keep warnings and cautions on COPS is in cl 15(3).

Operational controls and training

• Train prosecutors, court staff, police, Juvenile Justice and Department of Justice staff on the procedural obligations in cl 4-5, cl 10-11 and cl 15-16. Create standard templates for referral notices that match the Secretary-approved form and maintain logs of notifications to police commanders under cl 4.
• Create guidance on assessing when it is "not reasonably practicable" to attach certain documents to a referral (cl 5(4)), documenting the basis for that assessment.

Audit and review

• Regularly review compliance with cl 15(3) regarding COPS entries, the six-month outcome plan default (cl 6), and the content of outcome plans for bush fire/arson and graffiti offences (cl 8-9). Keep a register of Secretary approvals for extensions beyond six months and any related reasons.

This checklist maps each compliance step to the Regulation’s clauses. Agencies should integrate these tasks into existing juvenile justice workflows and ensure cross-agency SOPs for referral, notification, record-keeping and disclosure are documented and accessible.