House of Commons - Home Affairs

Select Committee on Home Affairs Third Report

APPENDIX 16

Memorandum by the National Association of Probation Officers

BACKGROUND

The probation service has the responsibility for supervising community sentences and individuals on release from prison on licence. The Probation of Offenders Act 1907 first gave authority for magistrates' courts to appoint and employ probation officers and for local authorities to finance the service. The relationship between probation officers and the courts marked the beginning of the development of the probation service. Over the last 20 years the work of the probation service has increased sharply and the main priority of the service are to protect the public through the prevention of further offending. Supervision by the service is a combination of control, understanding, support, accountability and rehabilitation. The probation service uses specific programmes and community based interventions to bring about a change in the behaviour of individual offenders.

The reconviction rates of individuals who have been on supervision in the community is very similar to those who have served a prison sentence, although many probation programmes have significantly more favourable rates than their prison counterparts. The National Association of Probation Officers believes that there is a case for increasing the effectiveness of community penalties rather than to continue building further prisons. Both services are currently under-funded although several hundred million pounds has been committed to build further prisons.

NAPO believes there is a case to both reduce the numbers of individuals in custody who do not present a serious risk to the public and to transfer finance from the prison budget to probation services whilst building on the effectiveness of community sentences.

OVERVIEW

The National Association of Probation Officers is the profession organisation and trade union which represents over 7,000 probation staff in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. There are currently 54 probation areas in England and Wales.

The main responsibilities are described by the Home Office as:

— To provide the courts with advice and information on offenders to assist in sentencing decisions;

— To implement and enforce community sentences passed by the courts;

— To design, provide and promote effective programmes for supervising offenders safely in the community for public protection;

— To assist offenders before and after release, to lead law abiding lives which minimises risk to the public;

— To help communities prevent crime and reduce its effects on victims;

— To safeguard the welfare of children in family proceedings; and

— To work in partnership with other statutory agencies and the voluntary and private sectors to provide effective programmes for offenders. (1)

The Criminal Justice Act of 1991, redefined the principles which governed probation practice. In essence "communication sentences stand in their own right and should not be seen as alternatives to custody". (2)

Last year the number of court orders dealt with by the probation service rose to 115,000, the highest total ever. The number of probation orders made stood at 48,000, roughly the same as the previous year. The number of community service orders made by the courts were 46,000, down 6 per cent on 1995. The number of combination orders rose by 17,000, up 15 per cent on the previous year and the number of money payment supervision orders reached 6,000, a rise of 88 per cent on 1995. In addition, there was also a significant rise in the number of persons supervised during or after their release from jail. The number rose to 60,000 during 1996, of whom 25,000 were adults on post-release supervision and 13,800 were young offenders supervised after release from prison. The number receiving voluntary supervision after a period of incarceration however fell to 8,800. (3)

The probation service also runs 101 hostels; the number of beds available was 1 per cent down on 1995, but occupied bedspace rose to 82 per cent during 1996.

The probation service also prepared 224,000 pre-sentence reports, 3 per cent more than in 1995. In addition 37,000 family court welfare reports were submitted during 1996. The service also commenced work on 10,000 mediation cases and there were 42,800 direction appointments during last year. (4)

(a) Offenders and the causes of Crime

Those on community supervision and on licence experience a range of social and financial problems. One of the most recent profiles of offenders known to the probation service concluded:

— 15 per cent had severe mental health problems

— 10 per cent had attempted suicide

— 28 per cent had chronic housing problems

— 75 per cent were unemployed

— 30 per cent had been in care

— 46 per cent had an alcohol problem

— 35 per cent had a drug problem

— 40 per cent had already served a prison sentence. (5)

In NAPO's experience though there is no single cause of crime but a number of contributory factors:

— Alienation, rejection, anger

— Homelessness

— Victim of emotional, physical or sexual abuse

— Emotional instability

— Lack of positive role models

— Lack of skills, self esteem and confidence

— Poverty and lack of money

— Poor housing and deprived communities

— Unemployment, lack of education and training

— School refusal, exclusion and failure

— Family breakdown

— Learned responses to conflict, stress and frustration

— Impulsive and instant excitement and status

— Learned ways of gaining and keeping power

— Substance misuse and dependence

— Group pressure

— Disgrace, provocation and revenge

— Mental illness including psychosis and schizophrenia and manic depression.

Over the last decade the probation service has worked increasingly in partnership with a wide range of agencies, organisations and groups. These currently include:

— The courts

— Health and trusts and psychiatric services

— Social Services and Housing

— Education and Schools

— The Police

— Employment Services

— Job Schemes

— Voluntary organisations

— Victim Support Schemes

— Drug Action Teams

— Domestic Violence Forum

— Local community groups

— Housing Associations

— Community service beneficiaries

— Mediation and conciliation services

The probation service also has strong working relationships with universities, training agencies, research organisations, campaigning groups. NAPO believes there is further potential for developing the role of the probation service as a lead agency in inter-agency work to reduce the risk of re-offending in the community.

(b) Staffing and Caseloads

The number of probation officers in post fell from 7,800 in December 1994 to 7,100 by the end of June 1997. The number of non-probation officer staff fell by 13 per cent during the same period and the number of probation officers seconded to work in prisons has fallen by 17 per cent since the summer of 1995. The probation budget is due to be reduced further during the next three financial years. NAPO believes that the fall in budget over the last two, the current and the next two financial years could amount to 29 per cent in real terms. During the same period the probation service plan has indicated that caseloads are projected to rise by 12 per cent. (6)

Since 1992 the number of probation orders made has grown from 42,500 to nearly 49,000. The number of community service orders has grown more modestly, up from 44,000 to 46,300, however the number of combination orders made has increased from 1,400 in 1992 to 17,100 last year. All court orders have risen therefore from 90,000 in 1992 to 114,600 last year.

STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES

(a) Community Teams

There are nearly 1,000 probation offices in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. The staff are under pressure, and supervise higher caseloads and more seriously convicted offenders than at any time in the probation services' 80 year history. Last summer NAPO analysed the activities of one of those teams. The team was located in the East End of a typical English city. They supervised 250 people on various orders and provided over 450 reports for the courts in their area. The offences of those supervised had clearly changed. Fifteen years ago two or three would have been convicted of violence, and the majority would have committed no less serious offences of theft and handling stolen goods. Almost half have now been convicted of sexual offences or violence against the person. The staff came from a variety of backgrounds including:

— A Social Security Officer

— A Legal Assistant

— A Conference Organiser

— A Nurse

— An Accountant, and

— A Clothing Manufacturer

A number of factors characterised the work with the offenders. They included:

— Protecting the public

— Helping rebuild lives

— Assisting offenders face the future

— Handling risk

— Dealing with multiple convictions and

— Community Care. (7)

(b) Community Service

NAPO examined the workings of a community service team in a similar inner city area. During last year 625 new orders were made involving 65,000 hours of unpaid work. Those sentenced were told to report for work at the time specified, failing to do so resulted in a return to the court. During 1996, about a third of all offenders were taken back to the court setting. They were either fined, ordered to continue their community service or re-sentenced. Despite these strict standards 75 per cent of those offenders completed their orders as required. Since July 1996 the caseloads have increased by around 25 per cent. (8)

(c) Hostels

Hostels provide an important safety valve for the prison system by offering a restricted environment for those on bail who need secure conditions and for those on probation and parole needing supportive residential supervision. There are currently 101 hostels in England and Wales all of which are running at 82 per cent occupancy for most of the year. Over the last three years the Home Office has closed 15 hostels.

Last year NAPO studied the activity of one hostel in detail. It was established in 1990, having previously been a home for boys leaving care. It offered 25 single rooms and had an occupancy rate of between 80 per cent and 90 per cent. Most of the residents were there for bail assessment or on prison licence. The average length of stay was up to six months. On any given day at least half the residents had already been in custody. The range of offences covered theft, handling, driving offences, burglary and sexual matters. Virtually all the residents were aged 24 years or over. The hostel had a list of partnership arrangements with a variety of local groups including the psychiatric clinic, an alcohol recovery project, the beat police officer, employment and training schemes and outward bound courses. The hostel operates a locking system from 11 pm at night to 6 am in the morning and had rules of no alcohol or drugs or discriminatory behaviour or violence. All residents received enhanced supervision based on demanding in national standards.

During 1996, out of 110 residents over 60 per cent successfully completed their stay without committing a further offence or breaching the hostel rules or absconding. The weekly cost for a hostel bed runs at between 50 per cent and 66 per cent of that of a prison place.

NAPO believes that consideration should be given to extending the hostel estate. However any continued increase in the caseloads of probation officers or of hostel occupancy is likely to adversely affect both the standard of supervision, public safety and completion rates. (9)

RELATIVE COSTS

A parliamentary answer to Alex Carlile on 18 June 1996, showed that for the financial year 1996-97, the average cost of a prison place per annum was £24,388. (10) Comparative figures for the probation service are contained in "Probation Statistics" 1996, published in September 1997. The average cost for a probation order for the financial year 1996-97 was £2,200, for a community service order £1,690, for supervision under the Children and Young Persons' Act 1969, £1,040, for post-release supervision of an adult £1,020 and for a young offender £1,260. (11) An attempt to find figures for the monthly cost of supervision orders combined with intensive or intermediate treatment by Alun Michael MP in January this year was not answered. (12) It seems likely however that probation with additiona requirements such as attendance at cognitive behavioural based programmes is likely to be in the region of 50 per cent more expensive than a straightfoward probation order.

EFFECTIVENESS—PREVENTING RE -OFFENDING

The re-conviction rates of those placed on probation are broadly similar to those who have been released from prison. However government re-conviction rate figures for probation, do contain what the researchers call pseudo-conviction which should be discounted. These are convictions for offences which were committed before the order commenced. Home Office Study 136 published in 1995, suggests that the reconviction figures need correcting and that six percentage points need to be shaved off community penalties and 2 per cent off prison figures, which would appear to give the probation order a modest one or two percent advantage. (13)

There is however a significant body of evidence to show that some probation programmes compare very favourably indeed with the reconviction rates from prisons. Nevertheless further work needs to be done on the seriousness or otherwise of the re-offending following different orders and periods of incarceration.

A recent follow up study of the re-offending of all offenders placed in Kent from 1991 onwards demonstrates the positive impact of supervision upon subsequent offending patterns. The study looked at nearly 900 offenders who had been supervised solely by the Kent Probation Service. Some 44 per cent of the group had already been in prison. In the five years following the commencement of the order 48 per cent of the offenders were convicted for at least one offence.

However there were stark differences in the reconviction rates for different types of orders. The most successful was the probation order with a condition which had a 41 per cent reconviction rate. Orders with residential requirements had a 60 per cent reconviction rate. Reconviction was the highest amongst young offenders. 62 per cent of those aged 15 to 20 were reconvicted in the five year period. Those who had previously been in prison tended to commit more offences than those who had not. The broad figures showed that 68 per cent of those leaving prison in Kent were reconvicted within five years, compared to 41 per cent of those on probation with a condition, and 47 per cent on straight probation. The report argued that it was not possible to compare all those who were given probation with all prisoners, as within the prison group there was a mix of very serious offenders who would have never been considered in the first place for community based sentences.

The study looked at reconviction from magistrates' courts by age and found as follows:

Reconviction where offenders were sentenced at Magistrates' Court by age

Age Prison Probation

17-20 84% 70%

21-25 77% 53%

26-30 50% 41%

30+ 43% 26%

All ages 72% 48%

Additional research conducted by Andrew Underdown and others in the Manchester Probation Service have found that programmes operated under community sentences can impact on the attitudes and reasoning processes of offenders on their patterns of behaviour and on their social circumstances and therefore on their re-offending.

Amongst the findings of this piece of research are:

— Problem-solving methods and provision of positive and responsible social models for offenders can reduce further offending by up to a third and the breach of orders by half.

— That a pilot study in Mid Glamorgan which was aimed at improving offender reasoning found that reconviction rates fell by 7 per cent.

— In Hereford and Worcester an intensive probation programme which also worked on offending behaviour showed reductions in the total volume of offending of 50 per cent running for a six year follow up period.

— In West Glamorgan a project aimed at achieving personal development offered 30 per cent lower reconviction rates in a two year follow up period.

— In Manchester 96 per cent of offenders participating in alcohol education programmes were reducing or monitoring of their drinking by the end of group.

— In Manchester, in a supported tenancies project for homeless young offenders, 80 per cent retained their tenancy through a six month support period. (15)

NAPO believes that there is now a substantial body of evidence to prove that both targeted intensive programmes and individual work with offenders when properly resourced is effective. There is however evidence that there is inconsistency in practice and service delivery across different probation areas. NAPO believes that there is a case for strengthening national guidance on probation areas on effective and enhanced supervision.

THE PRISON POPULATION

(a) Prison Profile

The Prison population has risen sharply since 1992 when it stood at 46,000. The latest figures show that on October 23, 1997 there were 63,640 prisoners.

Over the last 15 years however there have been quite significant changes in the type of prisoner, the type of offence and sentence lengths. Comparing the daily population in 1982 with 1996, the number jailed for offences of violence has risen from 6,500 to over 9,000. Similarly the number in prison for rape has grown from 600 to over 2,000, the number for other sexual offences 800 to over 2,000 and the number for robbery 2,500 to 5,700. During the same comparable period the number in jail on a daily basis for theft fell from 7,900 to 4,700.

During the same period there has also been a sharp increase in those serving long sentences (defined as more than four years). In 1982 there were 5,600 prisoners in this category. It grew to 12,500 by 1992 and to 17,500 last year. However it remains the case that last year there were 1,363 adult men who were serving sentences of three months or less and nearly 5,000 serving three to 12 months. The figures also show that out of 6,363 young offenders in prison in June last year, 1,600 were serving short sentences of less than 12. An examination of the offences that this group committed showed that the majority were for theft, fraud, criminal damage and less serious burglaries. (16)

(b) Female Offenders

By end of May 1997 there were over 2,600 females held in jails in England and Wales, 550 of whom were on remand. This is a dramatic rise since the summer of 1993 when the female prison population stood at 1,560 including 395 on remand, an increase therefore over the four year period of 76 per cent. The latest figure show that 400 of the sentenced women were serving less than 12 months. Sentence lenghts were generally one month longer for women last year than in 1995. The proportion serving time for violence and drugs has increased and the proportion for theft and fraud has fallen. Nevertheless over the whole of 1995-96 nearly 70 per cent of the total of women received into custody had committed an offence of violence, theft, handling or of less serious matters.

Prison statistics also show 36 per cent of women have no previous convictions compared with 15 per cent of men. Forty five per cent of women are described as having a psychiatric condition prior to admission compared to 36 per cent of men. In addition, over half of female prisoners have dependent children compared to less than a third of their male counterparts. These statistics show in NAPO's view that several hundred women have been jailed unnecessarily during the last few years and most could have been more effectively supervised at home or in hostel accommodation. There also needs to be a substantial increase in drug and alcohol services to assist with rehabilitation, particularly for women, but also for all offenders of all ages. (17)

(c) Black People and the Criminal Justice System

Last year NAPO in partnership with the Association of Black Probation Officers examined the data and experiences of Black People in the Criminal Justic System. The report published in August 1996 concluded that black people remained over-represented in prisons and at all other stages of the Criminal Justice System. It is well documented that the number of black people stopped and searched in London and elsewhere is up to three times greater than the proportion in the general population as a whole. It is still the case that black persons are less likely to have probation reports prepared because they are more likely to plead not guilty at an early stage in the prosecution process. The number of black prisoners has grown from 14 per cent in 1989 to 17 per cent last year. NAPO concluded that it was essential that all agencies within the Criminal Justice System did their utmost to make sure that they recruited, retained and promoted suitable black candidates and that all agencies particularly the courts ensured that all black defendants were treated in a non-discriminatory manner. (18)

NON-CUSTODIAL SENTENCES

NAPO welcomes recommendations from the Home Secretary this autumn to introduce reparation orders and action plans for young offenders. It is important that agencies intervene early with families to prevent further re-offending. However similar powers already exist. It is essential that sentences are rationalised to avoid confusion and duplication. It is also essential that delay is eradicated with the Youth Justice System and that the relevant agencies are adequately and efficiently funded.

ELECTRONIC MONITORING

The current trials involving electronic monitoring as a means of enforcing curfew orders commenced in July 1995. The initial take up was quite slow and just one hundred orders were made during the first calendar year. By the end of July 1997 the total number of orders made had increased to 400. The latest figures suggest that approximately 20 per cent of the orders were terminated because of breach or further offences. Thus far, electronic monitoring has been used with a very small proportion of community penalties. The costs therefore are quite high. The most recent figures suggest that the cost of a probation order for a full year is £2,500, that the cost of a curfew order excluding start up funding is the equivalent of £8,000 per annum and the cost of a year in jail is £24,000. A combination therefore of tagging and a community penalty at the current levels of sentencing would be extremely expensive.

NAPO remains unconvinced that tags are likely to improve re-offending rates, indeed NAPO concurs with the Home Office's original assessment made during the training of magistrates at the time of the commencement of the trials. A pack for magistrates, entitled "Electronic Monitoring—Trial of Curfew Orders 1995", contained the following section:

"What Electronic Monitoring Cannot Do?

— Reduce crime

— Stop offenders breaching curfews

— Stop offenders committing further offences

— Be suitable for All offences

— Prevent an offender from going a short distance from their home

— Track offenders in the community"

In the United States where tagging has been available for almost a decade, there are currently about 40,000 persons on the system, which represents about 1 per cent to 2 per cent of all community penalties. If tagging in Britain is to be commercially viable there would need to be between 15,000 and 20,000 on the system at any one time. Unless there is a dramatic change in sentencing practice it is highly unlikely to reach this level.

Tagging therefore is likely to sharply increase the cost of community supervision with no obvious impact on effectiveness.

CONFIDENCE IN NON-CUSTODIAL PUNISHMENTS

There has been sustained criticism from government over the last decade about the role, function and structure of the probation service. However NAPO believe there has been substantial change over that decade. The main priority of the probation is clearly protecting the public through the prevention of re-offending. Offenders now report to strict national standards on attendance, compliance and breach. It is crucial however that support services which deal with the problems of homelessness, drug and alcohol abuse, finance and debt remain fully supported within the probation service and the voluntary sector.

NAPO believes that consideration should be given to determine which probation functions should be organised or determined nationally, regionally or locally.

Nevertheless, there are still 54 separate probation services each following its own local priorities, and in many instances those local priorities are inconsistent with those of their neighbours. NAPO believes that this system is no longer viable, indeed that the structures are anachronistic. NAPO believes there is an overwhelming case for reducing the number of services and for co-terminus boundaries with other criminal justice agencies. Substantial savings on bureaucracy could be made and transferred to frontline services. NAPO is concerned that traditionally there has been no voice as there is with the prison service to represent and argue the probation service's case in government and in public expenditure rounds. There is also a need for greater co-operation with the prison service on a range of issues all of which would improve confidence and effectiveness. They include:

— A comprehensive and integrated through-care plan for short term prisoners. Currently little is available for this group of prisoners, but there are a group who are highly likely to re-offend and return to prison.

— There is a need for enhanced training skills including parenting for young offenders.

— There is a need for greater liaison and treatment between agencies for services for those offenders whose crimes are linked to drug or alcohol addiction.

— Up to a third of prisoners experience mental health problems. There is clearly a need for greater liaision, treatment and service between the two services for this group of offenders.

— There is a need to look again at many of the key Woolf recommendations on integrated work and the need for community prisons.

NAPO believes it is the responsibility of the Home Office to articulate and promote the advantages and effectiveness of community penalties. NAPO believes there has been considerable change over the last decade and that further effective practice programmes and partnerships should be put into effect without delay.

Harry Fletcher

October 1997

REFERENCES

1. Probation Statistics, England and Wales, 1996.

2. Criminal Justice Act 1991, A Quick Reference Guide for the Probation Service.

3. Probation Statistics, Quarterly Monitor, September, 1997.

4. Ditto

5. The Probation Service, Strategies for Criminal Justice, NAPO, 1997.

6. Probation Staffing Statistics, September 1997.

7. Probation: A Service For the Future, NAPO, April 1997.

8. Ditto

9. Ditto