I suspect that the idea of having supervised accommodation for offenders has been around for as long as probation itself. The hostels operated by the probation service are 'approved' for the purpose by the Ministry of Justice and prior to this by the Home Office. Increasingly they are being referred to as Approved Premises (AP) rather than hostels, but I don't understand why. Many are still owned and operated by voluntary and religious groups, thus once again reflecting our roots.
Traditionally probation hostels served mainly two distinct purposes, that of a supervised bail address as an alternative to a remand in custody and secondly as a place of supervised re-integration into society from a period in custody. Additionally, in the past it was not uncommon for someone made subject of a probation order to be required to reside at a hostel for a period, usually because of particular problems in being able to live independently. The time at the hostel was used so that appropriate community support could be arranged, together with accommodation. Hostels were also able to be used for short periods in order to afford 'respite' and in cases where some structured support was required say for people with mental health problems.
In my experience it has always been wise to foster good relations with hostel managers because it quite often tipped the balance in being able to get your client accepted, either when they had been refused elsewhere, or worse thrown out by another hostel. However, that was all in the past. Nowadays finding hens teeth is easier than a hostel place and the reason is basically because all facilities are full of high risk parole cases being released from custody. There are virtually no bail places at all and the few that do crop up are again reserved for the high risk cases. Now I'm all in favour of hostels being available for this challenging group who require a high degree of monitoring prior to being allowed to live independently, but it means that there is little or no provision for other lower risk people, but that might have greater welfare needs.
This situation has been developing for some time and prompted the previous government to let a contract several years ago for bail places to be provided by a private contractor. A company called Clear Springs won the Bail Accommodation and Support Service contract, despite having no experience of working with offenders and they supplied several hundred addresses, typically 3 and 4 bed-roomed houses as 'supervised' bail addresses. Unfortunately the supervision proved to be minimal and when neighbours and the wider public became aware, there was a great deal of negative publicity. In the end a death at a property persuaded both Clear Springs and the Ministry of Justice to part company earlier this year. The BASS contract has subsequently been awarded to Stonham Housing, a charity and specialist housing provider working with offenders.
Sadly, the whole future for Approved Premises within the probation service is about to be thrown into turmoil as it is the stated ambition of the coalition government to divest itself completely of the management and operation of all probation hostels in the very near future. Along with the decision to privatise Unpaid Work, the dismantling of another fine public service looks certain to follow in the footsteps of the Forensic Science Service and the National Air Sea Rescue Service.
My current experience of supporting (unofficially) a young man living in an 'approved residence' - it is extremely difficult for someone who has just managed to get clean from class A drugs prior to release from prison, to be housed with 3 other young men who are obviously all still using. He has no family support so no other housing options available to him. The importance of appropriate housing and adequate support cannot be underestimated if people are to break the cycle of drugs/crime/prison/homelessness. When are we going to invest in such preventative measures rather than pay much more, financially and in human terms, to keep low-risk people incarcerated?
ReplyDeleteI agree with your comment Jules. All I have ever heard are negative comments concerning hostels and that they are often unable to offer really useful help to anyone being released from prison. I have heard that hostels often house people still using drugs etc. so it is indeed worrying. I shall shortly myself be supporting a young man due to go into a hostel later this year. He will have served an 18 month prison sentence and will be released on license into hostel accommodation in September 2011. I have been told by probation that I shall need to make an appointment to even go and visit this young man - hardly friendly!
ReplyDeleteAs I have tried to indicate, the role of hostels has changed over recent years - their former use for welfare reasons has largely disappeared and been replaced with the need for supervision of high risk offenders leaving custody. This is very unfortunate and means that the character and scope of hostels has changed considerably.
ReplyDeleteSadly hostels have traditionally relied on less well trained staff with pay and conditions all being live issues, as with staffing levels generally. In reality they have always been a 'cinderella' area of probation work. One of the many attempts at saving money has been in the area of food with onsite cooks being replaced with imported ready meals - not good for morale in any residential facility.
Drugs have become an issue for all hostels and I am familiar with this geing a cause of grave concern for many residents. But the sad fact is that drugs are widely available both in prison and the community - we need to sort out a better way of dealing with the whole subject.
Having said all that, there will be help and good support available and hostel staff will be pleased to work alongside any positive external assistance around, once they know you. Don't forget about the home probation officer either who will be heavily involved and should have close links to the hostel. Good luck to both of you!