I'll start off by something I read on the Napo Forum pages by Rob Palmer, a very regular contributor both there and on this blog. It continues the theme of imparting some reality checks to potential bidders and I think it's rather good:-
When I developed a shiny new Drug Treatment and Testing Orders unit in S.W. London in 2000, I recall a discussion with a provider that has stayed with me. The person involved, a manager of an established drug treatment agency, made the point that the average number of relapses in a recovering addict was 11. He went on to suggest that these 11 relapses are as important as the successful 12th in the eventual recovery of the substance misuser as they help the user to recognise the difficulties and to develop strategies to ameliorate them. It was no great effort to transfer this idea of 'failure as a legitimate part of the process' to all offender rehabilitation (I guess it is the same in science: failed experiments inform the eventual successful ones) and to consider the idea that an entrenched offender has to fail on the path to success.
The concept has always made sense to me as a practitioner. Until, that is, you introduce the concept of payment by results. It doesn't change the perspective of the offender but it puts the whole PbR thing on a very shaky footing. If you accept the premise that I have outlined above, you wouldn't touch it with a barge pole.
Indeed you wouldn't, but then a lot of these potential bidders know diddly squat about probation and what we do, a point grasped quite quickly it would appear by one Jeremy Wright way back when project TR was being hatched in right-wing Think Tanks. He soon realised that the public knew virtually nothing about us and this could be put to good advantage. Here he is quoted speaking at a POA fringe meeting at the 2012 Tory Party conference:-
"Speaking from his own point of view, he said generally the public understanding of what the probation service did was very poor, and any reform of the probation system had to focus on this fact.
He also stressed the importance of the public believing in the worth of community sentences.
"We need to ensure those sentences command respect" he said, which would in turn encourage sentencers to use them more often."
News continues to reach me that indicates potential bidders are increasingly falling by the wayside. This from a potential third sector sub contractor:-
Some thoughts from a Tier 1 get together with Tier 2/3 providers
Only 6 out of 8 Tier 1 providers attended and only 12 out of 30 Tier 2/3 providers attended
Tier 1 providers were not interested in what we had to provide and some barely spoke to us
One big bidder was claiming they were going to get 8 areas, so I think you are right mop up between 3 or 4 major providers
Then there was this comment yesterday:-
Please watch this space re Sodexo and the whole North of England, Probation AND prisons. Word is it is a done deal as economies of scale will be manageable in this well defined area. The job cut after 12 months establishment period could be 2000.
They're in the mix for Northumbria, Cumbria & Lancs, Merseyside, Durham & Cleveland, West Yorks - as a prime, and have their financial finger in numerous other pies, especially in conjunction with GMC, the Manc mutual. Recent acquisitions include HMP Northumberland, with a savaging of about 200 staff.
Despite all the MoJ rhetoric, it's looking more and more like a stitch-up with just a handful of big corporations being able to scoop-up virtually all the prime contracts. In relation to Sodexo, it's clear from comments yesterday that they had a big hand in influencing Tory policy through right wing think tanks such as Reform and this website confirms the credentials of the woman at the helm:-
Sodexo has appointed Kate Steadman to the newly created role of government relations manager.
Steadman's primary objective will be to look after Kalyx, Sodexo's prisons business, while supporting Tony Cooke, who was recruited to the role of government relations director in 2009.
Prior to joining Sodexo Steadman was most recently an adviser on prisons and probation to the shadow prisons minister and shadow secretary of state for justice, while also assisting the shadow attorney general with policy development.
She has worked within British politics and criminal justice policy for the past five years, advising and working with shadow cabinet ministers - now cabinet ministers - as well as junior ministers and other MPs and peers from all political parties.
Cooke said: "Kate brings a wealth of experience from the heart of British politics and will be an invaluable asset in helping Sodexo to align its services in the public sector more closely to Government's policy aspirations."
This document 'Administering Justice by Results' from 2011 is well worth a look, but as an antidote to all this depressing stuff, I see that someone has posted on YouTube Professor Paul Senior's speech he gave recently. As always, a barnstormer from a probation officer through and through!
If there were 10,000 bidders it would all still end up in the hands the the few big fish in the end. Outsourcing is capitalisim in a very raw form. Driven by greed it sucks the life from everything it touches until only the biggest and fattest survive.
ReplyDeleteBut private companies have delivered public services for awhile now, and as such developed a work sentiment and practice model that has become ingrained. Sanction and penelty. You comply with the rules we give you or you'll lose this or that. It's the same thinking that the government impose on the contracters they sell to.
But with TR, the oppisite is needed if you want to get paid. A sanction (or recall) for none complience means lose of income. So apart not knowing diddley about rehabilitation, the private sector have a model of delivery, entrenched in the minds of those that deliver it that flys in the face of the necessy approach to be successful with a TR contract.
Can they really all change that punitive delivery mind set?
The whole war on drugs is a failure anyway. Were drugs legal, addiction could be managed so much easier outside the criminal justice system. Of course, there's money to be made - outsourcing is CRONY capitalism in it's purest form. The targets are written by (or at the behest of ) the companies undertaking the work. The targets become the end, and the good of the recovering addict or that of society is forgotten.
ReplyDeleteThe solution is to legalise drugs, and stop putting vulnerable people through an unnecessary and abusive criminal justice system, before dumping them on an under-resourced probation system.
I suspect most in Probation who deal on a daily basis with the victims of the 'war on drugs' have been saying something like that since at least the mid eighties - but sadly - media and government have long been uninterested in knowing views of those with first hand experience.
DeleteI actively supported a small local drugs project in Essex, in about 1985 - and put in a lot - hundreds of hours of unpaid overtime in - I was visited by someone from The Home Office Drugs Team - to whom I provided information - he was totally non committal - he did not have a clue about probation work - let alone probation work in a rural area - and country wide links of drug dealers, as was apparent from the home addresses of some arrested in our locality for drugs related offences - usually pecuniary crimes - I never heard any more.
Central Government ignorance is not new - that was probably in the days of Leon Brittan or his immediate successor as Home Secretary.
Like most of criminal justice policy, drugs policy depends on using fear as an electoral asset - despite many in high positions of power, having themselves been part of the drugs industry as consumers. Sadly too often it is the gofers - who really suffer and stay loyal to those with money and those able to remain secrecy by threats of violence.
I agree the solution is to legalise all drugs and get heroin on prescription as was once the practice in the UK. Apart from harm reduction benefits, there would be less acquisitive crime to feed habits and less gangsterism.
ReplyDeleteHmmnnn... legally obtained drugs would largely still need to be paid for. I may be wrong but I'm assuming you're not going to get the equivalent of eight bags a day or whatever on prescription if your usage begins to grown. Plenty of topping up goes on now with methadone scripts - no reason why this would stop with prescribed heroin... and then of course there's the crack cocaine for your speed ballers. Can't imagine prescription crack arriving anytime soon.... I wonder if drugs mine not be best addressed by building a way of living where people won't feel the need quite so much...and yes, i expect this might take a while...
DeleteNice to see agreement on something breaking out!
ReplyDeleteQualification: One swallow does not a make a summer!
DeleteWhen summer is outsourced, one swallow may well be the benchmark netnipper!
DeleteJust for fun I can't resist sharing this little nugget with you-remember the badgers moving the goal posts?
http://thesleaze.co.uk/raining-badgers-873.html
Don't want to detract from serious comment, so please delete if you wish jim, I just find it too funny not to share-sorry.
Is the flooding of the Somerset Levels the consequence of a botched attempt by the Department of the Environment to cull badgers in the West Country? Despite denials by the government, rumours persist that, having been defeated by the badgers during an earlier cull attempt last year – according to the Environment Secretary, Owen Paterson, the badgers ‘moved the goal posts’, frustrating attempts to shoot them – it was decided to instead drown them en masse, by flooding their habitats in the region. “It’s all got out of bloody hand!” seventy three year old Somerset farmer Archie Giblets told a local newspaper. “They’ve pumped so much water into the area that we’re the ones being flushed out, whilst those furry black and white bastards have all escaped to a safe haven!” Indeed, several witnesses are claiming to have seen local badgers commandeering boats, dinghies and canoes, often by force, in order to make their escape. “My mate Barty Bellowes swears he saw this gang of badgers ambush a boat carrying a family of five to safety as it passed some trees,” claims Giblets. “The bastards leaped out of the trees and swarmed all over the boat like bloody pirates! They were biting and clawing the occupants until they were forced to abandon their boat and swim for it! Last he saw of the boat, it were heading south east with a badger at the tiller and at least fifteen more as passengers!”
DeleteIs this more evidence of it all been made up as it goes along?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.viewfrompublishing.co.uk/news_view/30632/15/1/dorchester-commissioner-blasts-prison-decision
Dorset Police and Crime Commissioner Martyn Underhill says he is disappointed by a decision which will mean local prisoners being sent out of the county to serve their sentences.
DeleteUntil Dorchester Prison closed many local offenders were housed there which allowed families to visit.
Since the jail closed and the status of the Verne on Portland has changed there is now no ‘local prison’ in Dorset.
Said Mr Underhill: “I am deeply disappointed by this review. The Ministry of Justice have confirmed to us this week that they are not changing their position on local prison provision for Dorset.
“The reality is that, with very few exceptions, Dorset prisoners will be housed outside Dorset whether they are male or female, on remand or convicted.
“Both I and the people of Dorset, struggle to understand this. When I was elected, Dorset had a prison estate of four prisons – HMP’s Portland, Guys Marsh, Verne and Dorchester. With Dorchester now closed and The Verne designated for Immigration use, 14 months later, we now have two. Neither of these are allowed to house Dorset people in Dorset prisons. It is frankly ludicrous.”
Mr Underhill says the result of the decision will make it more difficult to tackle re-offending : “As Police and Crime Commissioner, providing support to prisoners and tackling re-offending is a key part of my role. Both will be difficult to provide remotely. Prisoners will struggle to maintain contact with their families and the provision of local ‘through the gate’ services will be adversely affected.”
The Commissioner is also critical of the way the Ministry of Justice has been handling its decision on local jails and provision:
“The Justice Minister confirmed to me in November that HMP Portland was to become a resettlement prison for Dorset. I then received another letter from the Minister in December stating that a mistake had been made and that a decision was still pending. Today we received that confirmation. Communication on this issue has been poor and confusing.”
He says that he remains committed to lobbying Government to reverse the decision.
From the F.T. It appears that the government aren't shoving ATHOS, they've had enough and been trying for awhile to get out of their contract.
ReplyDeleteWonder if they'll want a probation one?
Atos seeks contract exit after death threats
By Gill PlimmerPersistent death threats against staff who decide whether sick and disabled people are eligible for benefits have forced the private company employing them to seek an early exit from a £500m government contract.With opposition Labour MPs also stepping up criticism, Atos Healthcare said the political environment had become untenable and that it was no longer fair to employees to leave them vulnerable to attack.“It is becoming incredibly difficult for our staff; it’s pretty unpleasant,” people close to the company said.About 163 incidents of the public assaulting or abusing staff were recorded each month last year, Atos said.At protests outside 45 Atos offices this week, names of individual doctors were chanted, while many of the 2,000 staff employed to carry out the work had received death threats both in person or on Facebook and Twitter, as well as bullying at the company’s assessment centres.Examples on Facebook include: “murdering scumbags . . . won’t be smiling when we come to hang you bastards”. Another says: “Know anyone who works for Atos? Kill them.”The French IT company has been in discussions with the Department for Work and Pensions with a view to exiting the deal since October last year, because it views the tests as “outdated”.“In its current form it is not working for claimants, for DWP or for Atos Healthcare,” Atos said. “For several months now we have been endeavouring to agree an early exit from the contract, which is due to expire in August 2015.“Despite these ongoing discussions, we will not walk away from a front-line service. Our total focus remains on delivering the services we are contracted to provide in a professional and compassionate way, until a new service begins.”Atos has become a lightning rod for discontent over the coalitions’s welfare reforms, which aim to shift more people off social security benefits and into work.For the past three years, the company has been under fire for its handling of work capability tests, which assess whether people are well enough to apply for jobs.A third of its decisions were overturned on appeal, amid allegations that people with terminal cancer or other serious illnesses had been denied benefits as a result of its assessments.
Please watch this space re Sodexo and the whole North of England, Probation AND prisons. Word is it is a done deal as economies of scale will be manageable in this well defined area. The job cut after 12 months establishment period could be 2000.
ReplyDeleteBit dramatic. The total staff count in the northern CRCs is less than 2000
so sorry had not realised my error initial loss forecast to be 200 once systems established. I am truly sorry for angst caused but the point still stands watch this company.
DeleteI'd just like to make a mention of what someone put as a comment on yesterday's blog. It is regarding West Yorkshire's Post Sentence Assessment. What I understand there is that instead of having a year's Supervision Requirement, say, they are proposing something like a 20 day Specified Activity Requirement and expecting offenders to attend 20 times within the 12 months of the Community Order. The problem I have heard, loud and clear, is that most of these Orders are ended without the Days actually being completed. Indeed many Orders have very few 'Days' completed because people don't get on programmes or groups and aren't seen when they are on waiting lists, or just aren't suitable for working in groups, or don't turn up. An FOI request would be interesting to help clarify the evidence, but I hear that senior managers have as much as admitted this and blamed front line staff. The problem for any privateers if working this way would be if they then tried to close the case on NDelius at the 12 month mark and took payment, they would be open to claims of fraud in the same way that Serco are now on tagging contracts. In fact, I think the way that PSA is structured makes this almost inevitable. If West Yorkshire's way becomes a cornerstone of TR through the creation of Rehabilitation Activity Requirements the future is perilous for private companies. Much better for them to have Supervision and Programme Requirements. In my mind, any such contracted PSA system in private hands would lead to high levels of media scrutiny, reputational damage and possible criminal investigation. Let's face it, we can't currently end 200 hours of UPW when only 130 had been completed. To claim the 200 hours would be fraud, so the future of contracts looks very troubled indeed if government and companies go down this route.
ReplyDeleteso what you saying? anyone winning yorkshire contract would have to up the contact days (and costs) or face allegations of fraud? that's not very attractive. it would be simpler would it not if contractors were paid on basis of what programmes they got people through. would make them double efforts to get people to attend and complete programmes if their payments were dependent on it. less open to the 'fraud' accusation of not completing orders.
DeleteOnly an opinion but seems to me that ndelius mimics DWP sanctioning benifits system. If you are not in the right place at the right time the computer operator will sanction or breach you for that failure to attend. You are right though work force will double but wages halfed. The down side is that breaches will go through the roof and fill the prisons up. Oh and by the way the Yorkshire model derides the cornerstone of probation history of the one to one contact being central to risk and desistance because front liners are advised not to meet with service users.
Deleteblimey. no wonder they're not completing their orders!! .
DeleteAnon at 17:26 You raise a very good point. I've heard very similar to what you've heard - maybe we can encourage further comment on exactly how this wonder development actually works?
DeleteI think it must be a given that the private contractors will use whatever means they can to ensure those on supervision will successfully go the distance.
DeleteIt's important therefore that any oppertunities to exploit a process to gain a successful outcome are identified and closed.
I also expect that contracts agreed with the private contractors will have quite stringent whistleblowing clauses built into them.
But if WY aren't completing Orders, shouldn't we know how much or how many are being completed? This would give a baseline of what existing staff can provide and give contractors an idea of how much performance they would need to add to meet their contracts? Am I missing something here? Sounds like an FOI request to me.
DeleteFOI - good idea!
Deletehttps://www.whatdotheyknow.com/
The fraud uncovered at A4e was exactly that described above. People were given job placements (paid) for 6months, for which A4e were given approx £1000 a month management fee per individual.
DeleteIf the individual doesn't turn in for work you don't get the management fee. So you just sign everyone off each month as full attendance and get your fee!
If it wasn't for a whistleblower they'd still be doing it now.
I think sometimes probation staff are guilty of thinking with regard to the private sector with the same kind of fair and honest conscience and dignity that they apply to their work (and their lives) as a public sector employee.
I really do feel that many entering the private sector will be taken a back a lot when they realise just how they really operate.
Description of WY system not very accurate.
DeleteYou need to read up on the Rehabilitation Activity Requirement in the Offender Rehabilitation Bill. In effect this signals the end of court imposed specified activities, giving all the discretion to the CRC provider to determine the programme of supervision.
DeleteA successful completion will be getting to the end of the order, not completing the actual number of days which are simply set as a maximum. This does not affect unpaid work or treatment requirements. This is supposed to free up the new providers to do what works for rehabilitation.
Or to do the very least? especially if they think they are a no-hoper in the first place?
DeleteStudents in the Ukraine were treated like scum an elite govern the nation in their own interests with the bulk of the population facing immiseration in the end they kick off. This is a set of policies and a reaction that is spreading. In the UK we have food banks growing poverty and students treated like scum; we have benefits taken off the poorest in society while the rich buy record amounts of Super cars.
ReplyDeleteThe political buffoons ( and I do mean buffoons) are locked into a ideology that can only end in tears. Why do they continue are they mad? The demise of our profession is simply a part of this process.
Unconscious Incompetence will abound. Trouble is, the commissioners are just as clueless.
ReplyDeleteThe WY PSA model, was I think, an early attempt to shape CRC work. Community Orders for whatever period may have 15 activity days, 30, 50 or 60. Nothing in between. It is true that Supervision as a Requirement, is not actively sought in the majority of cases, generally reserved for Sexual Offenders and DV cases; who continue to get fairly long periods on a CO, coupled with interventions such as NSOG (60) or Building Better Relationships(50) both High Activity Requirements, or Safer Relationships.(30). The low/med risk cases complete their activity days, based on post sentence assessment and may include; 8 x OB groupwork sessions (Action for Change) 2 x Victim Awareness Module, 6 x ETE sessions, 10 x sessions with a drug/alc support group/intervention, or Hate Crime Module, Drink Driving Group etc etc.I'm sure you get the idea. Once the sessions/activity days are complete you can terminate the case - it is done, as there is no supervision activity to continue for the full 12 months. SSSO, Curfews, AC's and UPW can stand alone.
ReplyDeleteThere are however serious administration issues associated with the PSA which WY are trying to get sorted. The original idea was to reduce the number of 1-1 supervision orders, that is for sure. However, to monitor the system, you need to recorded, contacts etc under the right line in ndelius and this is easier said than done. You need a procedure, that everyone buys into and fully understands; and it assumes other partner organisations etc will give you information re: attendance etc.
A major problem of PSA, from my perspective is that there are not enough activities running in order to get clients through their court orders, quickly, whilst motivation remains high and if there is no supervision, you lose people. Long, very long waiting lists for Sex Offender Treatment, for instance means that more of what would be group work or interventions work, is having to be done by OM's and in my view being put onto 'pathways' to treatment, which are driven by numbers, as opposed to the appropriateness of the clients passage into treatment. For example, rather than do a core programme, OM's do the initial 4 sessions and the men, as they are men, are fast tracked into Better Lives, or Relapse Prevention, whatever you want to call it.
It is/was a brave attempt to focus attention, provide a wide variety of interventions and to retain the respect of the judiciary, but just because they have done away with National Standards in favour of professional judgement and desistence, the staff resources to run programmes, groups etc are just not there.
WYT are getting tough on staff, printing off charts to demonstrate failings in recording etc which may reflect badly on PSA, but in reality, the performance charts are artificial, as the monitoring system makes no allowances for things we cannot actually achieve, with the best will in the world and so all it does is demoralise staff.
Now if you fling all this into the mix of crams to delius, new templates for everything, r-oasys, all of which are still throwing up all kinds of clitches, and TR on top....I am surprised WY staff have battled on, or maybe we are just ahead of the game, and things can hardly get any worse.
If you are a manager thank you for your honesty which seems to confirm yesterday's comment on such staff being chosen for "special attention" . Napo Unison time for you to step in and stop these bullying tactics now!
DeleteYou put in a lot of detail in there, and I kind of followed it (some of it), and thanks for trying to explain it. But doesn't all the evidence suggest that it is one to one work and relationships that makes the difference? Not groups, activities and blunt interventions? That is my experience and I think it's the message of desistance research. Sounds like you are trying to get square pegs in round holes...that surely is a very expensive route to failure. Maybe a Freedom of Information request might prove or disprove that?.
DeleteSounds reminiscent of a work fare type scenario whereby a schedule of tasks was presented to the claimant by the PbR agency to facilitate eligibility for benefits. The catch? It was never achievable. Not meeting the criteria led to sanction, whereas anyone claiming to have completed all the tasks was sanctioned (& in some cases referred for prosecution) for fraud. The financial benefit to the agency was its success in detecting fraudulent claims, a prized criteria worth more than being successful with the client.
ReplyDeleteThe wiles of the cash hungry are beyond our wildest imaginations. And even holier-than-thou MPs like Blunkett take the shilling.
Maybe we pay a retainer to our most innovative clients in return for ideas as to how to maximise profit in the shark infested world of dodgy business?
I started the thread re WYPT and 'PSA'. I am guessing that anon at 20:57 is currently employed by the same Trust . .too much inside information to be an outsider. My aim was not to educate re 'Activity Requirements' . . you'll all get that soon enough!, but more to highlight the extent to which senior management has colluded with MOJ in the whole process of TR. Vast resources, both staff and finance, have been pumped into making sure PSA is up and running. Alongside this similar resources have been used to make a 'Mutual' bid for the CRC. 'PSA' had been in the planning for months before roll out and needed the authority from Judges in the WY area. Similarly specialist 'low risk' teams were created and PSO's were recruited on temporary contracts specifically to manage low risk service - users.
ReplyDeleteI sat in a briefing with Mark Siddall (ops director) as far back as Jan 2012 when he was actively promoting PSA / Activity Req's as the future . . .we would be experts in delivery . . .we should be carefull as to whom we shared our knowledge . . .we would be needed to deliver the model to other areas . . .and yes . . .we would be able to sell our expertise.
I'm now getting to my point ! How did he know all this so long ago ? Given that this whole thing was his baby, recognition at Buck Palace etc; why, just when he could bathe in all its glory, does he decide to take early retirement? Why did Sue Hall accept a senior position with CRC only to pull out days later ?
Something doesn't add up. People know more than they are telling. Please will at least one CEO or the like, spill the beans. It will inevitably "come out in the wash" but timing could be crucial.
Just to finish . . .all this gratis TR preparation work in W. Yorks was done with the full knowledge of both NAPO and Unison. I was sat nxt to my Union rep in the very briefing I refer to above !.
It is not an exact parallel but there are similarities in the way the Government prepared and then seem to have provoked the 1984 Miners strike by building up reserves of coal and managing to stimulate a split in the miners themselves and then provoke a strike at a time convenient to the Government.
Deletehttp://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b007k1mq
I hope it is not just a false conspiracy theory. There does seem a possible link with the preparation that has been going on in Yorkshire to have a model of operation ready to go, that does not require contact between supervisees and supervisors to the last day of the community order and also takes the setting of the precise requirements away from the courts and puts them in the hands of the companies who are to oversee the supervision and get paid for it.
This seems to be a merging of the responsibilities of courts, Government and the no longer independent practitioners.
Coupled with the fact, that probation workers, are not renowned as compliant as a body but traditionally as independent people. That independence may have already been diminished in recent years with the merging of the role boundaries between PO's and PSO's and the overlapping of both in the ridiculously named posts of 'Offender Managers' The unity of probation workers then being further divided by some going to NPS with possibly better employment protection than those going into CRC's.
No one seriously concerned to have any effective organisation, would deliberately divide it at the service delivery point and cause confusion, by creating different status probation workers, with one lot being described, erroneously as more competent than the others - it seems a divide and rule strategy. Meanwhile the structure is bound not to be effective, making further reforms inevitable in a year or so's time, by when possibly - the back of the profession will already have been broken.
What I am propounding almost seems too fanciful to be true, but so far I cannot see any other explanation for the way things are being done - maybe I will (hopefully) be proved wrong and the dismantling of probation will not be a precursor to other changes that make our judicial system even less independent than it is already becoming - with its proliferation of fixed penalty notices and considerable concerns about the integrity of policing going back nearly 30 years and with ever more private policing and crossovers between civil service/government ministerial jobs and private companies carrying out government contracts.
Earlier by chance I heard a radio episode of Yes Minister - first broadcast in 1984 - The episode - Moral Dilemma - featuring bribery and corruption in Government contracts with all involved being vulnerable to exposure so the hapless - Jim Hacker, effectively agrees to government defence contracts - won as a consequence of bribery - rather than have it revealed that a nominally priced gift he accepted on a trade mission - was in fact a highly valuable objet d'art his wife had taken a fancy to and had been undervalued so it was below the valuation government rules set for it to be accepted as a personal gift. Truth really is stranger than fiction.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b007k1mq
Let us hope we get to the truth about the preparation for TR and possible conspiracy' with the ORB changing the nature of probation supervision and that a few folk start to be open and tell what they really know!
Is this enough to justify a Judicial Review?
I read about WYPT with interest but can't help feeling you should be looking to Durham and Teesside Trust for the forerunner for the CRC model. All offenders complete the 10 session ( but could take up to 16 with reviews) Citizenship Programme with the OM either PO or PSO grade dependent on ROH. They then pass onto a CSS officer (not Tier 4, MAPPA, CP or DV cases) who is a PSO grade and can hold 100 cases, there are examples of this. Supervision can then include using bulk reporting centres staffed by volunteers ( yes truly). I bet the MOJ have watched this model with interest. I hear practitioners were very concerned about the Citizenship Programme but it was imposed with a very tight fist by the exec team. No-one gets to know their offenders they are simply processed and then move on. When their Chief Exec also became Cumbria's Chief he tried to impose this model on them but as he was less influential there - not having appointed the exec team himself - it did not happen. This model has been running in Durham for three years so there is a lot of data on it available.
ReplyDeleteYeah, and it's shit. Any practitioner caught using this should be shot as it's nothing more than a lazy way to give the appearance that you are helping offenders. The original architech of this buggered off from DTV once he got his Masters which, aligned with the inability to sell if to other trusts, gives an indication of how much cop it is.
DeleteMany many times, when the shit hits the fan with offenders, one of the first questions by SPO' is 'has he completed Citizenship'. It's deeply ingrained into the psyche of most managers and practitioners and deeply corrosive to the skills set that we should have as both practitioners and human being replacing common sense with a tick box approach.
It would be ideal for the CRC.
Mr Bruce has chosen the same fate as Mr Siddall and Ms Hall - pockets stuffed and retirement from the probation melee. I hear South America is a popular destination, Argentina, Brazil maybe?
ReplyDeleteMr Bruce did speak to the press at one stage and seemed less than welcoming of the - new way as designed by the MOJ
Deletehttp://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/cumbrian-probation-chief-s-reform-fears-1.1055670#
Begins; -
"Cumbrian probation chief's reform fears
By Duncan Bick
Last updated at 12:54, Monday, 13 May 2013
The man in charge of keeping an eye on Cumbria’s offenders is worried about “serious issues” with protecting the public that could come from new reforms.
Russell Bruce, chief executive of Cumbria Probation Trust, made his comments following a statement from Justice Secretary Chris Grayling over changes to how prisoners are treated.
Under Government plans, only criminals deemed to pose the most risk to the public will be watched over by the public sector – about 30 per cent of offenders. The remainder would fall to private companies and charities.
Local probation trusts would be abolished and replaced with a national agency.
Mr Bruce said the measures – due to be introduced by 2015 – could lead to “fragmentation” in managing offenders, potentially affecting public safety.
The measures would see all people serving prison sentences given 12 months supervision which, the Government says, would give them help with housing, employment and drug abuse.
Mr Bruce said that the trust supported many of the proposals, and put this to the Government when it carried out a consultation exercise on them.
He added: “We also recognise that there is scope for involving a range of organisations in working with offenders but we do have real concerns about the fragmentation in the management of offenders between the new contractors and the national probation service – with the potential to affect the protection of the public which lies at the heart of all our work.
“Clearly with the much smaller public sector probation service envisaged in the Government proposals this will raise major issues for many of our staff and we will obviously be working closely with them over the coming months as we consider the most appropriate arrangements for maintaining the quality of service to the public under the new structures.”
Mr Bruce also said that the risk an offender poses to the public changes over time.
He believes an effective way of monitoring any changes will need to be introduced with the changes.
He is also concerned that the new organisations will be paid by result. As a result of Cumbria’s relatively low levels of crime, he fears they may choose to focus on areas that could be more profitable.
Mr Bruce described the proposed changes as “unprecedented”, and suggested the Government allow more time before they are introduced."
The WY model was in gestation long before CRCs were thought of and in the mind of the designer was about retaining professional input into what individuals needed as to intervention,
ReplyDeleteIf "retaining professionsl input" means putting a drink driver nxt to a drug user, nxt to a benefit cheat, nxt to a someone who beat their dog, nxt to an angry young man, nxt to a fraudulent old lag, nxt to shop thief, nxt to a Twocker etc etc. . . in the same room all to discuss how they might make positive changes in their life ! . . .then you succeeded ! ! Utter garbage.
ReplyDeleteAs far as I am aware the accredited programmes and specified activities ran as they ought. I only viewed the process from afar. Sad to see the sniping of colleagues with minimal information. I started my career with sue hall in 1981 at Grimsby and do not believe she has been pleased with who this has progressed rather her comments to the select committe say otherwise. I suppose people blaming each other pleases Mr Grayling, who after all is the author of this.
ReplyDelete