******
DLNR CRC are already talking about a same system of individual re-offending rates and star ratings.
******
At Sodexo run Northumberland Prison it is really funny to see the wall chart with star employee on the notice board as you go inside.
******
In a previous Mc Job I was awarded stars for good performance. Oh, how I miss that job :(
******
A friend in Interserve i.e. Purple Futures, said performance related pay will be introduced linked with re-offending for each case worker.
******
Purple futures has never had any plans to introduce performance related pay or to monitor reoffending rates by individual case manager. Hope this clears the point up.
******
'Hope this clears the point up.' Well of course it does - anonymous, uncorroborated statements on fundamental issues always set everyone's minds at rest.
******
This is always a by product of the staff recognition scheme and therefore will come in by default.
******
"has never had any plans" - doesn't mean those plans can't be brought in swiftly in the future. After all, we all know that the last government didn't plan for its legislation to be used for wholesale privatisation, but here we all are.
******
I feel the CRCs are going to fall apart. I already feel a pang of sadness when one of mine re-offends, but at least am aware I will not be put on a management chart somewhere. Now it seems my name will be bandied about in meetings as tho I'm a poor officer if one of mine re-offends. This is an extremely stressful situation to be under, particularly if someone re-offends and I have to then justify to the senior what I've done with the person to reduce recidivism.
What do they expect us to do - honestly?? It's like they're setting us up to fail. I've 20+ years experience and now feel like I don't know anything anymore. I've lost my confidence, I've lost my mojo. I want to leave so bad. I've not had any sick leave yet because as tough as it's been, I knew there would be tougher times ahead and for me they are fast approaching, as is my 6mths off with work-related stress.
******
I find the whole thing laughable, that I will be 'named and shamed' if one of my probationers commits a further offence, as if somehow personal accountability for ones actions alongside 70 odd years of academic theory about the causes of crime, sociology and (developmental) psychology now count for nothing! You might just as well set me a target that the sun must shine for at least 10 days over the next month in my town, and 'name and shame' me if I cant deliver on that!
I don't actually blame the private companies for using this model; it's used elsewhere and they have clearly swallowed the MBA dogma that managers don't need to know anything about the company they are running, transferable skills and all that. I am more dismayed that our CEO's and ACO's (many of them social work trained) can so totally abandon their first principles and endorse this drivel. Shame on them all.
******
I work in the NPS Court team. My workload has changed out of all recognition with the horrendous duplication of form filling, pushing out FDR's or being told to do as many oral reports as possible. My job has changed fundamentally being sent to different courts to cover for staff shortages as a direct result of the split. I firmly believe we will be affected further - we have absolutely no idea what the future holds now for any of us and I think it is a case of watch this space. Do you trust the MoJ? Just look at how they have responded to recent events. I dread to think what is coming for all of us CRC and NPS alike.
******
I will accept payment by results for my caseload as long as I get to screen them in advance and select those I consider to present an acceptable risk.
******
If you are simply turning people round and not having the time to help them through their problems (a call to the DWP normally takes 30 minutes due to the time you are on hold) then there is absolutely no hope for either party. However, in my area Sodexo also run the prison so it's a win/win for them. I'm actively applying for jobs and hope that I'm out of the madness soon. I pity those left behind, in either CRC or NPS.
******
For all affected by performance related pay, you need to be savvy and record what you need to record to maintain your income. For example, if stats are collated quarterly you will quickly learn to record what you need by the cut off dates and if needed, hold back some figures for the next quarter. So, if you are targeted to get 10 accommodation referrals and you get 12 hold 2 back to give yourself a head start next quarter. It is not right but that is how staff on performance related pay work - to the figures as they are needed. Learn quickly to play them at their own games.
Yes, I hear your cries of despair at the sheer stupidity of such games when we deal with peoples lives and trauma so, pay lip service to the figures - not to the impact of service users.
******
I spoke with someone who works at Working Links, he said how he has become disillusioned with the company as they're becoming more focused on targets rather than the people they work with. They are also closing offices down and introducing an orange bus in order to reach clients (I kid you not). He also told me that Working Links only went for the contract as MoJ have guaranteed a certain amount of profit, they wouldn't have touched it other wise. So on the orange bus I go!! I think they call that innovation.
******
I predicted that much of this would happen, but it was even before this blog was up and running. Now much of what I predicted has come to pass, and sadly the changes are irreversible. Creativity is the way forward, playing the MoJ at their own game by being smart when it comes to 'fudging the numbers' so to speak. Let the changes bed in, but in the meantime, look after your health by not taking work too seriously, just do what you can, concentrate on risk and sling shot the rest.
******
One thing that has not had a mention in all of this is the loss of 'corporate memory'. This means the bidders are free to repeat every mistake the Probation Service has ever made, all in the name of 'innovation'. Performance Related Pay empowers the offender and compromises the therapeutic relationship; 'breach me and I will re-offend and you won't get your PRP' kind of thing. More unsophisticated thinking. The offenders are going to run rings around all of this.
******
So let me get this straight, in my area there's no vacancies for NPS PSOs and so does this mean prison PSOs are going to have to go to a CRC (no space in ours either due to a recent big recruitment drive) or basically be made redundant? That's shocking - I don't think they should've recruited in the CRCs until the NPS staffing picture was clear because now even the CRCs aren't available :(
******
So, guess what. Who cares anymore? I'm knackered, on long term sick & highly unlikely to return. NAPOs claimed brinksmanship hasn't helped at all. I haven't the energy or stamina for this people-chess. PSO grade roles have long been abused by Trust managers to facilitate where we are now. The de-professionalisation is parallel to teaching, to social work, to policing & prison service roles.
I just watched Nick Clegg (metaphorically) sucking Brand's cock (BBC3). Can someone PLEASE get Brand on board? He's a liability, he's "random" and he's a loose cannon BUT he's effective. I need to go back to the 1970's for a rest.
******
In the last five days, my admin told me she is retiring, another admin has resigned and a PO colleague has gone on long term sick. We're a very small team, we're being decimated. Everyone is looking for new jobs.
******
Sounds like my office, I've never seen so many people leave - I think we have a leaving presentation every week! Why does the phrase 'rats off a sinking ship' come to mind?! Now, if only I could find the exit door!
******
I don't get this too many PSO's in NPS, I thought the shafting was done on how many high risk cases you managed so how did "too many PSO's" get into the NPS? They never managed high risk cases, again it makes a mockery of all the PO's shafted into CRC's. The whole thing stinks like a skunks arse.
******
The HMIP report is boring and part of the problem of modern day probation. The report traces events from court to termination on what has become an assembly or production line, with tasks that have to be slotted together and various interfaces scaled while maintaining clear channels of communication. And if this was not already problematic enough in an integrated service sharing a corporate identity, the fragmenting influence of TR will add further degrees of difficulty and complexity.
HMIP atomises and de-skills the probation task and is no different really to how the workings of an assembly line would be analysed. It's all about capturing knowledge and passing it along the line to the next operative in a bureaucratic and cybernetic chain. Once upon a time, probation staff knew their clients, would naturally liaise with the court staff or whoever. They identified with their caseloads, sought to be conscientious and deal with crisis and risks as they arose. HMIP gives us Lego probation.
******
Never mind the Probation Service, what about the Prison Service? I work as a PO in the Court Team and see first-hand how the Courts can be persuaded (with good reports mind) to go along with community sentences. Once the ORA is in place I'm going to have a hard time convincing them to support a proposal for said sentence if they know that the offender will be getting Probation once released.
Over a very rare (as in infrequent rather than uncooked) lunch break today there was not a Officer there who felt that the Bench would have any confidence in reports recommending community over custody sentence or indeed see any need for them. The impact this is going to have on the Prison is going to be massive and most likely one of those laws of unintended consequences. Whilst we may have it hard in Probation, I don't think it's going to be half as hard as what it will be in the prisons.
******
Makes little difference to me. I no longer have any time to help anyone and unless you come in covered in blood, knife in one hand and the severed head of your victim in the other, I'm going to find it difficult not to be thinking of Delius/PSR's/Paroms or other associated paperwork when I'm discussing things with you.
******
'most likely one of those laws of unintended consequences' or perhaps not. It's seemed from the start that MoJ want prison numbers to go up. I just haven't yet figured out why.
******
Super prisons and privatisation. There, sorted. My work here is done :)
******
Great point. I'm also a court PO and couldn't agree more. One of the laws of economics - supply creates its own demand. Just look at what's happened with curfews, SSOs, UPW etc and what happened with IPPs.
*******
I am a court PO too and also agree. This is massive and wholly unanticipated by NOMS so no planning in the system for this. Remember when we used to talk about TRain crash re TR? Well this is the biggest multiple pile up ever about to happen....
******
Yes this is exactly right - the courts will no longer have to do a careful balancing act for cases which meet the custody threshold: why give a shoplifted 12 months supervision plus DRR, when you can send him inside for 8 weeks under the misguided belief that "that'll sort out his drug problem" and he'll get the 12 months supervision when he comes out.
The prison estate will be 90,000 and rising before the end of 2015, easily. What was their prediction for IPPs before 2005? Low hundreds? This will dwarf that scandal. And the only reason this hasn't been anticipated by NOMS is that they haven't listened to front line practitioners - I've been making this point to my MP for well over 18 months.
*******
I know we have some Magistrates who read this blog. Maybe if they would like to leave an anonymous comment reflecting their views?
I'm reflecting on the staff numbers in my office and don't believe for one moment that we have enough staff to cope with the additional work that the U12months will bring. Pre-TR I worked in the Court team for some years, in various Courts, and saw just how many people on a daily basis were given U12month sentences. At times it outweighed those given community sentences. I know there will be a commencement date and it's unlikely that the ORA will be applied retrospectively, but even a quick back of a fag packet calculation suggests that over the next twelve months caseloads in CRC's are going to at least DOUBLE!!!
******
Of course NOMS officials know that there is a very high probability that the introduction of post-release supervision will increase the prison population. It is the same reason Custody Plus was binned. The question is whether their political masters have either taken notice of any warnings or allowed officials to plan for the consequences...
******
We are in utter crisis people. The word on the ground is that there are plenty of changes coming our way. A tsunami of bullshit crap.
******
Yep, ratings pitting staff against each other, under 12 months, no information and supposed to be starting Feb, increased reliance on volunteers who don't get paid for working with difficult cases, more tagging and booze tags. More money for managers and staff will continued to get shit on. Lovely.
******
We recruited 15 volunteers during last 6 months in my CRC and all but 3 have left, most found work in APs as sessionals, joined NPs as TPOs or found work elsewhere. A lot of time, effort resources, staff goodwill has been directed towards volunteers but we cannot retain them. Given a choice between paid sessional work with NPS, paid employment, volunteering ends without much notice, and who can blame them? No way to run any kind of business.
******
I sat with a client and his partner for over 2 hours listening to them yesterday. To hear the client articulate that "light bulb" moment and then go on to talk about it was part of what we do. Against the dire situation we all find ourselves in, little old me came away from work yesterday with a glimmer of enthusiasm and hope - actually doing the job I was trained to do. I say to myself "am I a PO or a feeder of information to the centre that eventually will use it against us all?" Client or Machine????
******
My experience of St Giles mentors has been very poor indeed. One poor lad was indeed met at the gates by an enthusiastic mentor who took him to accommodation that could best be described as unfit for human habitation. When he had the gall to protest, the mentor told him that everyone he had taken there had said the same thing, ie three people in as many weeks and that he had to take it and pay up or he'd be in trouble.
Another time a mentor told one of my clients how best to defraud the benefit system, something he had a previous conviction for himself. There simply are not enough trained and vetted mentors available and as Andrew rightly says the practicalities have not even begun to be considered. It would have been far better to ask a public probation service to do this work as the private and voluntary sectors are not geared up to provide these kinds of services safely.
*******
I have a habitual DV perpetrator who regularly receives short sentences, mainly for D&D/BoTP outside his ex-partner or her parents home. This is due to him refusing to work with Probation. If anyone planned to collect him from the Prison gate and advise him of his new obligations, then I would have SERIOUS concerns for their safety! I completely agree, someone is going to be badly hurt.
*******
I really fear for the safety of these mentors with some of our service users and hope a risk assessment is done eg double manning when driving them from the prison gate etc. All of this of course takes time and asking for the information from the appropriate agency, so much easier prior to TR dontcha think???
*******
I hope the mentors are insured to work with the released prisoners, not to mention car insurance. I thought CRC weren't to work with tier 4 sex offenders? Sex offender, tier 4, previously a MAPPA case and with PPU now supervised by newly qualified PO. I have previously seen the offender in prison when we ran TTG. He was banned from entering the Probation office. Worrying.
the reason NPS is over-staff with PSOs is because they should not be there. NPS is high risk cases - PSOs aren't trained or paid to deal with the like. Despite this they are being given small caseloads but again they should not be managing them, as soon as a case is classed as 'high' a pso should not go near them but if they don't it means they've nothing to do and so are virtually making themselves redundant.
ReplyDeletewhat is happening to prison PSOs - again NPS so if they come out of the prison there is nowhere for them to go to except the dole queue.
NPS is not just high risk, like Grayling claims, but all MAPPA nominals, regardless of risk. There are large numbers of MAPPA cases which are low or medium risk, but have been in prison for 12+ months for a violent offence or are on the sex offenders register.
DeleteMy CRC caseload contains individuals that are much dodgier than many of those I used to work with before the split, but because they're not living with a partner (i.e. their next victim), they count as medium risk. For the moment.
My prediction is POs cut from CRCs and a proportion of PSOs cut from NPS.
DeleteGrayling doesn't know the difference between PO's and PSO's and it may be that they will simply be called Offender Managers. Those warning of a Tsunami of bullshit coming our way are right. In London Staff in the London CRC MTCnovo recieved a letter stating 'between now and February , the MTCnovo team will be working hand in hand with the CRC senior team to ensure a seamless transition' It's the same old 'business as usual' bullshit that has been used to hoodwink staff from the outset. Don't fall for it.
DeleteI've heard those in the CRC will be called 'Responsible Officers'.
DeleteAs in [held] responsible when your client decides to offend.
'Responsible Officer' has been around since at least the Criminal Justice Act 2003.
DeleteYes but as a legal term. I think some of the bidders are intending to use it as a job title.
DeleteI heard they will be called 'responsible officer' too. New name, new grade new(lower) pay!
DeleteIn response to anon at 9.46, I am a PSO based in a prison, I may not have a degree but to say that that I not trained is quite frankly an insult. I have 10 years experience, have done every training course going and hold a caseload of everything from remand prisoners to lifers. I have the same caseload as PO's and Prison Officer Band 4's but will be removed in the near future as I won't be good enough apparently. To add insult to injury, we have 'colleagues' gloating that we will be joining the dole queue. I know everyone is now looking after their own interests but TR really has made brought out a very unpleasant side to some people. Being a PO does not automatically make you good at your job. We should make sure we support each other, the work is still the same and the clients are still the same. Surely there should be roles for PSO's and PO's.
DeletePSOs in prisons were automatically assigned to NPS and must have an employment tribunal case somewhere along the way - I understand when the prison changes come in PSOs will be offered training to work as prison officers (who would want to do that any time in the near future) or offered redundancy.
DeleteHere's my point: NOMS knew about these planned changes when they automatically assigned prison PSOs to NPS. Prison PSOs should be offered the enhanced redundancy available at the moment.
How can we help support prison PSO colleagues with this? It is the most unfair thing to happen to employees in the whole TR thing.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11306135/Chris-Grayling-promises-to-help-veterans-turn-away-from-crime.html
ReplyDeleteA classic bit of news management by Grayling:-
DeleteChris Grayling promises to help veterans turn away from crime
A review commissioned by Chris Grayling, the Justice Secretary, found that former soldiers are unlikely to end up in prison but those who do to turn to crime deserve more support from the state
Veterans who end up in prison will be given specialist support to help them turn their lives around in recognition of the pressures they have experienced in the Armed Forces.
A review commissioned by Chris Grayling, the Justice Secretary, found that former soldiers are unlikely to end up in prison but those who do to turn to crime deserve more support from the state.
From January 2015, every prisoner coming into custody will be asked if they have been a member of the Armed Forces, and prisons will be given new guidance about helping them during their sentence.
Servicemen and women leaving prison will be assessed to see if they have mental health problems, including depression, which need to be addressed, while their wives and families will also be offered support, under the plan.
Mr Grayling said: “Most ex-service personnel have successful civilian lives and do not enter the criminal justice system - but I am determined to help the minority who have committed an offence turn their lives around.
I am just focusing on the news management bit - advance planned to get a release on Sunday when practitioners need a day of rest but the media snatch at anything likely to attract an audience and keep the advertisement fees coming in.
DeleteNapo could only cope with this volume of nonsense with a fully geared up team of PR volunteers ready to 'hit' the media with similar stuff and respond promptly. It is best if it is current practitioners who can give appropriate examples from their own work and that of close colleagues.
Come on Napo organise - a new structure is needed with more engaged and either better relationships with the other criminal justice and TUC GFTU unions or don't waste energy on them and get focused and go it alone for the good of the clients and the practitioners.
Is Grayling now lacking confidence that the CRCs will be able to provide adequate support that he has to make specific directions for ex-service personnel? It's almost like he's making it up as he goes along, spouting any old rubbish that pops into his blinkered, ideologue mind.
DeleteI have tried to promote wider consideration of the issue about how best to respond to the Grayling PR machine here: -
Deletehttp://tinyurl.com/kbm5dr4
Andrew, at best we can hope for a sympathetic hearing only in the Guardian, Independent and the Mirror - and even then only with specific journalists like Mark Leftly (with a - very - honourable mention to Ian Dunt at politics.co.uk). And those papers (possibly excepting the Mirror) are inclined to give the Lord Chancellor the right of reply in the name of balance - I recall a particularly odious article about TR in the Guardian.
DeleteHe, on the other hand, can put out a press release in full knowledge that it will be more or less recycled by the Telegraph and the Mail, and can get a favourable account in the Express (when it's hit its quota of Diana stories for the week) and the other tabloids. All of which gives him a much greater reach, circulation-wise.
On the telly we can win all the arguments we like on Newsnight and Channel Four News, where they have the space to air more than a single soundbite; hardly anyone watches them compared to BBC or ITV where they can't do much more than a couple of soundbites - and have a much stronger duty to be 'impartial' (read: uncritical of power) than the press.
This is one area where I have some sympathy for the Napo hierarchy - we're one voice shouting against many. The PR job now should be a relentless focus on driving through the message that this will be Grayling's responsibility when it fails.
Hmmm... "relentless focus"? Maybe I've got a career ahead of me as an MoJ spin doctor...
Maybe but think in terms of how Churchill spun the great escape of Dunkirk in May/June 1940 to a sign of the possibility of victory - admittedly Churchill controlled the propaganda.
DeleteNapo and probation practitioners can have impact with the so called alternative on-line media (that is what with a few parliamentary mentions bought the historical paedophilia of highly placed people, now into sharp focus). It will not happen by accident or against a background of defeatism suggested by Ex-Napo member on 21 December 2014 at 12:44.
However, I think he or she has a good campaigning idea with the suggestion of a "relentless focus" that "this will be Grayling's responsibility when it fails." However I think there also needs to be a relentless focus on what has been lost by splitting probation and might be gained for the future by reunification.
For the record, Churchill never spun on Dunkirk. Churchill described the Dunkirk evacuation as "a colossal military disaster", saying that "the whole root and core and brain of the British Army" had been stranded at Dunkirk and seemed about to perish or be captured, he described their rescue as a "miracle of deliverance".
DeleteI admire your sense of optimism, Andrew - but if we couldn't get a fair hearing of the logical argument (as opposed to "£46" and "stubborn re-offending rates" repeated ad nauseam, which is all we get from the MoJ) before share sale, how the hell are we going to do that now that any casual observer will simply see a done deal for the CRCs?
DeleteAlthough your Churchill analogy is plain silly, you are right about focussing on the NPS/CRC split - given how often poor communication between agencies is sighted as a factor in SFOs, serious case reviews and so on, it's inevitable that this will crop up time and again in the next few years. Well done, Grayling.
maybe if service personnel were discharged with a mentor provided by the military(similar to ttg) they would not end up in the CJS in the first place.
ReplyDeleteJust a thought. One day the government may have joined up thinking - doubt it tho
What appears to be missing so far is an alternative model to TR. Is anybody seriously suggesting that Probation Service, in its historical form was in any way other than inefficient, bureaucratic and inept at fashioning its own unique destiny without relying on the likes of Harry Fletcher, every time there was a crisis. Get real, it was a minnow of an organisation led by increasingly large band of flaccid middle and senior technocratic management with little understanding of the wider macro picture. Most , thankfully are now retired after taking the a kings ransom but they left a legacy that oversaw such substantial changes to its core values and operational practices that it made it almost invisible to the general public how the service really impacted on reducing offending. What Grayling et al has done has introduced scientific management model of business that arguably will see CRCs and NPS become more visibly lean and accountable. Whats the alternative then folks, more of the same?. Perhaps we should turn an blind eye to that has gone before by seeing it from an unusually bland perspective.The danger comes those managers, left behind who have a zeal to embrace all things scientific. And we know where that will lead. Wake up, everybody ! .Things will never be the same
ReplyDeleteAlthough people talked of The Probation Service - before it was far from one organisation but many dozens under a sort of localised democratic control - except in Inner London - the democratic control was never perfect anywhere because at heart it was Justices of the Peace who were and are appointed in rather convoluted ways. As far as probation was concerned those JPs were topped up by representatives from elected local authorities plus other specialists.
DeleteThey each were only responsible for their own area with the Home Secretary - advised by an Inspector taking an over view and setting regulations under Parliamentary Authority such as The Probation Rules.
What was swept away, was the diversity of folk with overall responsibility for how all those probation services operated, now it just comes down to one person under parliamentary control - so what we have is a failure of governance which most of us practitioners paid too little heed to because we were focusing on practice and management issues with the constant factor of there being more that needed doing than the resources allowed.
An alternative model to TR needs to include getting rid of NOMS.
DeleteReduce the prison estate and put more funding into community sentences.
Let probation get on with the real job instead of meaningless and time consuming targets.
Allow public sector probation to commission third sector and voluntary organisations to do the work they do best.
It's not rocket science.
I agree about NOMS being the problem. They stifled any ability for Trusts to be innovative and efficient. NOMS will be the thorn in the CRCs side as well. I have looked at the contract specifications, and there is a lot which is still to be governed by the Authority's whims. NOMS will still believe they can pull the levers - and if they are right the CRC providers might as well give up now. I anticipate a power struggle between NOMS and the providers. The first battleground will be OASys, or at least anything that the new providers want to replace OASys.with.
Delete[quote]Once the ORA is in place I'm going to have a hard time convincing them to support a proposal for said sentence if they know that the offender will be getting Probation once released.
ReplyDeleteOver a very rare (as in infrequent rather than uncooked) lunch break today there was not a Officer there who felt that the Bench would have any confidence in reports recommending community over custody sentence or indeed see any need for them. [/quote]
You may well be correct, particularly if it is combined with a loss in confidence in breach procedures; as things stand, I think many magistrates will feel there is little or no incentive for CRCs to breach offenders, and possibly quite the opposite.
There is now an almost complete divorce between local benches and the probation teams, because the commercial nature of the system rules out contact. Are breach rates and all the other stats that used to be discussed now going to be commercially sensitive and therefore secret. Will NPS really be able to monitor CRC breach rates, let alone communicate it to the local bench.
There will be an incentive for CRCs to breach troublesome community order cases quickly, to get them off the books and onto curfew-only sentences. There might will be little value (at a corporate level at least) to recommend custody, since they'll just come back again in a few weeks - although I'm hearing that the requirements on managing the ORA cases will be very minimal: see them on release, point them towards a couple of other agencies, and wave goodbye.
DeleteI'm not sure that the 'point them towards a couple of other agencies' is necessary and, unless the CRC's are taking backhanders, will only be deemed a waste of precious time, time that could have been spent completing Delius to make sure targets are hit.
DeleteThe other two are pretty much guaranteed though, the first being a cash linked target. I just hope that their mentor at the Prison gates brings them in on time.
I'll write Spurrs' phone number on their Licence and ask them to call him. Just out of kindness of course.
Who has time to breach people? I've got clients on their 4th Risk of Breach letter and whilst I'm prioritising breaching them my time is taken up breaching those on their 6th Risk of Breach letter.
DeleteTo suggest that the Courts now have ANY confidence in Probation being able to do what they propose in PSR's is laughable at best.
I have an idea that will help with the management of those facing a caseload of 100+. Get them all to report on the same day, tick their name off your list without seeing them or checking if there are any problems then shoo them back out of the door. This will leave you free to concentrate on feeding Delius and making money for our overlords.
ReplyDeleteIf only we had some sort of centre that we could get them to come to at the....oh! Oh dear! It appears that somebody has already thought of this.
Back to the drawing board I suppose.
From now on folks it's all in the numbers for CRCs...
ReplyDeleteLet's take the case of someone we will call Jim on a 12 month Community Order:
Scenario 1. Get Jim to a mass reporting centre post sentence and after minimal reporting take the order back to court at 6 month stage and revoke for good progress. That way we get paid under our contract for a completion and lessen the risk ( to the business of course) of him reoffending during the term of the order 'cos it finished early.
Scenario 2. Jim doesn't play ball so we won't get paid for a completion so prompt breach action must be taken ( we've lost the money after all) so get him resentenced to under 12 month custody and we start the money ball rolling again as this is a new "event". The two bites of the cherry approach to offender management.
Scenario 3: Jim has a PSR which suggests a community penalty but the author has no way of convincing the Court that this is better than a prison sentence THEN a community penalty. Jim goes to prison, comes out on a 12 month Licence/SSP and is then recalled several times before being breached and given a further period of custody. Jim gets no help at all, continues to use drugs/alcohol, is homeless and inevitably offends and the cycle starts again.
DeleteSodexo 1 Society 0.
I think that this is a equally feasible reality.
Poor 'Jim' has some jail time ahead of him ;)
Scenario 1 ignores the fact that the PbR payment is based on a one year reconviction measure, so getting Jim off the order early serves no purpose. In fact, it is likely to be counterproductive as it increases the risk of reoffending. The contract doesn't pay for individual completions, it penalises if the completion rate falls below a contractually specified percentage.
DeleteScenario 2 - if Jim doesn't play ball, then we get penalised if we don't breach, because the contract requires prompt breach in specified circumstances. There is no direct financial advantage from having Jim re sentenced to custody because the contractor is not paid per actual offender but according to forecast annual volumes.
Scenario 3 gives Sidexo no particular financial advantage. They lose payments because Jim reoffends. They get no extra money if Jim is given a custodial sentence, even if he is in a Sodexo prison (because Sodexo are paid per prisoner place, not per prisoner).
Scenario 4 escalate the risk and pass onto NPS. NPS takes the case - CRC gets paid out as a completion despite doing no work with the offender.
Deleteme thinks Anon 16:51 knows quite a lot - you've been smoked out my friend, but thanks for the info....
ReplyDeleteYes, I know quite a lot, but only by reading what is in the public domain (like most of the contract documentation). It's always better to know what is happening rather than just be guided by conspiracy theory and assumption, is it not?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/11680395.Latest_company_to_take_over_probation_announced/
ReplyDeleteSorry for HF today - his sterling work on ex-forces stolen by Grayling, with a little help from Gorgeous Rory. Sadly Grayling has turned it into a performing seal.
ReplyDeleteThere's clearly nothing or no-one that Grayling & co won't sell to the highest bidder. Who the fuck does he 'own' at the BBC? I can sense a letter coming on, and it won't be to Santa Claws.
DeleteWith regards to Grayling and the BBC. Grayling and colleagues were suggesting changing non-payment of the licence fee a civil rather than a criminal act. They know that if that happens the BBC revenues will go down as fewer people decide to pay. That is the stick they are beating the BBC with.
DeleteI'm deeply saddened by the current situation BUT too many are frightened of losing their Jobs, their incomes, their security. They'll dance nekid in the street just to keep their jobs. Too many are in so much credit debt they're tied to the money, NOT the principle or the purpose. Thatcher's dream come true - bill them, and they will come.
ReplyDeleteInteresting reading re. DWP and JCP. Many of these organisations will be running CRCs
ReplyDeletehttp://johnnyvoid.wordpress.com/
I have been reading the Payment mechanisms - sorry, I am that sad. Interesting that programme starts receives a payment, but Programme completion don't. So an incentive to get people on a programme, but not for them to finish the programme.
ReplyDeleteJim, give yourself & the special one some time out - close the blog for a few days. Your efforts (joint & several) have been impressive, significant & groundbreaking. They have undoubtedly influenced events.
ReplyDeleteUnless Grayling & fiends pull another crass stint, maybe give yourselves a few days' grace and a fine malt.
Hear, hear.
DeleteLike you I suspect, I feel things are winding down as we approach Christmas and people try and absorb and make sense of what has happened over the last 12 months.
DeleteAs you thoughtfully suggest, the controller here at blog HQ is winding down too and pretty much running out of anything useful to say, so things may coast for awhile as the malt comes out of the cupboard.
Lets see what happens and if there's some more guest blogs on offer to enlighten, inform or just entertain us. Thanks for your concern and support which is very much appreciated.
Cheers,
Jim
Thought for the day....
ReplyDeleteCan you imagine how great this blog will be ( remain) when CRCs are sold off? We will be able to share all the wheezes and japes they'll get up to and document it. The thought of it is keeping me going..... Fantastic!
Funny you should say that - I've been telling people I know that, all being well, there might be at least another year of blogging left in which to catalogue the mess as you suggest - so stay tuned for awhile longer and thanks!
DeleteI have a funny feeling that the next 12 months are going to be very eventfull. Hold on tight everyone cos we're in for a bumpy ride !!
ReplyDelete