I heard about trainee POs being given placements in CRCs so that they can gain the breadth of experience needed - I hope I'm not asked to be a mentor or anything because I would refuse! No-one can make sense of this mess.
********
Our (CRC) admin have today been tasked with sorting all the dead files. Admin have to go through all the files and identify from lists which of the dead files should be with officers who have an active case (including NPS officers!!!). All the remaining files (ie where there is no active case) have to go into an NPS archive somewhere.Then, if these people come back into the system, you'd have to request any dead file if you want to have it. In the future, there'll be no case files - everything will be on electronic systems.
All the info in closed files that needs to be kept will be scanned in under the relevant event number. In the interim, however, its a mammoth task and agency staff are to be brought in to box up all the files! Another waste of public money, and what about confidentiality? As for Team Managers - they are not able to speak out and have had to sign something to that effect. It's like living in a dictatorship - put up and shut up!! CRCs have also been instructed to just take anything that NPS send out their way.
*******
The breach situation is pathetic. Nearly every breach gets sent back as "insufficient information" by the NPS Enforcement Team. Obviously when this happens, you try to give them what they want next time you do a breach - only for that to be batted back for some other piffling reason. I heard yesterday that NPS may, in future, be able to fine CRCs if breaches are knocked back. Well, they could easily find any old excuse to do that - perhaps this is another way that NPS can control CRCs and ultimately for Civil Service to take back the work from "failing" private CRC companies? It's a good job that professional staff are still committed to the job, if not the company they may work for!
*******
*******
Today I have had a 52 yr old male come in - first offence, first time on probation. He's been sentenced to supervision, unpaid work and BBR (Building Better Relationships previously CDVP).This guy has no previous history of DV - why the programme requirement? Also he works variable hours in a restaurant which is open 7 days per week - he'll therefore have difficulty doing the supervision let alone the unpaid work and programme!
He said the report author didn't even discuss that he might get a programme, or tell him what would be expected of him, and he certainly hasn't signed consent for release of info forms. He's now going to appeal his sentence, feeling his assessment has been half baked and his sentence is harsh - the report did not present his perspective or look at mitigating factors at all. To make matters worse, NPS court staff gave him incorrect appointments and he was sent a warning letter for not showing up when we expected him to - which caused him great distress and panic, leading him to take a day off work and loss of pay to rush to the office.
From what I can see, no effort was made at PSR stage to establish whether there was a call-out history re DV instances (which there isn't). People are just not being properly assessed - both dangerous, distressing and ultimately costly to the public. We are also waiting longer to get our new cases - this is impacting on timeframes for ISPs and also, as in the particular case outlined here, the notifications to police about DV programmes being imposed, etc, being delayed And child protection checks at PSR stage - forget it.
********
******
I'm with you. Ashamed, embarrassed, depressed and powerless. Actively looking for a different job. I do not want my name or reputation associated with this horror story. Two colleagues in tears today. These are professional, capable people. Reduced to this.
******
The MoJ, primarily Prison management and lacking in the knowledge and training that has served Probation so well for a century, have thrown the baby out with the bathwater. Bidders are about to lift up the covers and see what the MoJ has done to 'prepare' the field for them. They are not stupid. They will see a broken service that does not present the option of an easy ride to profit. They will see the shell of a house that needs gutting. Ruined in less than four months.
******
Having returned to the field, as they say, I was asked to consider a recall. Checking the previous convictions I was alarmed to find a conviction for murder. According to our records the conviction resulted in 120 hours community payback. A somewhat lenient sentence under the circumstances. On reflection I suspect the migration to ndelius may not have been as successful or as factually accurate as I was led to believe.
******
Our local flagship Womens Centre that was only opened last year is officially known as the Isis Centre but is now jokingly called the Crisis Centre on account of staffing and work issues. It is a single office with NPS on one side and CRC on the other - NPS admin not allowed to help CRC colleagues even though she is capable etc. Not funny really when you think of the clientele and the hardships they have been through.
******
I came close to walking away after 25 years yesterday. Not because I am stressed but because the service is fast becoming a joke. I am not giving Capita et al the satisfaction of an easy win, however. But it was close.
******
INJUSTICE secretary and duty of care are complete opposites. The duty of care, stripping probation officers of their roles, jobs and duties has been appalling. He has smashed the service into an unrecognisable unworkable pile of shit. No one in the service knows what they are doing anymore, just daily crisis limitation and fire fighting against systems that are not fit for purpose.
******
Our CRC programmes staff running high risk BBR group can't see NDelius records to see what might be going on for the men before they arrive....you know what I mean trivial stuff like new callouts, charges, child protection issues, homelessness, Restraining or Non-molestation Orders etc. No risk issues there then. What a terribly distorted and broken system.
******
Workload assessed in West Yorks. Most NPS on around the 200 per cent mark on the old tool, new tool coming anytime soon. Expect a minor revolt next week!!! Management crapping themselves!
******
Additionally staff refusing to do flat rate reports. Expect FDR meltdown. Going the same way as Manchester. Utter pandemonium!
******
I fear you are only commenting on your own office within the larger area of West Yorks. In my office (W. Yorks) some PO's/SPO's can't get enough flat rate reports to do, absolutely coining it in!
******
Today in my office it has taken 4 staff nearly all day to complete a recall using the new process we are forced to use on Delius! It seems to have so many glitches. The rest of us are dreading it. Another colleague refused to use this for the second recall and the duty officer was overjoyed when the third recall came in at 4.45pm which meant it could be done over the phone! The irony is that when we have completed the form on Delius, admin have to print it off and scan it to email it to the recall section at Noms because they can't access it on Delius. You couldn't make it up!
********
I have an example concerning the abandonment of all previous policy around safe practice. 2 colleagues who have not been trained in sex offender work are now being expected to write PSRs on serious sexual offences and hold cases, as long as they don't have a Sex Offender programme. Another irony is that PSR allocation is such a shambles that those who have been trained in SO work are writing reports on shop theft and breach of COs!
Searching for a HR offender on Delius I knew was there took more then 5 attempts last week...imagine if I was a temp admin officer responding to a request or enquiry from police.....therein lies the start of an event sequence which ends in an investigation with ACEs and CEOs trying to defend the system and therefore turning to the old favourite 'officer error'....senior managers have not spoken out against TR in the North therefore we can assume that they all support this which will mean that we will move away from identifying a system failure and instead look for a human element...senior managers do not use Delius so how would they know how dangerous this system is? Delius, the supposed all encompassing risk assesment system is in itself a dangerous liability...
ReplyDeleteAgain vicarious liability!!!!!!
Delete'arse spraying mayhem'
DeleteI'm still chuckling about that :)
Does that 'law' still apply in a private company?
DeleteI don't know about that 'law', but I have heard that Crown privilege - which prevented Probation Trusts being sued - will not apply to CRCs... Bidders better have deep pockets, or excellent insurance!
DeleteI do not believe the probation trusts had any crown privilege, nor do the police or the prisons. They have all be sued. Crown privilege is now known as public interest immunity. And vicarious liability applies to employers, whether public or private.
DeleteIt would be a shame, a real shame, if when (or if) the winning bidders were announced their business insurance companies got anonymous letter directing them to this blog or spelt out in detail the problems that they might have in the future and the FACT that most SFO's come from medium ROH offenders.
DeleteI would imagine that their insurance premiums might just increase. A lot!!!!
oh I like that idea but im thinking the banks will be the insurers/underwriters and we know the govt & bankers are in bed together.
DeleteYeah, but the Banks' bottom line is profit. If they think they are too high a risk, given both the potential for damages etc, then If cover is given the premiums are going to be extortionate. I agree with Niles, it would be a crying shame and a course of action that I intend to take at the earliest possible opportunity.
DeleteDoes any one know when the preferred bidders are to be announced?
ReplyDeletefrom the 24-28 however from the office stated that for legal reasons will not be passed onto staff until legal limit has been reached if there are any legal challenges from other bidders.
DeleteI think that has been put back following the legal challenge from Slater & Gordon.
Deletehttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-29765501
ReplyDeleteUnrelated sort of but CAPITA in charge of this, also a bidder for London. More good news.
Do I work for a CPA, CRC or a Probation For Profit Company? I am going to use the latter from now on...it is the most accurate....
ReplyDeletePlease stop blaming the court staff for the state of reports, most are now to be done on an oral basis - probably an hour start to finish...yes even high risk, read the PI if you don't believe me...DV, Safeguarding checks? However can anyone deliver them in this timescale....you have no idea how bad it is going to get.Paying for reports to be done properly? That is all stopping too....everything on a oral report that is the target
ReplyDeletean hour is the starting point for a report, benches, in my opinion, have always been happy for cases to 'go back to pm or the following morning' if checks need to be made. You make it sound like court clerks start a stopwatch as soon as they request a report and that is not the case and to suggest otherwise is untrue.
DeleteI am just finding the main reason for poor reports is new staff who aren't probing interviewees enough or aren't putting the info on the FDR. Without going into detail they put statements and then don't expand ie if someone came from Poland to work then it is not too much effort to ask them WHEN they came and WHO with. (this is just a basic example). In addition people are being passed fit for Unpaid Work when this is clearly not the case - people with heart complaints & arthritic joints.
Having arthritis or a heart complaint doesn't automatically make you unfit for unpaid work in the same way it doesn't always make you unfit for employment.
DeleteI hate it when people make sweeping generalisations like that.
Can I just mention that Oral reports in my area are typed on a template and so there's no excuse not to put basic information on the form that will be going to your COLLEAGUES in order to help them get the ISP up and running. Court staff have become very insular of late and I know for a fact that they are allotted time to type these up. No excuse for shoddy, half baked reports at all in my opinion.
DeleteCan I just inform you that under the Probation Instruction in use, this will cease, oral reports are honestly a tick box only with the offenders details and the offence type the only written information. National service National delivery from now on! PLEASE check the PI, this is honestly being used in some areas now and is expected to roll out to all.
DeleteNo,that is not correct, court practice has really changed because benches want to deal with so called "stand-downs" themselves and courts do not have slots available in the afternoon or next day. Court teams are being instructed to do most reports as oral reports so delivered within the sitting ( am or pm) of the same bench. IMO every PO /PSO should have to do court duty under such circumstances, then everyone would understand the pressure in the restricted time and criticise the staff less ( but managers more). It really is a disgrace.
ReplyDeleteIf we as probation don't stop this practice now then reports will be the next thing to go. The quality of assessment to be provided under the circumstances described is (in many circumstances) not going to be good enough and so in the end courts will do without them all together.
DeleteThe problem is we have allowed ourselves to be placed in a position where fast delivery reports are ever considered acceptable in any circumstances. My first experience in court (1976) was to observe the delivery of an oral report in which the distressing details of a mans life were laid bare to the bench and members of the public present. I welcomed NAPO's view that Oral reports should be restricted to requesting adjournment for a full report. Whatever happened to our policy (and principles)?
DeletePlease colleagues just read the PI, oral reports will make up the vast majority of all court reports soon, increasing in my area now to 70% target. They are tick boxes only, easily checked with the PI where the template is. "Allowed ourselves " ??? We are being Instructed now.
DeleteJust wondering... does the instruction state that there must be poor quality. .does it state that if there are important inquiries to be made that these should be disregarded.. .does it remove the concept of professional assessment and that if more time is required it should be requested.....does it remove the possibility of using the time to complete an interview of quality, underpinned by skill and experience... does it instruct that the interview should involve reading out the question and ticking the box with the answer...
ReplyDeleteDoes it offer the possibility of using the time to complete a quality interview / assessment whilst reducing the time needed to complete the actual report...
Does it suggest that the Court can / could have the confidence to know that a skilled and professional person has completed an appropriate inquiry , has gained all relevant information and that on that basis provides a concise and applicable report and viable proposal...
Just wondering ....
very well put Anon 11.21
ReplyDeleteI cant believe Court staff are on the same salary band as their case carrying counterparts. PSOs especially - the hours I put into each of my 90 cases and they are ticking a sodding form!! In addition they sit in courts just incase probation are needed - if their court runs out of cases they go back to the office and get off early. If they sit in a report court they basically are just gathering results and escorting the defendant to get their 1st appointment for probation. Most court PSOs I know would not last 5 mins in a case carrying team and how do I know this - because some of them used to carry cases and couldn't hack it so were shunted off to the court!!!