Written evidence from Community and Criminal
Justice Division, De Montfort University (PB 21)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. The qualifying probation training arrangements
have changed very recently and it is important that these new
arrangements are given a chance to operate and to be properly
evaluated. This qualifying training requires adequate funding
so that the relevant staff can receive training and those who
are on training receive full support. The location of probation
training in higher education is an important acknowledgement that
what is required is more than simply training in technical skills,
and this principle could be extended to the development of a post-qualifying
structure extending beyond the point of probation officer qualification.
Probation practitioners, wherever they are employed, should receive
the same training.
INTRODUCTION
2. The Community and Criminal Justice (CCJ) division
at De Montfort University (DMU) has over 20 years experience and
expertise in teaching, training and research in probation. The
division delivered the Diploma in Probation Studies in the East
of England and later the Midlands for 12 years and DMU is now
one of only three universities contracted to deliver the new Probation
Qualifying Framework (PQF). DMU has contributed significantly
to probation research and scholarship, and a list of selected
publications is presented as an Appendix.
3. The expertise within the division means that
we could present responses to all the questions posed by the Committee,
and where our published work has particular relevance to one or
more of the questions posed, this has been highlighted in the
appendix. However, our particular interest is in probation training
and our submission will mainly focus on the final question posed
by the committee:
"Is the provision of training adequate?"
BACKGROUND AND
CURRENT TRAINING
PROVISION
4. Qualifying training for probation officers
was delivered through the Diploma in Probation Studies (DipPS)
from 1998 to 2010, following the separation of probation training
from social work training. In 2010 a new Probation Qualifying
Framework is being launched, and DMU is one of three universities
(along with Sheffield Hallam and Portsmouth) contracted to deliver
this.
REFLECTIONS ON
PROBATION TRAINING
5. The Probation Qualifying Framework is very
new (at the time of writing, the first students have not yet started
at DMU, although some have started at other institutions) and
our first point is that it should be given time to operate and
should be evaluated as it is delivered. The process of replacing
the DipPS with the PQF has taken at least three years (DMU was
commissioned to write the curriculum in 2007) and it is important
now that there is a period of stability and predictability in
probation training. There are, however, some further observations
and suggestions that can be made about probation training.
Who should have access to the probation qualifying
structure?
6. A change in the workforce profile in recent
years has been the increasing number of Probation Service Officers
(PSOs). Yet until quite recently the training made available to
this group of staff was seriously deficient: people were asked
to take on work calling for sophisticated skills and to accept
significant responsibilities within a very short time of appointment.
The greatest benefit that has been brought by the introduction
of the PQF is that training is no longer restricted solely or
mainly to the probation officer grade, but that PSOs are also
included. The new structure brings two clear benefits to PSOs,
firstly they are provided with training at Vocational Qualification
three (VQ3) level and, secondly, there is a clear pathway, with
funding, to a full probation officer qualification. The original
recommendation in the 2007 work carried out by DMU and Portsmouth
University was that the qualifying training for PSOs should be
located within higher education and should attract a university
certificate, but this was not accepted. Nonetheless, the inclusion
of PSOs in the new structure is to be welcomed. It is still possible,
however, that the pressure of resource constraints will still
leave some staff in roles for which they are inadequately trained.
Staff pressure and inexperience have been cited in enquiries into
serious further offences. For example, the Independent Review
of a SFO relating to Damien Hanson and Elliot White was critical
of both individual and organisational practice, but of particular
note was that the front line worker for White was unqualified
and lacked adequate supervision (Knight & Stout 2009):
"In the case of Elliot White it is clear that
the probation service officer managing the case was inexperienced
and required support. An internal inquiry by LPA into the circumstances
of the case concluded that the level of staff supervision provided
by the senior probation officer was inadequate." (HMIP 2006)
7. The 2007 proposals also included a recommendation
that case administrators (CAs) be included in the training structure.
(It is worth noting that the inclusion of CAs in the structure
was determined by NOMS at tender stage; it was not an initiative
of the universities). Case administrators are not included in
the final framework. This is regrettable, as the case administrator
role increasingly involves direct work with offenders, including
sometimes passing on of difficult information. A case administrator
post is, for some, a first opportunity to work in probation and
some CAs progress to posts as PSOs or POs. It remains our view
that case administrator training could usefully be included in
the framework.
8. The coalition government has made it clear
that it expects probation tasks to be carried out by a range of
providers in the statutory, private and voluntary sector. This
provides further training challenges as the qualifying framework
is not easily accessible to candidates outside the statutory sector,
and there are currently no equivalent qualifications on offer
for practitioners in private or voluntary organisations.
9. Probation is a highly skilled profession.
It calls for more than technical skills; staff need insight and
intellectual and emotional maturity. All these are necessary to
encourage and enable offenders to change, to bring them to recognise
that their behaviour has been unacceptable and to motivate them
to participate in the interventions that will bring about change.
Emotional literacy is essential to establish effective working
relationships with damaged and mistrustful individuals, not least
those who pose a risk of serious harm to others and who, in many
cases, have themselves been victims of abuse and violence. All
staff need to acquire, practise and demonstrate the skills, knowledge
and values appropriate to their role. All staff need a detailed
knowledge of diversity, and the impact of disadvantage and discrimination
on particular offender and victim groups.
Support and Funding for Training
10. The numbers of candidates submitted for qualifying
training are very low, and have fallen dramatically in the last
few years. As a rough comparison, DMU welcomed 308 students in
2003 to cohort 6 and a further 197 to cohort 7 in 2004.
The team continues to work with the same regions but took on 63
DipPS students in 2008, no students in 2009 (due to the changes
in the training regime) and expects 23 students to start in September
2010. This reflects a similar drop in numbers nationally. It is
clear that this reduction in numbers has been caused by the limited
funding available, and the drop in the recruitment of staff, particularly
at probation officer grade. However it does lead to concerns that
there might be a shortage of qualified staff available to carry
out the most demanding and highly skilled tasks of the probation
service, such as supervising high risk offenders.
11. The funding pressure on the probation service
could also have further detrimental effects on the experience
of training for candidates. PSOs engaged in the PQF must be provided
with workload relief, adequate study time and appropriate tutor
support to enable them to learn and to move up a level in skills
knowledge and understanding. It is also vital that students continue
to learn in groups, or cohorts, to allow reflection and conceptual
analysis, particularly on work with high-risk offenders, that
only shared learning can provide. The probation service must continue
to value its identity as a learning organisation, supportive to
those engaged in training.
12. Training, and for that matter research, have
often been the first casualties of budget cuts in other areas.
It is tempting, but a temptation to resist robustly, to seek accelerated
routes which may fail to equip staff with the skills and knowledge
that they need. It is accepted that the workforce is unlikely
to increase significantly, but it is important for the foundations
of a solid framework to be laid down for now and for the future.
Post-qualifying structure
13. While there has been a great deal of discussion
about the nature of qualifying training, there has been much less
consideration of the importance of continuing professional development
(CPD). The most that qualifying training can do is to equip staff
to be ready to begin their practice. CPD should be available to
enable staff to learn about new developments, including changes
in law, policy and in emerging evidence about effectiveness, and
to take on roles calling for specialised skills or knowledge.
It is also essential that the value of training for management
is appropriately recognised and staff in middle and senior management
roles given the opportunities they need.
14. When probation training was part of social
work training, there was a well-established post-qualifying framework
for probation officers enabling them to engage in CPD and to achieve
both a professional and an academic qualification for this work.
A post-qualifying framework was never introduced alongside the
DipPS but the introduction of a new qualifying framework provides
an opportunity to build on that framework and to offer accredited
professional and academic programmes for developing practitioners
and aspiring trainers and managers. The continuing close association
between the probation service and universities provides potential
both for research opportunities and the development of continuing
professional development opportunities. In our experience, there
is considerable interest from practitioners in continuing their
professional studies at a postgraduate level. However, in the
absence of a formal post-qualifying framework these aspirant students
are dependent on the goodwill and ability to make a financial
commitment of their employing area.
CONCLUSION
15. Probation practice is a complex and challenging
professional role and the current and previous training regimes
reflected this. There is a risk that financial pressures could
lead to a simply instrumental approach being taken to training;
this could in turn lead to a squeeze on quality and an increase
in the public risk relating to the often difficult and damaged
people who make up the offender population. Responses to recent
crises in social work have included a recognition of the skilled
and demanding work that social workers do and the need to attract
high quality staff and train them at a high level. The same arguments
apply to probation, particularly as there is a prospect of a greater
emphasis on managing high risk offenders in the community and
on restorative justice. If a variety of providers are to be involved
in delivering probation then the high-quality qualifying training
on offer in the statutory sector will need to be made available
to prospective voluntary and private providers. It is important
that future practitioners, wherever they are employed, are encouraged
to develop research awareness, sophisticated thinking and conceptual
understanding appropriate to the role of the probation officer.
REFERENCE (SEE
ALSO APPENDIX)
HM Inspectorate of Probation (2006) An Independent
Review of a Further Serious Offence Case: Damien Hanson and Elliot
White. London: HM Inspectorate of Probation.
APPENDIX
KEY PUBLICATIONS
FROM THE
CCJ DIVISION, DMU
Canton, R (2010, forthcoming) Probation, Cullompton:
Willan.
This is a general introductory text about the work
of the probation service, intended to give a reliable account
of most aspects of contemporary probation policy and practice,
while offering theoretical and critical perspectives as well.
Canton, R and Hancock, D (2007) Dictionary of
Probation and Offender Management, Cullompton: Willan.
This widely-used book was edited by Professor Rob
Canton from CCJ and contains contributions from many staff in
the division. It also contains contributions on many of the topics
that are subjects of the Select Committee inquiry such as contestability,
probation trusts, probation training, restorative justice, community
penalties and diversity.
Dominey, J (2010) "Work-based distance learning
for probation practice: Doing the job properly",
Probation Journal 57:
153-162
This article argues that work-based distance learning
can be an appropriate model for probation training, but only if
certain principles of teaching, quality assurance, organisation
and resourcing are adhered to. It identifies key aspects of work-based
distance learning and highlights the factors that must be in place
if the model is to produce knowledgeable, competent and motivated
practitioners.
Kemshall, H (2009) Understanding the Community
Management of High Risk Offenders, Maidenhead: Oxford University
Press
Professor Hazel Kemshall has published extensively
on the subject of the management of risk in the community and
this is the most recent of her many books. This book examines
in detail a range of risk management techniques and considers
assessment, multi-agency working and recent policy and legislation.
Knight, C and B Stout (2009) 'Probation and Offender
Manager Training: An Argument for an Integrated Approach', Probation
Journal 56(3): 269-83.
This article argues that training arrangements for
probation staff need to take account of the fact that complex
offender-focused work is now being carried out by various grades
of staff and that the issue of role boundaries should be central
to the debate about competency and qualifications. The importance
of higher education in enabling the development of critical and
reflective skills as well as knowledge for all staff is emphasized.
Stout, B, Yates, J and Williams, B (eds) (2008) Applied
Criminology, London: Sage
This edited collection is a key CCJ publication and
most chapters have some relevance to probation. Those with direct
reference to the topics of the Select Committee Inquiry include
Knight et al's chapter that discusses the managing, resourcing
and teaching of diversity and Stout and Goodman's chapter that
argues that restorative justice is an approach that requires greater
citizen involvement.
Ward, D Scott, J & Lacey, M (eds) (2002) Probation:
Working for Justice (2nd edition) Oxford University Press
A collection of papers on a wide range of probation
topics. Written around the time that the Human Rights Act was
implemented, the book explores the ethical challenges of probation
as well as reviewing effective practice, public protection and
the changing organisation of the Service.
September 2010
| 
