CRCs and Domestic Violence

Well, what a surprise. CRCs no longer have the trained staff, inclination or ability to deal adequately with DV cases. All this was predicted, the warnings were ignored and somebody has to carry the can. So far it's just Michael Spurr. Here's the press release from HM Probation Inspectorate:- 

Community Rehabilitation Companies are failing to tackle domestic abuse and keep victims safe

Community Rehabilitation Companies are not doing enough to rehabilitate perpetrators of domestic abuse or keep victims safe, according to a new report out today. HM Inspectorate of Probation found poor practice was widespread in Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRCs), which supervise low and medium-risk offenders across England and Wales.

Inspectors found probation staff did not have the skills, experience or time to supervise perpetrators properly. In more than half (55 per cent) of the cases that inspectors looked at, perpetrators of domestic abuse were not making enough progress on their court orders. In too many cases, perpetrators were drifting through their probation periods, rather than getting the support and challenge they needed to change their behaviour.

The report also raises concerns about the role of probation staff in preventing future incidents. Probation staff tended to underestimate risks and work to protect victims and children was not good enough in seven out of ten cases (71 per cent).

Too often, home visits – which can help staff to assess the potential risk to partners and children – were considered a luxury. Inspectors found that in cases where a home visit should have taken place, fewer than one in five (19 per cent) had been completed.

Chief Inspector Dame Glenys Stacey said some of the safeguarding practices that inspectors had uncovered were of “grave concern”.

Dame Glenys said: “Too often, we were left wondering how safe victims and children were, especially when practitioners failed to act on new information indicating that they could be in danger.”

The Inspectorate was so concerned about seven cases that they asked the relevant CRCs to take immediate action to ensure the safety of victims and children.

Inspectors found some CRCs only expected the most basic assessment of cases, giving staff a limited understanding of the offender and the context of their crime. Written reviews, which are used to monitor offenders’ progress, were completed in less than a third (32 per cent) of cases.

Inspectors found probation staff did not always draw on available information from other agencies, such as the police and social services. In some cases, they did not have the knowledge and skills to assess the impact of domestic abuse on victims and children. Others failed to understand the importance of reviewing and responding to changes, such as an offender moving in with a new partner.

Dame Glenys said: “Domestic abuse is not a minor issue – last year, more than 1 million incidents and crimes linked to domestic abuse were recorded by police across England and Wales. CRCs play a crucial role in supervising perpetrators of domestic abuse and we found they were nowhere near effective enough, yet good work could make such a difference to families, individuals and communities as a whole.

“There isn’t a national strategy to improve the quality of CRCs’ work on domestic abuse. The government’s current contracts have led to CRCs prioritising process deadlines above good-quality and safe practice. There are no specific obligations on CRCs to tackle domestic abuse and there are no direct incentives for this work either. The Ministry of Justice has the opportunity to consider this issue when it recasts contracts.”

Inspectors found issues with the delivery of ‘Building Better Relationships’, the only nationally accredited domestic abuse programme for use in the community. The course supports perpetrators to examine and change their behaviour but, in practice, it is bogged down by contractual and logistical issues.

In the cases that inspectors looked at, just over a quarter (27 per cent) of perpetrators had been referred to the programme. This is far fewer than CRCs expected and has a direct impact on their income because they are paid for each participant and can be penalised financially if there is a high dropout rate.

CRCs are stuck in a downward spiral – with fewer people starting and finishing the programme, there is less money coming through the door to fund future activity. In the cases that inspectors looked at, less than half of referrals had started their course and others were unable to start because their course had been cancelled.

Some staff had created their own alternatives to ‘Building Better Relationships’ – but these courses were not accredited, based on evidence or consistently delivered by experienced staff.

Dame Glenys said: “CRCs have developed new domestic abuse policies and guidance but this is not translating into effective practice. We found probation staff with unmanageable workloads. Inexperienced staff were managing complex issues with little training or management oversight. Some were too busy to do a thorough job, others didn’t have the knowledge to do a good job.”

Inspectors found small pockets of good practice but, overall, it was a concerning set of findings. The Inspectorate makes eight recommendations in its report, with the aim of raising the standard of probation work with perpetrators of domestic abuse and giving greater consideration to victims’ needs.

The Inspectorate also calls on CRCs to put the right training and support in place so staff can supervise perpetrators of domestic abuse effectively, manage the risk of harm to actual and potential victims, and deliver interventions that are based on evidence.

Chief Executive of Women’s Aid Katie Ghose said: “In cases of domestic abuse offences, it is vital to have the right response from probation services. Survivors of domestic abuse need to be protected, and the threat from perpetrators must be managed.

“This report shows that Community Rehabilitation Companies are failing victims, with a significant lack of understanding about domestic abuse, especially coercive control. Probation officers are routinely underestimating the ongoing danger posed to the victim, and not reassessing the level of risk involved when circumstances change. The findings of this report show that Community Rehabilitation Companies are currently not fit for purpose when it comes to domestic abuse cases, and we call on the government to urgently change this to protect survivors.”

This from the Guardian:-

Private probation firms 'put victims of abuse at risk'

Inspectors say poor practice is widespread in community rehabilitation companies

Tens of thousands of victims of domestic abuse and children are being put at further risk of harm by privatised offender supervision companies whose staff lack the skills, experience and time to supervise perpetrators, according to a new report. Inspectors found poor practice was widespread in community rehabilitation companies (CRCs), the privatised probation providers introduced in England and Wales under widely derided reforms by the former justice secretary Chris Grayling.

In 71% of cases assessed by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Probation (HMIP) as part of a thematic study into CRCs’ approach to domestic abuse, work to protect victims and children was deemed not good enough. Guardian analysis suggests this figure could be equal to as many as 55,000 cases. There are 158,727 offenders under probation supervision by CRCs across England and Wales. HMIP said an assessment of previous inspections suggests as many as half – equivalent to around 79,300 cases – feature domestic abuse.

The chief executive of Women’s Aid, Katie Ghose, said: “This report shows that community rehabilitation companies are failing victims, with a significant lack of understanding about domestic abuse, especially coercive control. Probation officers are routinely underestimating the ongoing danger posed to the victim and not reassessing the level of risk involved when circumstances change. The findings of this report show that CRCs are currently not fit for purpose when it comes to domestic abuse cases and we call on the government to urgently change this to protect survivors.”

The level and nature of contact with perpetrators was sufficient to help protect victims and children in only 55% of cases looked at by the inspectorate. In the cases where there should have been a home visit, these had been undertaken in only 19% of cases. Probation staff were also meeting offenders in public spaces such as cafes, which limited the scope to explore and address sensitive and personal issues.

The chief inspector of probation, Dame Glenys Stacey, said: “CRCs play a crucial role in supervising perpetrators of domestic abuse and we found they were nowhere near effective enough, yet good work could make such a difference to families, individuals and communities as a whole.”

Inspectors raised concerns about the falling referral and completion rates for domestic violence prevention programmes, designed to reduce reoffending among perpetrators of abuse. The only course to be accredited by a public authority, called building better relationships, was introduced to probation services in 2012 in a bid to reduce reoffending.

There were 4,452 programmes started in 2016-17, a 7% fall compared with the previous year, the inspectorate says in its report. Of those who started, only 2,041 – or 45% - completed the course, a 12% drop in completions compared with the year before.

In the cases that inspectors looked at, just over a quarter – equal to 29 men – had been referred to the programme. At the time of the inspection, 13 men had started the course. However, in seven cases the course had been cancelled. “There were too few referrals to this programme,” the report says. “Many individuals experienced extensive delays before joining a course and too many did not complete one.” The inspection looked at 112 cases and interviewed 30 perpetrators of domestic abuse.

The probation sector in England and Wales was overhauled in 2014 by Grayling, who ignored warnings from within the Ministry of Justice and broke up existing probation trusts, replacing them with a public sector service dealing with high-risk offenders and the CRCs that manage low- to medium-risk offenders. After a succession of highly critical reports from the inspectorate and the justice committee, as well as derision from those working within the sector, David Gauke, the justice secretary, announced that eight private firms and the 21 CRCs in England and Wales were to have their contracts terminated in 2020, two years earlier than agreed.

Under Gauke’s proposals put out to consultation, the number of CRCs operating in England and Wales will be reduced to 11, with 10 new probation regions to be formed in England plus an additional region in Wales. Stacey said recasting the contracts presented an opportunity for the ministry to reconsider the issue of how CRCs deal with domestic abuse.

The prisons and probation minister, Rory Stewart, said: 

“We must protect victims of domestic abuse from any further suffering. That is why we have set out plans to better support victims, bring more offenders to justice and ultimately keep the public safe through our proposed domestic abuse bill. We are taking decisive action to improve CRCs by ending current contracts early, investing £22m in through-the-gate services, and we have consulted on how best to deliver probation services in the future. This report highlights pockets of good practice to build on, but more must be done. By putting in place new arrangements, we will heed the lessons from what has and hasn’t worked, so probation plays its full part in tackling domestic abuse and protecting victims.”

Richard Burgon, shadow justice secretary, said: “Once again we see how the private probation companies are failing to keep the public safe. The government must stop letting victims down and ensure that there is a complete overhaul of probation so that it puts women’s safety first.”