Written evidence from the Probation Chiefs
Association (PB 17)
Are probation services currently commissioned
in the most appropriate way?
1. Probation Trusts need a new "strategic
commissioning" approach to the delivery of probation services
which opens up the potential for new ways of working with a range
of public, private and voluntary sector providers.
2. Current commissioning arrangements, through
the Directors of Offender Management (DOM), are too remote from
the communities where the services are delivered.
3. The procurement processes used by the Ministry
of Justice/National Offender Management Service (MOJ/NOMS) are
unnecessarily bureaucratic. This often results in potentially
suitable and locally accountable providers excluding themselves
from tendering exercises and the usual "Prime Providers"
taking the available resource.
4. Probation Trusts have the business skills
to commission offender services. They have established links with
the local communities and operate with sensitivity to local issues.
Crucially, Probation Trusts have the advantage of highly developed
relationships with local Magistrates and Judges. Probation Trusts
are Responsible Authorities on the Community Safety Partnerships,
increasingly commissioning through joint and co-commissioning
initiatives with local strategic partners.
5. Probation Trusts are the most appropriate
local commissioners of probation services, and should be more
centrally involved in the commissioning of the whole range of
offender interventions required to protect the public and rehabilitate
the offender. It is important that Probation Trusts take primary
responsibility within communities for offender management.
PCA Recommendation 1:
Improve and consolidate local joint and co-commissioning arrangements
by reducing centrally-driven procurement of services.
PCA Recommendation 2:
Develop Probation Trusts role within local joint and co-commissioning
arrangements as a responsible authority for offender interventions.
How effectively are probation trusts operating
in practice? What is the role of the probation service in delivering
"offender management" and how does it operate in practice?
6. The new governance arrangements for Probation
Trusts provide the potential for greater autonomy and therefore
greater flexibility to meet local needs. It is not clear that
these issues of governance are fully understood or appreciated
yet by NOMS.
7. Some of the barriers to developing the full
potential of Probation Trusts are:
— over-regulation
and lack of proper autonomy;
— having
severely limited freedom to control finances (for example, no
year-end flexibility); and
— having
severely limited freedom to design and control the regime within
which offenders are managed.
8. Probation Trusts, in recent years have already
achieved substantial efficiencies. However, some of the processes
informing these efficiencies (for example the Specification Benchmarking
and Costing Programme) need to take more account of the effectiveness
of services delivered.
9. There are some unanticipated consequences
of becoming Trusts, for example an increase in bureaucracy, monitoring,
and financial controls and having to commit resources to manage
VAT and Corporation Tax.
PCA Recommendation 3:
Realise the potential of Probation Trusts
by increasing their autonomy and streamlining central controls.
10. Whilst the Offender Management (OM) model
is clearly articulated in the national documentation, the emphasis
at present can appear to be on an administrative approach with
the focus on outputs rather than outcomes. The emphasis should
be on the direct addressing of offending behaviour to achieve
desistance from offending and the protection of the public. The
"management" of an offender through the different requirements
of the sentence is a corollary to this work.
11. Within the OM framework there are currently
a range of accredited programmes delivered by Probation Trusts
which the most recent research evidence from the MOJ shows are
successful in reducing reoffending.
12. In order for Probation Trusts to work effectively
with offenders within the OM model they need to have greater professional
flexibility within a less regulated performance management framework
and a reduced emphasis on process targets. It is also crucial
that work with offenders is predicated on evidence based practice
and a demonstrable link to reducing re-offending.
PCA Recommendation 4:
Build on the existing Offender Management
Model through an emphasis on direct offender supervision as the
means of protecting the public through rehabilitation of the offender.
Are magistrates and judges able to utilise fully
the requirements that can be attached to community sentences?
How effectively are these requirements being delivered?
13. The Criminal Justice Act 2003 provides for
a range of additional requirements to be included in Community
Orders, many of which are not delivered by Probation Trusts. Most
of these can be utilised fully by sentencers but there are the
following constraints:
— some
Probation Trusts have no or only partial access to Senior Attendance
Centre provision;
— some
Probation Trusts are unable in all or part of their areas to offer
requirements in relation to Health Service delivered interventions
of Mental Health Treatment or Alcohol Treatment;
— there
is still variance in the use by courts of electronic monitored
curfews;
— the
provision of accredited programmes is currently driven by targets
set by the DOMs, not by need as assessed by Courts and Pre-Sentence
Report (PSR) writers; and
— the
increases in offenders who need interpreters has resulted in limited
access to some provision such as accredited programmes and Community
Payback.
14. Probation Trusts have been increasingly able
to provide sentencers with a wide range of Specified Activity
Requirements to address the needs of specific groups, for example,
women offenders, and specific issues such as lower level alcohol
misuse, debt and money management, compliance, and parenting skills.
15. In 2009-10 the Probation Service nationally
delivered its best ever set of performance results. These demonstrate
that increasingly the whole range of interventions delivered under
community orders are completed successfully. This has been driven
by volume targets which sometimes get in the way of delivering
interventions based more specifically on needs in the OASys assessments.
16. Where offenders fail to comply, orders are
rigorously enforced; a process which has been transformed over
the last ten years. Probation staff have developed approaches
which are designed to achieve compliance rather than enforcement
per se. These include a more thorough exploration with individuals
at induction of factors which might inhibit compliance like employment,
or care responsibilities.
17. Whilst there is still some scope to ensure
that all the requirements in a Community Order are available and
fully utilised nationally, when requirements are made sentencers
can have confidence that they will be delivered as expected and
rigorously enforced.
18. A critical issue is public confidence and
research evidence (MORI) shows that public confidence in the use
of community penalties goes up the more the public know about
them. There would also be benefits to developing ways of providing
feedback to sentencers on the progress of orders which would promote
confidence in community sentences.
PCA Recommendation 5:
Allow Probation Trusts to focus more on meeting criminogenic needs
that are identified in court reports rather than meeting regionally
commissioned sentencing targets.
PCA Recommendation 6:
Establish procedures for providing increased levels of feedback
to sentencers on the progress of orders.
PCA Recommendation 7:
Increase the provision of information about community sentences
to the public and other stakeholders.
What role should the private and voluntary sectors
play in the delivery of probation services?
19. Probation Trusts already work closely with
a wide range of agencies in both sectors and would welcome the
opportunity to extend this. The commissioning and oversight of
probation services, including offender management, require the
unique blend of professional skills, knowledge and experience
which Probation staff bring to the sector making Trusts ideal
brokers to undertake this role.
20. The strength of the third (or voluntary)
sector is in its values, its local connections, its capacity to
attract additional resources and to present a positive image of
work with offenders. The voluntary sector's strengths include
linking offenders through positive engagement, like community
payback and restorative justice schemes, with local communities,
as well as improving employment and leisure opportunities for
offenders.
21. In respect of the private sector Probation
Trusts already have examples of creative contracts providing,
for example, offender mentoring services, staffing cover and supplementing
report writing. The private sector also provides employment opportunities
to offenders. The private sector can also contribute to "back
office" functions and to driving the role of technology in
delivering effective supervision and reducing the cost of support
services. There is also potential for the private sector in the
skills development aspect of Unpaid Work/Community Payback. Probation
Trusts could themselves create "social enterprises"
or "arms length" companies to deliver traditional public
service programmes for offenders.
PCA Recommendation 8:
Build on Probation Trusts current joint working arrangements with
the private and third sector by developing their role within local
joint and co-commissioning arrangements as a responsible authority
for offender interventions.
Does the probation service have the capacity to
cope with a move away from short custodial sentences?
22. Annually some 32,000 individuals are sent
to prison for periods of up to and including three months from
the Magistrates' Court (2008). There is currently no capacity
in Probation Trusts to take on the work of supervising a sizeable
proportion of these offenders in the community without a number
of radical actions and alternatives to the way in which resources
are currently deployed. There would need to be action in respect
of:
— demand
management;
— resource
transfer;
— releasing
capacity through a lifting of unnecessary process requirements;
and
— greater
reliance on professional discretion.
There is enormous potential and substantial cost
saving for the Government in this area. However, there are prolific
offenders in that population, some very dangerous, and Probation
Trusts will need to be involved in the risk assessment and allocation
of support to this group.
23. On the issue of demand management, capacity
would be created if there was use made of diversion from probation
caseloads of lower risk level offenders through Police/Crown Prosecution
Service (CPS) action and the use of alternatives to prosecution
and greater use of fine/conditional discharges. There could also
be diversion via Problem Solving Courts to the voluntary sector.
The use of shorter orders, including stand alone Specified Activities,
and an increase in the use of other requirements (eg Exclusion,
Prohibited Activities) would target resources more efficiently.
24. The issue of resource transfer would need
to be addressed: specifically there would need to be a transfer
of resources from custody to community as well as from the centre
to Probation Trusts. Resource transfer from the female custodial
estate to the community would also allow for the prioritising
of sustainable services for women offenders.
25. The transfer of budgets; alcohol, drugs,
ETE and accommodation to Trusts would allow them to commission
local partners to target more effectively the most excluded offenders
at the local level.
26. Finally, there is the potential for releasing
capacity through increased use of professional discretion in relation
to National Standards of supervision and meeting process targets.
There is an urgent need to release highly trained and professionally
qualified staff from process monitoring in order to focus on the
direct supervision of and engagement with offenders.
PCA Recommendation 9:
Free up Probation Trusts' capacity by streamlining and reducing
centrally-driven monitoring arrangements.
PCA Recommendation 10:
Enable Probation Trusts' capacity by increasing the ability for
Probation staff to use professional discretion in the allocation
of operational resources.
PCA Recommendation 11:
In the case of short-term prison sentences, give consideration
to the transfer of resources from the custodial to the community
(Probation Trusts) in order to create capacity.
Could probation trusts make more use of restorative
justice?
27. There are already innovative examples of
restorative justice (RJ) being used in Probation Trusts. These
include conferencing, RJ as a specified activity requirement in
a community sentence, or as an element within an Intensive Alternatives
to Custody programme or Integrated Offender Management. Judges
and magistrates have signalled their support for these options.
28. Community payback already has a clear restorative
element (visible payback to the community) which is highly valued
by local communities. The restorative elements within community
payback could be strengthened.
29. There is clearly scope for increasing the
use of RJ and, given the high value victims place on it and the
impact it can have on offenders, it could be established as a
core option in sentencing. This could be part of a broader RJ
framework that allows all personal crime victims to opt into a
RJ process at different stages in the offender/victim journey.
Victims could have an entitlement for an RJ approach to be investigated
if they want the option pursued.
PCA Recommendation 12:
Make Restorative Justice an entitlement for victims in cases in
which they have expressed a preference for it.
Does the probation service handle different groups
of offenders appropriately, eg women, young adults, black and
minority ethnic people, and high and medium risk offenders?
Women Offenders
30. Probation Officers are skilled in identifying
the complex needs which women offenders have (mental health, substance
misuse, histories of abuse) and engaging with women to provide
interventions which will divert them from custody and crime. Probation
staff are able to apply National Standards whilst remaining responsive
to specific needs like working patterns, childcare, and health
appointments.
31. Probation Trusts work with the Women's Community
Projects (WCPs) which provide "wrap-around" services
for women offenders and those women at risk of crime. In the WCPs
supervision takes place in a safe, women-only environment with
access to "one-stop shop" facilities.
32. With increasing numbers of women being diverted
from custody and the female caseload increasing the ability to
continue to make services, accessible, sensitive and appropriate
to need is likely to become more difficult.
PCA recommendation 13:
Increase the capacity of Probation's current work with Women's
Community Projects in order to meet the needs of the rising numbers
of women offenders.
Young adult offenders
33. The Probation Service has demonstrated an
effective approach to working with young adults who offend, both
in managing Community Sentences and Custodial licences. Youth
Offending Services and Probation Trusts have established practices
for managing the transition from youth-based Community Justice
provision to adult provision. The transition to young adulthood
is crucial; a time typified by the tailing away of traditional
youth service provision.
34. A third of those subject to Community Orders
managed by Probation Trusts with bespoke requirements are reconvicted
within a year compared to 60% of those who serve a prison sentence
of less than 12 months. The Probation Service has demonstrated
that well-managed Community sentences are more likely to be effective
and act to prevent the "revolving door" for young adults
in custody.
35. Local initiatives within Probation Trusts,
such as Integrated Offender Management projects have Probation,
Police and Local Authority combining services in targeting specific
risk factors.
PCA recommendation 14:
Develop a sector-wide approach to commissioning services to meet
the special needs of transition to young adulthood.
Black and minority ethnic offenders
36. The Probation Service has an outstanding
track record for employing Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) staff
who reflect local communities and for being able to demonstrate
that all offenders should be able to have confidence in the services
that are offered. Where Probation Trusts are working with a high
concentration of BME offenders it has been possible to provide
specific programmes for BME offenders which also addressed issues
of identity, history, culture, experience and opportunity.
37. Probation Trusts ensure that BME offenders
do not find themselves as isolated members of predominantly white
groups of offenders, including on community payback groups. In
some areas local contracts or partnership arrangements have ensured
community provision has been developed for BME offenders or members
of specific communities.
38. All Trusts provide access to registered interpreters,
and set expectations of providers of offender services within
contracts. Probation has a long history of seeking to identify
and drive down disproportionality or prejudicial treatment, with
rigorous monitoring of the quality of reports and the outcomes
from proposals in court reports. Increasingly offender surveys
and user groups are being developed to receive and act on feedback
from offenders, including those from BME communities.
PCA Recommendation 15:
Increase the use of offender surveys and user groups to receive
and act on feedback from offenders, including those from BME communities.
High risk offenders
39. The Probation Service has made significant
strides in managing medium and high risk offenders effectively,
through the development and professional application of robust
assessment tools, which make sure offenders who present the highest
risk of harm are tightly managed and resources prioritised, through
the Multi Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA). Offenders
who are assessed as less harmful but commit high volume crime
are also managed on a multi agency basis as Prolific and Priority
Offenders (PPOs). Through these arrangements information is shared
and resources pooled across key agencies to ensure agencies achieve
the greatest impact in reducing crime and protecting the public.
40. Approved premises also provide a valuable
mechanism for containing very high risk particularly in relation
to dangerousness, sex offenders and more recently some terrorism
offenders.
41. This multi agency approach is internationally
recognised as an effective way of managing risk. Both MAPPA and
the PPO scheme make sure that greatest weight of offender management
techniques are brought to bear on those offenders in the community
that demonstrate the capacity to cause the greatest harm. Assessment
is kept under regular review to spot escalation from medium risk
offenders and move up the intensity of supervision or in reverse
to recognise progress and concentrate resource where it is most
needed. Working in partnership with the police, prisons and local
authority and health partners has become a key ingredient to effective
practice and is currently informing the development of Integrated
Offender Management.
PCA Recommendation 16:
Promote public and stakeholder understanding of multi-agency approaches
to public protection and risk management work.
Is the provision of training adequate?
Qualifying Training
42. The new Probation Qualifying Framework (PQF)
was introduced in April this year (replacing the Diploma in Probation
Studies which ran from 1998-2010) and has the support of Probation
Trusts.
43. However, because of reductions in recruitment
due to the recent budget cuts the new qualification will be slow
to start; the new qualification also has a long delivery time.
Combined, these factors have the potential of creating a gap in
qualified Probation Officers which could become acute by 2012,
creating a potential risk to public protection practice. This
needs careful monitoring to ensure Trusts retain the levels of
skilled staff required.
PCA Recommendation 17:
Establish a national body to oversee the implementation and continuous
development of the Probation Qualifying Framework (PQF).
Post Qualifying and In-house Training
44. There are no formal post qualifying arrangements
for Probation practitioners, which is a significant gap in their
continuous professional development, although all Probation Trusts
have training programmes. Much of Trust training time has however
been taken up by preparing staff to implement new Government initiatives.
The recent Criminal Justice Joint Inspection recommended that
there be better training for staff working with high risk sexual
offenders.
45. Training for staff to deliver accredited
offending behaviour programmes is comprehensive, but there is
a long lead time which can cause significant workforce planning
difficulties.
PCA Recommendation 18:
Agree a framework of recognised national qualifications for
certificating the continuous professional development of probation
practitioners.
Leadership and Management Development
46. There has been no consistent development
needs analysis of senior managers even whilst Probation was a
national organisation resulting in variable provision for both
Chief Executives and their senior managers. A number of Trusts
and Regions have invested their own scarce resources in their
own senior or middle manager programmes. This is not funded as
part of their contract. In our view a proportionate level of NOMS'
resources for leadership development should be allocated to Trusts.
47. Senior managers in Probation Trusts manage
a complex system of partnerships with enhanced scrutiny of a public
protection role, which is highly visible and volatile. The development
of joint training opportunities with their peers in community
organisations is required if local commissioning is to be successful.
48. More attention needs to be paid to succession
planning and the development of new senior managers for the future.
There has also been a lack of access by Probation managers to
critical posts in NOMS.
PCA Recommendation 19:
Establish a leadership development and succession planning framework
within the Probation Service.
September 2010
| 
