Data Cleansing

I think it's worth highlighting yet another unwise and dangerous aspect of this TR omnishambles raised yesterday. It concerns the direction to staff for the wholesale destruction of records, euphemistically referred to as 'data cleansing'. 

In my experience, the retention of comprehensive and accurate records has always proved both valuable and often vital in dealing with 'difficult' cases and this erasing of the corporate memory will have serious consequences further down the line.    

How are people getting on with getting rid of years worth of data both paper and electronic? How many are filling out the destruction forms when deleting information? Preparation for share sale is being done recklessly and I imagine illegally. Where do we report this to?

I'm not sure what you mean, could you clarify? Thanks

CRCs are being told to get rid of any information they have that should go to NPS i.e. old files, old paperwork etc. Anything that has a trust logo or should belong to NPS. Apparently there are legal implications if not done properly and I can tell you now, the deadlines are so tight, I don't see how it can be done properly.

Don't worry - just dump, delete & job done. Someone will cover for you. No-one wants to put their corporate hand up & say "we screwed up".

Not so long ago (pre-2014, but post-2006 - a time when I was allowed to write reports) one of my "very worrying" ex-clients re-appeared having committed a very serious offence. I referred to relevant and significant background papers which couldn't otherwise be located, but were in an old file I had kept back. After that file was taken from me I was subsequently disciplined ("failure to follow policy & procedure") for retaining paperwork which should have been shredded or otherwise destroyed per the "new" Trust guidelines. No-one else involved previously had kept their paperwork, which led to further discomfort (for me) as the Judge asked NHS, social services and another partnership agency why they didn't have any record of their past involvement this person? That went very quiet very quickly. The case was reallocated to another PO and the records were made 'sensitive' (limited access only).

So please don't worry about deleting. You're doing the bidding of your paymasters. Keep a copy of the instruction, policy or direction. If, as or when you're asked in the future, just produce that copy. Me? Oh, I'm just happy flipping burgers these days.

I have no doubt someone would cover. There is already talk of denying all knowledge paperwork ever existed. Thing is, if someone reports it now whilst it's happening, perhaps share sale will have to be put off for a little while. So where would someone report it to?

Perhaps one might compose a letter containing such concerns to the MoJ, with copies to The Independent, The Guardian, the Public Accounts & Justice Committees, Russell Brand, Ian Lawrence, MD of Sodexo & HMI Probation? Don't forget to include your name, rank & National Insurance number. I have also failed to find the "sarcasm" font.

Well, that looks like the end of all my detailed records which I had on file as well as on screen. Some high risk cases had numerous old files. One case (sibling sex offender) had 6 files, separated into personal data, part C's, forms, PSR's, letters, CP reports, MAPPA, for ONE current Order! As I had worked on cases in the mid 90's, which had dead files going back to the early 80's, there was nothing like a good rummage to really get to know a person. It's a sad, sad time.

Going off on a tangent about old records, as an old records admin, I used to field requests from out of area and the request always was for the last PSR and little else. Got me wondering how many times an author wrote 'would like treatment and has a job offer dependent on sentence handed down'?. Because, with a little digging, I imagine it would show up the same aspirations are proffered time and again for the same cases. With the split between NPS and uncle Tom Cobley and all, who knows what horrors will not see the light of day.