Conclusions and recommendations
1. Tensions between the objectives of meeting
the learning and skills needs of offenders and occupying prisoners
in purposeful activity have prevented resources being reallocated
so that they better meet needs.
All of the delivery partners—the Department for Innovation,
Universities and Skills, Learning and Skills Council, and National
Offender Management Service—should sign up to agreed funding
priorities and work towards redistributing provision so that it
better matches current needs. HM Prison Service should identify
now where there may be a need for investment in classroom space
or prison work areas, to allow for a managed redistribution of
resources without disrupting prison regimes. The delivery partners
should commit to joint performance targets so that decisions made
at the frontline are consistent with the agreed priorities.
2. The Learning and Skills Council and HM
Prison Service disagree over what can be delivered to those on
short sentences and what priority this group should be given.
The delivery partners should develop evidence-based, intensive
programmes, aimed at getting offenders serving sentences under
12 months into local employment on release or signposting them
towards further training in the community.
3. A quarter of prisoners have no screening
or assessment for learning and skills needs, despite this being
a requirement of OLASS. It may not be
possible for assessments to be carried out in all cases, for instance,
where offenders have very short sentences. However, if assessments
are not carried out, it will be difficult to identify which offenders
are most in need of the Service. The OLASS partners should either
carry out an assessment or document the reasons why an assessment
could not be carried out. The National Offender Management Service
should instruct the Probation Service to meet the existing requirement
to screen all offenders serving community sentences. Following
screening, the Probation Service should make referrals to providers
where the results of screening indicate a need, and training is
likely to increase an individual's employment prospects.
4. The quality of learning plans is poor and,
without improvement, OLASS cannot hope to support offenders effectively.
The LSC should give clear guidance to all OLASS providers about
their requirement to maintain a single consistent record of an
offender's learning needs, the learning they plan to undertake,
and the progress they have made. The LSC must enforce existing
contractual requirements for providers to maintain comprehensive
and accurate records of learners' participation and progress.
5. The lack of a core curriculum means offenders'
learning is unnecessarily disrupted when they are transferred
between prisons. The LSC should start
consultations now with providers and other OLASS partners, and
use the next contracting round to put in place a core curriculum
of courses delivered throughout the prison estate and accessible
in FE colleges to offenders in the community.
6. Learning providers are paid regardless
of attendance or course completion rates. There
is a risk that courses will be filled by offenders who are already
well qualified but who may be easy to teach. When contracts are
renegotiated in 2009, the LSC should make payments to providers
conditional, in part, on increasing attendance on courses by those
offenders who need them, and on the progress that those individuals
make. Contracts must specify minimum acceptable standards for
offender engagement and course completion. Consultation on these
issues should begin now.
7. Offenders' learning records are frequently
not transferred when offenders are moved, making it harder for
them to carry on courses, and difficult for the LSC and providers
to measure the impact of interventions.
The LSC is trialling a new data system in two pilot areas in September
2008. So that offender managers can understand what progress offenders
have made, the LSC must make data available accessible to all
OLASS partners, in a format that meets their needs. The requirement
for providers to transfer information about learners' progress
when they move between prisons and into the community should be
a condition built into the 2009 contracting round with OLASS providers.
8. The LSC does not collect information to
show whether or not offenders gain employment following completion
of their sentence. The probation service
attempts to measure whether offenders secure employment. To show
the extent to which interventions including learning and skills
had helped offenders to get a job, the partners should share information
about those offenders supervised by the probation service, including
those supervised on release from custody. For those offenders
who are not supervised by the probation service, the delivery
partners should carry out research, on a sample basis, to measure
the effectiveness of different interventions in helping offenders
get a stable job.
9. Offenders are more likely to gain a job
when they are released if they are equipped with skills relevant
to local employers. Some prison governors
are working with local employers to focus learning and skills
provision and prison work on preparing offenders for realistic
employment opportunities. Regional Learning and Skills Councils
must work with providers to obtain feedback from local employers
about the courses currently on offer, and make changes where necessary
to ensure that the courses available meet employers' requirements.
The LSC and the National Offender Management Service should promote
local best practice and engage major employers nationally in order
to tackle resistance to employing ex-offenders, and target learning
and skills provision on employers' practical requirements.
| 
