Saturday 27 February 2016

The New Probation World

As the mostly clueless new CRC owners continue the cull of experienced probation staff across the land, including Interserve:- 
In Merseyside, only grade safe are case managers and I think, for now, senior case managers (pso/po respectively). All admin including admin managers & Unpaid Work staff are having to do a 2000 word application for their post & the closing date is this Monday 29th Feb. Interserve have promised that those unsuccessful will get re-deployed. Little notice for this - 2 weeks at most.
they've come up with a cunning wheeze - pay a university to endorse their shiny new innovative approach to rehabilitation:-


New partnership to tackle offender rehabilitation 
25 February 2016

Interserve and Manchester Metropolitan University are proud to announce a new partnership which will develop innovative approaches to offender rehabilitation.

The Policy Evaluation and Research Unit (PERU) at Manchester Metropolitan will work with Interserve over the next three years to:

  • Evaluate a range of its offender rehabilitation interventions; 
  • Review existing research evidence from the UK and around the world to identify promising new approaches; 
  • Support the development of innovative approaches to offender rehabilitation by helping Interserve to translate research and theory into practice; and 
  • Work with staff across Interserve to ensure that evidence is translated into practice. In addition, Interserve will be jointly funding a PhD titled ‘An investigation into the theory and practice of personalised approaches to offender rehabilitation’.
Since 2015 the Interserve-led partnership, Purple Futures has been responsible for managing probation and rehabilitation services in five Community Rehabilitation Companies including Cheshire & Greater Manchester. Purple Futures is one of the leading providers of probation services in England and Wales and is responsible for managing 35,000 offenders a year.

Both PERU and Interserve are committed to developing innovative approaches to offender rehabilitation that are underpinned by robust research evidence. Staff from PERU supported Interserve when it was developing its distinct approach to offender rehabilitation that draws on desistance theory and the concept of personalisation of public services.

Professor Chris Fox, Director of PERU said:

I have been working with Interserve for a number of years as they have developed their justice offer. I share a desire to develop more personalised approaches to working with offenders. I have been impressed by their commitment to evidence-informed practice and innovative service design. I am delighted that PERU and Interserve will be working in partnership.

Yvonne Thomas, Director for Justice at Interserve said:

Interserve’s long-standing relationship with Manchester Metropolitan University continues as we work together on evaluating what works and will ensure that we stay at the forefront of new approaches to rehabilitation. We are committed to reducing re-offending and understanding what works is critical to supporting offenders to change their lives.


--oo00oo--

Meanwhile a brave colleague talks to the press about what life is like at a Working Links CRC in the West Country. This from the Bristol Post:-

Fears severe cuts could see hundreds of probation officers 'replaced with call centre'

The numbers of probation officers working in and around Bristol could be slashed by more than 40 per cent, with many offenders being asked to "dial in" to a call centre rather than reporting for face-to-face meetings with probation officers in the future. This is the alarming vision painted by a serving probation officer who has spoken to the Post about his fears for the future landscape of offender rehabilitation in the region.

Bristol, Gloucestershire, Somerset and Wiltshire Community Rehabilitation Company (BGSW CRC) was formed in 2014 as part of the Government's reform of probation services. The three probation trusts previously at work in the area were brought together to be run by private firm Working Links. It is responsible for the management of offenders who have been sentenced to serve their order in the community – covering a range of restorative justice, "community payback", statutory supervision orders and resettlement work.

The probation officer who spoke anonymously to the Post said morale among staff is "shockingly low" as the company is currently consulting on 42 per cent cuts in staffing numbers. This would mean the loss of around 250 members of staff in and around Bristol – both probation officers and administrators.

"It's absolutely shocking," he said. "I have worked in probation for a number of years, and I have never known morale so low. It's hard to imagine how they would continue to provide the current service with the head count cut by 42 per cent. The case loads each probation officer is currently juggling is already massive – and it can now be spread out across quite a wide geographical area. The service is already severely stretched and that has to be having an effect on the rehabilitation work we are trying to do. The proposed cuts which will slash the work force by almost half is unimaginable."

But the probation officer said the most shocking element of the consultation so far is the suggestion that some offenders will simply be trusted to "dial-in" rather than having regular meetings with probation officers. "Any probation officer will tell you this is an extraordinary idea – it would be turning probation work into little more than a call centre. Quite how they think it is going to work successfully is beyond me."

Mike Cracknell, Unison South West regional organiser, said:
"A lot of staff are shell-shocked. These people are clearly very committed to their public service and to the betterment of society that rehabilitation provides. But unsurprisingly morale is now very low. So much so, I wouldn't be surprised if any offer for voluntary severance is over-subscribed. This is coming about now because the funding streams from the Government to these companies has been greatly reduced. The reality is that Working Links is a private company with shareholders to satisfy, and it is now much more difficult for them to make a profit out of providing the service than when they took over in 2014. Indeed, you have to wonder whether it was ever an appropriate part of the public sector to be privatised. David Cameron talked just a couple of weeks ago about the importance of rehabilitation and not relying on prison sentences – you have to think that what is actually happening in probation goes right against the spirit of that message."

A survey conducted by Unison ahead of the Government's Transforming Rehabilitation programme, which brought the service under the management of the private company in 2014, found that 99 per cent of probation service workers were against the reforms. At the end of September 2015, the total national caseload for probation officers stood at 234,229, up 7 per cent on the number one year earlier. The national average caseload being juggled by each officer is around 25 offenders at any one time (according to HM Inspectorate of Probation's Workload Audit Report in 2014) – though some officers find themselves dealing with considerably more than the average figure.

In his online blog, Ian Lawrence, general secretary of NAPO, another trades union for probation service workers, described a recent meeting with Working Links over the issue as "the most shambolic meeting I have ever attended with a private sector contractor anywhere in my career".

He said: 

"At times it resembled a French farce with so many people coming in and out of doors desperately trying to fill the huge information gap that the employer had caused. It's reasonable for me to relay the question that members within their three CRCs are positing through their local representatives which is: why are Working Links treating us like idiots? 

Whilst we ought to be spending valuable time coming to terms with the rationale and detail behind the operating model on which they say they have predicated their staggering 42 per cent intended job cuts, we have one important problem, in that they seem to still be working out what that actually is. Add to this the heady mix of mass confusion that is being caused by ad-hoc and ill-timed releases of information to certain managers who themselves are then placed in an invidious position and you have a classic example of how not to undertake consultation and negotiation. It's not too late for Working Links to bring some much needed order here, and as always we stand ready to engage."
A spokesman for Working Links said: 

"We are committed to reducing reoffending and protecting the communities in which we work. Qualified probation officers will continue to play a vital role in our transformation and our focus is currently on aligning support services across the organisation to enable them to spend more time with our service users. Since taking on the CRCs, we have been open and transparent about the need to provide value for money services. We are consulting with the unions and our people on our proposed new way of working across the organisation. This includes consulting on proposals on changes to our estates strategy, including areas where we could co-locate services, creating a more cost effective information technology solution, and improving our processes to deliver efficiencies."
In response to the Post's questions about whether offenders could find themselves dialling in to their probation officers in the future, the spokesman said: 

"As part of our proposed changes we are considering a variety of ways to keep in touch with service users, depending on their circumstances. This is a phased and complex change programme that we anticipate will be finalised in early 2017. Wherever possible, we will aim to avoid compulsory redundancies. Our front line delivery will not be negatively impacted by our proposed changes. At all times we will ensure we deliver a safe service."
--oo00oo--

I notice that Gill Hirst FPInst at the Probation Institute has been pondering the whole issue of naming..... 

So… we were thinking in the Fellows’ meeting about how best to capture that you don’t need to be providing ‘probation services’ for the Institute to have something to offer you as a member and wondering whether the name might be putting off people who don’t have ‘probation’ in their job title or who aren’t commissioned providers of ‘probation services’. The plan is that anyone with an interest or involvement in the work being done with people on probation would find a form of membership and involvement that was relevant and useful for them so the Institute can meet its goal of, through the membership, better serving the public by improving services to those people, their victims and those potentially at risk from them in the future.

Here’s my idea: let’s call anyone who is responsible overall for the package of help and controls for someone on probation their ‘probation officer’ irrespective of who employs them and what training they have been given. There is no legal definition of the qualification you need to be an ‘officer of probation’ any more but law does outline what they can and must do…and ‘probation officer’ will look more sensible at the end of a letter or email while making sense to the person who wants to know who, out all the people they are seeing, is actually their probation officer and the one ultimately responsible for the decisions being made while they are on probation.

Then, how about we call very expert and experienced probation officers, who might coach or supervise others, ‘senior probation officers’ as long as they still undertake work with people on probation. This will leave a title: ‘probation managers’ for those who manage people and activities but are not practitioners.

Following this, we could call just about everyone else working with people on probation on a paid basis ‘probation workers’ – this could include for example: programme tutors, community payback supervisors, case administrators, resettlement officers, health coaches, peer mentors. Those supporting people on probation for no pay could be called ‘probation volunteers’ – an advantage of these two titles being to remove the apparent distinction between colleagues who have been on probation themselves (‘peers’) and those who have not, more accurately reflecting that ‘ex offenders’ are represented in all job roles, not just the least well paid ones.


--oo00oo--

Finally, an animated discussion has been taking place over on Facebook regarding Through the Gate (TTG) services and fees being charged for services. I find it interesting for a number of reasons, firstly that use of social media is growing, not least since Napo made such a hash of their dedicated members forum, now deleted completely, and the fact that the 'charging' aspect of TR seems to have come as news to quite a few colleagues. TR is, and always has been, about the money.  The debate was kicked off by this:-
"I am a PO working for a CRC. In the midst of the usual chaos yesterday, and when i was considering that things couldn't get much worse, I was saddened to receive an email from a prison CRC PSO explaining that they were willing to work with one of my prisoners to address (what I would suggest are) core resettlement needs ie housing referrals, drugs and alcohol etc. The letter then asked me to sign the consent form confirming that the prisoner required these services, and stated that I would then be sent a bill!!! (It did not include any figures) Should prisons not be providing these core services to ALL prisoners, irrespective of which area they come from?? Needless to say, I have sought further clarification from the PSO regarding this, and I am also awaiting an answer from management regarding which prisoners will be eligible to spend the money on...?? Having worked for some 12 years in a probation service where Officers have always gone 'above and beyond' to support clients in any way we can, I am deeply saddened to have been hit with the reality of a privatised service, concerned not with the welfare of our service users, or the impact of reoffending on the public, but for whether or not someone, somewhere, will be paying up." 
I think the prison was referring to a rate card and Through The Gate process.

I am intrigued, when we are going to be judged on our 'performance', who exactly will be judged to have made the difference? Was it one persons assessment and referral, the provider, the Supervising Officers support..... or the client, who sometimes is just ready to get on with it. Some clients for example have always found work and we have to record 'work found' and 'work sustained', when that has never been an issue. Not necessarily my credit to take. Are we going to be fighting to take the credit. as, well as arguing over who pays up for the service.

ETE services in our area seek out licence releases, attend the office on day of release to ask the prisoner if they have work lined up... They then claim it as a 'successful completion' even if that is the extent of their involvement... I have had one case tell me they have received more than a dozen letters demanding evidence of secured employment to record on ETE systems, despite having had a job lined up with his dad the Monday after his Friday release!.

So we will be fighting to prove things, when actually not everything is so easily provable as this, over and above actually doing work with people. At least have you GOT a job, might be a yes or no answer!!

Prisons are no longer funded to provide resettlement services. These are now provided by the CRC Through the Gate service 12-16 weeks prior to release date and my understanding is that these are already 'paid for' in the contract. I believe CRCs are contractually obliged to provide signposting services for employment, accommodation, substance misuse, domestic violence and sex working to prisoners. Offender Managers need to consent to the service and are advised that anything over and above this is 'charged' to the area requesting any additional services. I would be grateful if one of my TTG CRC colleagues could confirm this?

I am a PSO in West Yorkshire. I was part of through the gate (ha ha ha) team. The resettlement 'service' is now run by different PRIVATE organisations. They require payment for anything that is outside of their CRC district. This includes NPS clients in the same district. If you say no and do not send the form back no work would be completed prior to release. You'd have to organise all yourself and ask charities to do the work.

Is bloody awful at the minute. I left my prison job and went into programmes. Best move back to trying to do what I believe in and not bother about targets and profiting from crime!

From what I understand on TTG - NPS would always have pay if this service is used. CRC would only pay if they use the service of another area... so if your area doesn't have a prison or your case is in custody in another county/CRC - then you'll have to pay!!! Good solid business sense eh!

Wondering why the OP referred to everyone (including themselves) by grade rather than referring to a colleague working in the prison it distracted me from the TTG issue (which is arranged differently, but is a CRC contractual responsibility, from CPA to CPA - so really difficult to make any informed response without knowing the CPA).

Sorry I understood the post more than the comment above. Does it matter which CPA? The involvement of case holders in direct budget issues is wrong. Other factors beyond risk and need will influence decision making. We are losing integrity where we do what is right for offenders and victims because it's right.

No programmes allowed due to cost. No resettlement support due to cost. And Pss... It's hard to believe we'll help anyone anymore.

Yes it does matter what CPA, as you can see from post below, the resettlement team is providing resettlement services in her CPA, and as I know which CPA that is, I know programmes are also being provided. My comment was in respect of the fact that the issues will differ from CPA to CPA and someone's experience in Thames Valley will be different from someone's experience in Bristol or Manchester - so there isn't one response that fits all. Hope that helps with your understanding.

Coming from someone working with these resettlement teams in a prison....So far we have been working with everyone and managed to dodge the 'rate card' service for NPS offenders! Higher up managers just seem to be ignoring it at the moment but it will be coming in at some point...which will then also mean that all this time NPS colleagues and offenders will be used to receiving the service, and then could have it taken away from them down the line if payment isn't agreed! Staff are struggling to understand the situation and who's providing what service as it is, it's only going to cause more confusion in the future! I feel quite thankful that I am going on maternity leave in a couple of weeks to be honest as I do worry about what is coming..

I too have worked in a CRC TTG team for a while on secondment from my normal PSO role and in this role we saw everybody within prison whether NPS or CRC and no matter what area they had come from. I worked with women from all over the country "trying" to organise their resettlement with little knowledge of what was on offer in that area.

If one West Yorkshire prison are supplying a resettlement service to people up and down the country I can see why that individual areas CRC or NPS would need to pay for the service given as the CRC where the prison is based can't be just expected to cover the staff costs to provide this TTG service for all CRC's. From my knowledge the resettlement services that used to exist in prison were pretty sparse and a service user being released to a housing assessment appointment was previously being logged as a successful outcome of gaining accommodation?! Whereas the TTG service that the CRC now provide is worlds apart and a really great service! Totally agree, it shouldn't be about money but more about need for this service within prison but I can't say I didn't see this coming. I'm surprised they are only just starting to bill for the service.

The problem is that TTG is only in resettlement prisons and not all prisons are classed as resettlement prisons. As a result services are being brought in to plug gaps, but ultimately these have to be paid for. There simply aren't enough to spaces in resettlement prisons

This new system was put together with the main aim of reducing reoffending, esp for those leaving custodial establishments. To meet the needs of the revolving door short term custody cases! Was that not the propaganda it was all sold on?! It was not to save money! It was not privatisation! It was not selling out to large corporate bodies! It was to meet the offending needs of the under 12mthsers! Whilst enhancing the service to the rest by reducing red tape and paper work and allowing professionalism and autonomy! Because traditional "probation" failed offenders and did not reduce offending! Sadly the figures did not show that. I and clients did not agree with that & highly dedicated and motivated staff who believed in their "calling" didn't think that either! But it's been smashed & cannot be put back together again. The reputation the UK held as being leaders in our field in this area irreparably damaged. But for me what is sadder is the lives that have been damaged or will be damaged by this. Progress!!!!! Ha

Did not realise the TTG had financial implications also! Bloody shocking! Idea of TTG was to assist in alleviating some pressure from field teams so they can meet demands of higher caseloads, sounds like there will be lots of denying the service (awful!) in terms of financial costs and as a result at risk of being a redundant service if not used enough. Can appreciate that these teams are very new and have a huge task to fulfil but when they send you a half completed form and ask you to do the risk assessment and send it off I think is a bit of a god damn cheek, may as well just have done it myself in the first place!

Welcome to the new probation 'service'! We knew we had been sold out and it is just coming to fruition. Trying to make money from offenders is frankly wrong. We, as CRC staff, have a moral judgement call to make but I for one feel trapped by the lack of opportunity elsewhere. No likey.

Yep. It's all about the rate card now. Well.... they call it "rate card".... it's basically a price list. Absolute lunacy.

I've been a probation officer for 25 years and I have to tell you that whilst services years ago were problematic, we still had time to work with offenders. We now spend 75% of our time bashing away on computers with some kind of assessment or plan with little time to work with the client group. On the back of that I find that when the split came almost everything the public probation service owned was given to the privatised CRC. Now we have to pay them for everything we need. To make matters worse, the total budget given from Government has been cut and we are left to fight amongst ourselves to see who can get the biggest slice of the cake. Watch this space to see how much of it will go to shareholders in the near future. Private equates to profit not service.

And here's one for the mix. How about the wonderful introduction of ORA? Hurry up now and do his OASys start custody. He'll be out in a week and you can do his OASys start licence. The week after when his licence finishes you can do your OASys review to end licence and start post sentence supervision. Don't worry though, if he doesn't comply with that you can do another OASys review along with your breach file so you can get him back in court for his inevitable £50 fine with order to continue. We've really sorted this no supervision for under 12 months haven't we? Hey ho though. We can buy some more services from CRC to get them back on board and make them offence free.

Come on, you are missing the point. A charity, volunteer or catering company are going to sort everything out, show us experienced dedicated probation professionals how to rehabilitate offenders. Yeah, right.

50 comments:

  1. My understand in was that TTF services are for everyone both CRC and NPS paid for by MOJ and not related to the rate card? My experience so far is that it's rubbish, not one of my cases has been found accommodation. But they seem to get paid regardless. We really need some clarity in this area of work: what is their contract and what should they be doing, that way we can keep a better eye on it and report any misrepresentation noted.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's accommodation advice and not accommodation brokerage knobhead. Read the guidance!

      Delete
    2. So they get paid for giving advice which is essentially worthless then? Sounds to me as though the taxpayer is getting a bit of a dud deal...

      Delete
  2. I wonder if Gill Hurst would be happy to apply her thinking about what defines a "probation officer" to the health service... anyone responsible for the overall care of a patient irrespective of training is a "doctor", or how about education, legal services, social work? I am a qualified Probation Officer. It is my qualification that allows me to use that term. Social Workers can only call themselves a "social worker" if the are suitably qualified and can demonstrate current competence. There a numerous professions who apply a similar rule. I would like the Probation Institute to protect my professional status, not undermine it and reinforce the message that virtually anyone can step in and do this job with little more than a bit of common sense. We need a proper Professional Registration scheme.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Seems to me that while Gill Hurst amuses herself on a train journey with rebranding games, elsewhere staff are shell-shocked at the latest threats to livelihoods. If the probation institute was a planet it would be in another galaxy.

      Delete
    2. By email;-

      'Naming Conventions' by Gill Hurst reminded me when she was famous in Essex for comparing Probation to Marks and Spencer's open all hours policy.

      No surprise there! This blog on the PI was written by Gill Hirst an ex Director of Essex Probation Trust and more recently made redundant from Essex CRC who was famous for saying and then implementing that Probation is like Marks and Spencer and should be open all hours, ie 7 days a week and when needed till 9.00pm at night!

      No need for Gill to retain her professional credentials given she was paid off as corporate staff under the EVR scheme coupled with her early retirement package and is sitting pretty, whilst the majority of her colleagues were denied the EVR terms and had to go under the Sedexo severance package.

      I agree with 08:29 above who applied Gill Hirst's thinking to the Health Service, the eroding of our professional qualifications and status by these 'hand picked' fellows is dangerous, let's hope this analogy is not applied to the Chief of Defence Staff as the future security of our country really would be at stake!

      Delete
  3. Probation Officer27 February 2016 at 08:55

    Gill Hirst is very confused. This is exactly why I wouldn't join the incorrectly named Probation Institute with its hand picked 'fellows'. Not a word against privatisation, TR and cuts!

    For the record, I'm a qualified Probation Officer and my respective qualification enables me to practice as one. I don't really care what the PI want to call non-qualified probation and rehabilitation workers, but leave my title alone!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "So… we were thinking in the Fellows’ meeting about how best to capture that you don’t need to be providing ‘probation services’ for the Institute to have something to offer you as a member and wondering whether the name might be putting off people who don’t have ‘probation’ in their job title or who aren’t commissioned providers of ‘probation services’"

      Translation: "Shit! We haven't got enough members to keep us afloat, because the people we've helped shaft through TR have seen through us. How can we get the world and his dog to sign up so that we still have a reason to exist?"

      Delete
    2. So in what ways have the PI shafted its members through TR? Writing anonymously does not mean stating things which are distorted and simply untrue. This blog loses its credibility the more it allows such unsubstantiated statements.

      Delete
    3. "This blog loses its credibility the more it allows such unsubstantiated statements."

      The blog has been broadly anonymous since day one and I would venture to suggest that any credibility comes from any statement that is subsequently proved to be right or wrong. Such is the nature of the beast.

      Delete
    4. The PI helped shaft everyone working in the old Probation Trusts by providing a veneer of respectability and authority to Grayling's idiotic scheme and lunatic timetable, and continue to shaft everyone by failing to comment on the absurdities we see day in day out in the CRCs and NPS.

      They are now panicking about their lack of membership and trying to think of ways to broaden things out in order to ensure their own financial survival - especially once all those CRC-funded memberships expire later on this year. What the PI should actually be doing is standing up for good practice (and against bad practice). If it did this, it might become meaningful for the staff it's supposed to represent.

      Delete
    5. I did not read anything that required substantiation, as here someone is expressing an opinion about the relevance of the probation institute. If there is an underlying assumption it must be that the reader will already know that the probation institute has done nothing to defend probation values in the real world: it sits on the fence, it's an ivory tower, it's a dead parrot.

      Delete
  4. when buying shares individuals should research the company they are going to invest in and bear in mind values can go up and down. If you've got shares in a company that runs a CRC then tough it's a chance you took.

    ReplyDelete
  5. It's reasonable for me to relay the question that members within their three CRCs are positing through their local representatives which is: why are Working Links treating us like idiots?

    If the General secretary comment is to be understood in context, It is because Working links believe you are an IDIOT that is why they are managing their business in this way. So if your not an IDIOT WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO ABOUT IT ? It is a big question for intelligence and something that will be ignored by an INDIOT.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think the answer is that WL senior staff are all idiots, and surround themselves with similar levels of idiocy, so assume everyone else is similarly idiotic.

      That's the Working Links Way!

      Delete
  6. Manchester Metroploitan University have hardly covered themselves in glory with the PQF students as it is......it's all smoke and mirrors....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. From Interserve's operational overview document:

      "We operate in the USA, Colombia, Panama, Chile and export into Peru... We continued our expansion in Latin America, by developing and investing in our businesses in Colombia and Panama."

      Sadly no mention of Manchester Exploitation University.

      And there was me thinking the only thing to come out of deepest darkest Peru was Paddington.

      Delete
    2. According to Wikipedia, "Peru's main exports are copper, gold, zinc, textiles, and fish meal". Fans of certain football teams may remember Nolberto Solano with some fondness. The fashion photographer Mario Testino is also Peruvian.

      It's not just all about Paddington and marmalade!

      Delete
  7. It was obvious to all with the possible exception of every greedy CRC company, Chris Grayling and every spineless CEO who failed to utter a word against TR that in the first year the only way that savings could be made in Year one was to cull staff.....tick......now going into Year two they are realising that the promised profits are just projections not worth the paper they were printed on therefore go back to the tried and trusted getting rid of staff with the excuse of restructuring......tick......now the next year will be even more interesting as there will hardly be any staff to cull so what do they do next......well this is when they return to the MOJ to blame them for selling them a pup and ask for more money...but the cupboard is bare so they'll look to join forces with other agencies under the guise of yep you guessed it restructuring to provide 'better services to clients'......sub text meaning we've no idea what to do next....the promised freedom to innovate disappears into the distance as the desparate hunt for profit continues.......I have it good authority that two possibly three CRCs are looking to hand back the keys with each waiting for the other to be the first..it's a game of business brinkmanship with neither wanting to be the first failure.......there's a lot of loose tongues at the MOJ at the moment and rumours of a strategic rethink on the cards as the realisation dawns that making money out of offenders/clients/criminals is a lot harder than they thought,,,,,,,,

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I can confirm this. Our CRC are looking to take the keys should any existing provider hand them bank to the Moj.

      Delete
    2. "I can confirm this. Our CRC are looking to take the keys should any existing provider hand them bank to the MoJ."

      Some mischief perhaps?

      Delete
  8. The analogy of a vulture feeding on carrion springs to mind.

    ReplyDelete
  9. It was confirmed to me recently (both by NPS and relevant CRC colleagues), that in the little corner of the WL Empire where I work, NPS clients are fast tracked to the top of accredited programme waiting lists and ETE referrals lists as they bring 'new' money into the business. So, tough if you are a CRC probationer and need the help/support - just wait in line and we might get round to you.......

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well in my little nook, NPS staff are being told not to refer to programmes and ETE because it's too expensive! Either way, a fantastic example of the creation of a false market that massively distorts service provision. Way to go, Tories!

      Delete
  10. A small detour from a question in parliament yesterday.

    Andrew Slaughter Shadow Minister (Justice): "To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many rape incidents have occurred in each prison establishment in each month since May 2010."
    Hansard source (Citation: HC Deb, 26 February 2016, cW)

    Andrew Selous Assistant Whip (HM Treasury), The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice: "NOMs collects data on all sexual assaults, but does not separate these into type of assault. Our annual Safety in Custody Statistical Bulletin contains information on the overall numbers of sexual assaults"

    In chronological order, here are the numbers of sexual assaults (on staff and prisoners) 2010 (116) to 2014 (228) inclusive. They apply to 219 male prisons and 9 female prisons (from government data):

    116 101 143 131 144 139 148 135 120 129 137 137 113 170 228

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. important correction - the 219 & 9 figures are the numbers of assaults in male & female prisons respectively in 2014. Apologies for my stupidity.

      Delete
    2. Yet another dreadful indicator of the prison crisis and exacerbated by Grayling's tenure....

      Delete
  11. Don't you just love economics? All in the space of a week's our economy is growing, it's healthy! We are the 5 largest economy in the world, we are one of the wealthiest countries in the world......oops, things aren't going as well as we thought, now we're gonna have to cut public expenditure again, in the coming months! The lunatics have signed themselves out of the privately run asylum and are now running the country!

    ReplyDelete
  12. If the Probation Institute needs a few more members it could always make Chris Grayling a Fellow for his unprecedented services to probation!

    ReplyDelete
  13. If your NPS staff brass yourself for a difficult year including consideration of moving into a CRC. Mark my words as I'll return to this comment when the time is right.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nothing we don't already know, but no use jumping from the frying pan to the fire. Why the secret squirrel?, spill the beans now!

      Delete
    2. To what exactly? Have you forgotten about the redundancies? Even if the CRCs do start to recruit, I doubt the terms and conditions will be so appealing as to rule out trying a different career path. If I'm going to take a hit on earnings then I think I'd prefer to go elsewhere which isn't something I ever thought I'd say.

      Delete
    3. Well if mappa is moving from NPS to CRC for WAV purposes which is common knowledge then do the maths. When this happens there be reduced work in NPS in line with the original plan of 85 to 15% split things are going to move towards as opposed to the current 65 to 35% split will lead to one side cutting and one side increasing.

      Delete
    4. Mappa is moving to CRC's?

      Delete
  14. I'm not surprised Manchester University is running a Degree in Interserve. It previously ran a degree in David Beckham! These places will do anything for a bit of income!

    ReplyDelete
  15. I love working for DLNR crc, nothing much seems to have changed compared to the rest of the areas.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ok 20.26. It's a Saturday night for DLNR PR management to be working. Save the bollox for Monday morning

      Delete
    2. your talking nonsense, hard changes are coming with cut of 42% staff, delays in estates/IT, mixed messages, overworked staff.

      Delete
    3. 20.26 are you preparing for a job interview. You must be a PSO

      Delete
    4. And you must be one of those over ego inflated POs!

      Delete
    5. "over ego inflated " etc = QUALIFIED !!

      Delete
    6. ... For a job that no longer exists - yay for you!

      Delete
  16. 21:09 definitely delays in estates/IT,mixed messages and overworking,understand major Admin,PO cuts,no news on PSO's CP etc.Presume just waiting to see what the others can get away with.Seems dire in SWM CRC.

    ReplyDelete
  17. My pals tell me there has been a right fuck up with the IT and NOMS are being sued for hundreds of thousands if not millions by the CRCs. anyone know about this. My source is credible. Jim?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Where does this nonsense come from. I can only think of mischief making. There was a delay in some CRCS IT but no one is suing anyone. Not that I've heard and I keep my ear to the ground. Jim can we have some content regulation on the blog as comments like these and many others I've seen devalue the credibility of the blog. It's like reading the sun newspaper sometimes

      Delete
    2. "Jim can we have some content regulation on the blog as comments like these and many others I've seen devalue the credibility of the blog."

      There is some content regulation - I try and delete moronic crap. As for other speculative comments - it has to pass my 'is it possible?' test.

      Since TR there's been an increasing climate of fear, together with a desire for commercial confidentiality on the part of CRC's. Added to this and possibly in response to the blog, there's been an information clamp-down right across the profession. This only serves the interests of the CRC owners and MoJ who are intent on forcing through change at the expense of staff and ultimately damaging the prospects for clients.

      To put it simply, the only way this can be challenged is by encouraging people to share information. Anonymous statements are made, they could be true or mischief-making, lets see if they get supported or challenged. What the fuck else can we do?

      There is an argument I've seen espoused recently - "we lost the battle, lets just get on with things and make the most of it". I'm sure that's what the apologists for TR want to hear, but to quote Margaret Thatcher, NO, NO, NO! TR is crap and this blog will remain a place for serious discussion about how the damage created by Grayling and others can be repaired. In an information vacuum, rumour and mis-information are very possible, but the answer is simple - then share what you know for the benefit of all!

      Delete
    3. This blog does attract some fools making mischief and some comments can be clownish. But some of the most foolish, clownish and disingenuous comments are to be found in the various missives issued by the NPS and CRCs, whether its their silly acronyms or the deceitful way they rebrand every cheapskate reform as an exciting innovation. We read their stuff and line by line you know they are lying through their teeth. They claim to be inclusive and to value their workforce whilst savagely cutting headcounts. They claim to be morally motivated to help service users to lead better lives, but their core motivator is making money and handsomely rewarding their misanthropic elites who lie so effortlessly and strive to keep the workforce in a state of job insecurity. And if at some point in the future their profits or reputation should slide, they will walk away and flog their contracts just as G4S are now doing with the youth jails.

      Delete
    4. We need facts and evidence rather than regurgitated intellectualism. Analysis and evaluation does not solve any problems. If people have facts, please let us know. Many of us have been hanging on for over 2 years to find out what's really happening. CRC's still making it up as they go along. Really not good enough!

      Delete
  18. Working Links planning to provide IT courses to cases. If they pass, they keep their tablet.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Really? Meanwhile, WL are closing offices, colleagues being forced to work split sites - see clients in a shared building and then go to another where there are insufficient computers available for them all to access the system......Seems the only way you can guarantee access to the IT nowadays is to become a client!

      Delete