Friday 22 February 2019

If Only Probation Wasn't Broken!

It seems to me that whilst domestic politics continues to be focused on matters European and the right-wing's eye is off the ball, there's definitely a head of steam building in relation to at last doing something about the size of our prison population. The trouble is we're all still trying to cope with the effect of TR and that rather makes community alternatives a tad tricky to magic up. 

Here's Rob Allen's thoughts on that recent Gauke speech that sought to divert attention from the first CRC's going bust just hours before:-   

Sentence Planning: Why David Gauke Deserves Two Cheers

No one was quite sure what to expect from David Gauke this morning. Would we get some reheated (or under cooked) announcements to distract from the latest Ministry of Justice fiasco - in this case the Working Links probation company? Or was the Justice Secretary out and about as part of a government strategy to show that away from the joy of Brexit, domestic policy making is proceeding apace across Whitehall?

As it turns out, on this occasion at least, such cynicism was ill founded. It was to my mind the best ministerial speech on sentencing since Ken Clarke spoke at King’s College just after the 2010 election. Then, Clarke expressed incredulity that the prison population had doubled in the twenty years since he had previously held responsibility for it. There were echoes of 2010 today. Clarke thought it “too simple just to argue about tougher sentencing or softer sentencing … but I believe in intelligent sentencing,seeking to give better value for money and the effective protection that people want”. Gauke retains the sentiment but calls it smart.

The Justice Secretary staked out a much more constructive way forward on the use of imprisonment than any of the four Justice Secretaries who’ve followed Clarke; by urging caution in continuing to increase sentence length as a response to concerns over crime; by arguing for switching resource away from ineffective prison sentences and into probation; and by starting “a fresh conversation, a national debate about what justice, including punishment, should look like for our modern times”.

Since Clarke’s departure, policy has sought to focus much more on the practice of imprisonment than its use - with disastrous consequences. Prime Minister David Cameron didn’t want to “waste too much energy discussing big existential questions about the prison population.” As Justice Secretary, Liz Truss tried to paint England and Wales as “fairly mid table when it comes to custodial sentences” in comparison with other countries and argued that sentence inflation was limited to sexual and violent crimes.

Gauke rightly told his audience today that we are an international and historical outlier in terms of our prison population and that it’s not just about violent or sexual offences. “Prison sentences, in general, have been getting longer”.

So in terms of tone, his speech does mark an important break with recent history. Cameron described the idea that we could somehow release tens of thousands of prisoners with no adverse consequences as nonsense. Gauke sees “a very strong case to abolish sentences of six months or less altogether, with some closely defined exceptions, and put in their place, a robust community order regime”. 46,000 such sentences were imposed in the year to June 2018-more than half of all the prison terms passed.

Cameron promised you wouldn’t hear him “arguing to neuter judges’ sentencing powers or reduce their ability to use prison when it is required.” But that’s just what Gauke is planning.

Or is he? In the Q &A that followed the speech, it became clear that little has been decided in government but is rather being explored. As I have argued earlier there are difficult technical questions about achieving reductions in the use of short sentences. It’s the details that did for Ken Clarke’s efforts to reduce prison numbers – in his case the attempt to increase sentence discounts for early guilty pleas. So any penal reformers’ prosecco needs to stay corked for the moment.

The failings of the part privatised probation system will do little to assist Gauke’s ambitions, although the long-awaited arrival of GPS tracking - first announced as “prisons without bars” by David Blunkett in 2004 - should increase options for monitoring community-based supervision. But it’s hard to see his promised shift in resources from prison to probation until the new services and structure come into place in 2021.

In the meantime, to build on his speech today, he should establish a review of sentencing as part of the national debate he wants about punishment in the modern age. Perhaps he could ask Justin Russell to lead it?

He’s the senior MoJ mandarin who Gauke wants to succeed Glenys Stacey as Chief Inspector of Probation. Several people I spoke to at the speech this morning were uncomfortable with that appointment. The independence of HMI Probation is of paramount importance and it simply doesn’t look right for an official who has been responsible for probation reform to lead the organisation.


Rob Allen

20 comments:

  1. As an aside, it's worth noting that Durham Tees Valley CRC has just won a Sunday Times award as one of 100 top 'not for profit' employers for their Learning and Development. Interestingly it is of course THE ONLY not for profit CRC!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I find it hard to be as positive as Rob Allen. For me, Gauke's speech was political flimflam, a heavy-duty whitewash quickly applied to cover the ever-widening cracks. Brexit, failing CRCs, prisons in crisis - the disgracefully low levels of performance by & expectations of those charged with 'running the country' means a medley of soundbites & trite observations is regarded as 'a fresh conversation'.

    Sorry, Rob, I'm not convinced. Young Rory started out as the more impressive performer with his 'neck on the line' pro-active persona BUT... he's scuppered himself by taking on the pro-May cheerleading, leaving himself wide-open when the prison figures haven't improved & two CRCs are neck-deep in the shit.

    A lukewarm dish, whether re-heated or undercooked, is dangerous & shows a calamitous lack of skill, knowledge or understanding - its more likely to kill than satisfy one's appetite. Just ask Sodexo.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'm a PO there. Whilst it does have some issues that we are trying to work through, overall it's quite a progressive and fair place to work.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Meantime NPS NW is rated 'good' but "Reviews of risk of harm were not always completed when circumstances change, and in some cases appropriate contingency plans needed to be set out,” Dame Glenys said, adding: “Domestic abuse and safeguarding checks were not always undertaken when required to inform court reports and allocation.”

    How can that be 'good'? Also she notes there are massive staff shortages. How can that be 'good'? Sorry, Dame Bullshit, not convincing. Where's the overt slamming of TR that led to hundreds of probation staff, including experienced POs, being cheated out of EVR & told to piss off rather than being offered NPS roles? Or the appalling start-at-the-bottom-again policy for anyone wanting to apply for NPS? Nah, you can stick yer chums-togetherness approach. It'll be the same old same old when Justin takes over, all mates together, not an objective eye between them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh yes, then you get one of the fawning NW Twitter accounts stating- let's push for outstanding. What will that take with 20% less PO grade staff then there should be! Shows how absolutely out of touch management is with the reality of life for case managers in NW!

      Delete
  5. You don’t need to even read the meanderings of a pantomime dame to get the feel of NPS NW.
    Look at the staff survey results- management of change, piss poor. Scores worse than last year and the year before but carry on regardless.
    Someone famous once said it is the height of stupidity to continue with the same old experiment and achieve the same results. Can somebody please explain this to our managers in words of one syllable!
    Every year they promise us things will change and every year they are proved right when they get worse.
    These are the same people who repeat the mantra, “ our staff are our greatest asset,” three times daily, just before they shaft you!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. https://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/17451860.probation-service-lacks-the-staff-it-needs-says-inspectorate/

      Delete
  6. https://amp-ft-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/amp.ft.com/content/32d66096-35e9-11e9-bd3a-8b2a211d90d5?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQCCAE%3D#aoh=15508277599196&amp_ct=1550827762420&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcontent%2F32d66096-35e9-11e9-bd3a-8b2a211d90d5

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How part-privatisating the UK probation system backfired... paywall

      Delete
    2. Market Summary > Interserve plc
      LON: IRV
      9.88 GBX −0.38 (3.74%)
      22 Feb, 09:40 GMT

      Delete
    3. When ministers decided to part-privatise the probation system six years ago, they promised to inject “innovation and dynamism” into a struggling sector.

      The collapse last week of Working Links, a key provider, revealed the very opposite: a company crumbling under the financial strain of three lossmaking contracts, managing ex-offenders so poorly that public safety was in jeopardy.

      The disaster has revealed a system in turmoil. On the day that Working Links announced it was going into administration, a report by the probation watchdog called for “urgent remedial action” on one of Working Links’ contracts, covering Dorset, Devon and Cornwall.

      Inspectors warned that “professional ethics [had been] compromised and immutable lines crossed” because of cost pressures. Their most serious finding was that over-worked staff had avoided giving offenders the highest “red” risk rating because they did not have the resources to undertake the level of contact and supervision this required.

      But unions and justice campaigners have questioned why the alarm had not been raised long before Working Links folded, and whether the Ministry of Justice has effective scrutiny over the contracts that remain.

      Napo, the probation workers’ union, was warning the local probation directors about safety issues at Working Links as far back as 2016, in letters seen by the Financial Times.

      A group of whistleblowers from Working Links were so frustrated about their failure to be heard by the company that they wrote to the director of a local probation service in January, highlighting the same downgrading of dangerous offenders identified by the inspectorate.

      In the earliest days of the Working Links contract, one serial offender who had missed eight appointments with his Working Links probation supervisor in Wales went on to commit a violent murder.

      The flaws in Chris Grayling’s strategy
      The architect of the reforms was Chris Grayling, the former justice secretary, who decided in 2013 that the public sector should continue to manage high-risk offenders, while low- and medium-risk offenders would be supervised by the private sector.

      Eight organisations — including Sodexo, MTCnovo, Ingeus and Working Links — were awarded contracts worth £3.7bn to run 21 “community rehabilitation companies” (CRCs). They were paid according to a results system tied to reductions in reoffending.

      Frances Crook, director of the Howard League for Penal Reform, said she had warned the Ministry of Justice against the changes.

      “Having a cheap and cheerful bargain basement service dealing with people who are meant to be low risk but are actually quite problematic and complicated is simply not possible, it does not work,” Ms Crook said. “Human beings are very complicated — risk goes up and down.”

      The failings of Mr Grayling’s “transforming rehabilitation” strategy have been well documented. A report last year by parliament’s spending watchdog discovered that out of the 21 CRCs, 19 had failed to meet their targets for reducing the frequency of re-offending, and 14 were forecasting losses.

      Part of the problem was that too much of the contract — up to 28 per cent — was dependent on proven reductions in reoffending. However, rates did not drop low enough to meet the payment threshold, so companies did not meet their profit targets.

      Soon after the report was published, justice secretary David Gauke announced that he would terminate the contracts in 2020, two years earlier than planned, giving payouts of at least £500m to the companies involved.

      Working Links’ woes became an ‘open secret’
      In the meantime, according to one Whitehall official, Working Links’ financial woes had become an “open secret” within the probation world. In 2015, only a year after taking over the contract, employees were writing to the company complaining that excessive workloads were undermining the quality of their work.

      Delete
    4. In 2016, their union, Napo, was complaining about staff cuts and urging Working Links to disclose details of its operational model, which employees said constituted a risk to public safety.

      Ian Lawrence, Napo’s general secretary, said he and other union officials had raised the safety issues with ministers “repeatedly” over the past two years. “We warned them that staff were over-burdened with cases and stress and couldn’t carry out their work to the required professional standards,” he said. “All we were told, again and again, was that the MoJ was ‘keeping the situation under constant review’.”

      Mr Lawrence said he was especially concerned that offenders were going on to commit further serious crimes. In early January, a group of whistleblowers at Dorset, Devon and Cornwall CRC wrote to their director of probation services saying that to cope with cuts, over-worked staff were downgrading the risk profile of their clients to “reduce the frequency of contact expected”. They concluded that the system neither fulfilled its purpose of reducing reoffending nor “protecting the public from harm”.

      The probation inspector’s report into the CRC, released last week, noted that overall staff numbers had gone down by a third since February 2015, and said that Working Links was planning for an “end state” that included further personnel reductions.

      By the time Working Links formally approached the MoJ in October to warn about its financial troubles, the problems had been evident for three years. The department says it had experienced contract management teams working with the company to address its deficiencies, but has not given any details of what exactly was done.

      Officials in the MoJ’s commercial team started sounding out other existing CRC providers about the possibility of taking over Working Links’ contracts, and lined up a transfer plan with Seetec, which currently runs the Kent, Surrey and Sussex CRC.

      In a statement issued last week, the department said that former Working Links employees would be transferred to Seetec, and that the department would work closely with the company to “urgently raise standards”.

      Working Links could not be reached for comment.

      The MoJ has said it will unveil its new probation reforms later this year, but has not ruled out re-contracting some probation services. In a scathing analysis, the Institute for Government, a think-tank, warned that implementing a new system with a similar approach to contracting and the same struggling suppliers “risks another damaging failure”.

      Peter Dawson, director of the Prison Reform Trust, said the MoJ needed to take a more pragmatic and less ideological approach to probation in future.

      “Prison privatisation was done one prison at a time, very cautiously . . . in the case of probation, the whole country was contracted at once, coinciding with a fundamental change in the way the system was organised,” Mr Dawson said. “It was just too fast, and too ambitious.”

      Delete
  7. Hundreds of workers are being galvanised to march through London on Tuesday February 26 in a first 'national day of action against outsourcing'.

    The workers, pushed by their respective unions and labour bodies, will join the #CleanUpOutsourcing march organised by the Independent Workers Union of Great Britain (IWGB), United Voices of the World (UVW), PCS (Public and Commercial Services) Union and the Road, Maritime & Transport Union (RMT).

    The march will coincide with three coordinated strikes organised by three unions and a another legal challenge on outsourcing at the High Court.

    UVW (a minority union mostly representing migrant workers) cleaners and security officers will be on strike at the Ministry of Justice demanding the living wage.

    PCS cleaners, security, catering staff and others will be on strike at the Department for Business Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) demanding the living wage, equal terms and conditions and an end to outsourcing.

    IWGB cleaners will be on strike at the University of London demanding equal terms and conditions with directly employed staff. The union will also be facing the university and the government's BEIS department at the High Court in a landmark legal challenge that could extend the rights of the UK's 3.3 million outsourced workers.

    The IWGB describes outsourced companies as 'middlemen employers who are able to offer some workers far worse pay, holiday entitlements, sick pay and pension contributions than those directly employed'. The union also claims outsourced workers are also much more likely to suffer from bullying and discrimination.



    Left Wing Labour

    Shadow Secretary of State for Business Energy & Industrial Strategy Rebecca Long Bailey MP said: “For far too long workers in this country have suffered from worsening pay and conditions, while those at the top get richer. But seeing these mainly migrant workers from different unions come together to push back against the scourge of outsourcing gives me hope for the future of the Labour movement and the UK as a whole. These cleaners, receptionists and other outsourced workers have the courage to stand up and fight back, so we as the Labour Party will be by their side every step of the way.”



    Schedule of the day:

    8:00am - Assemble at University of London Senate House, Russell Square.

    9:30am - Royal Courts of Justice, Strand, WC2A 2LL.

    11:00am - Rally at Parliament square with speeches from MPs.

    12:00pm – BEIS, 1 Victoria St, SW1H 0ET.

    12:30pm – MOJ, 102 Petty France, Westminster, London SW1H 9AJ.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Some gems from the 2014 PAC Probation Landscape report:

    Recommendation: The performance of the current probation service should be the benchmark against which the reformed service is judged. The Ministry should set clear performance metrics for the new systems, both during the transition process and beyond, and monitor performance to ensure a satisfactory service is maintained.... by bringing in better equipped people on short-term contracts who are commercially focused to manage the contracts effectively...

    Recommendation: The Ministry needs to apply best practice in all aspects of contract design, bid evaluation and contract management and be able to demonstrate that it has learned the lessons from previous contracts... The Ministry acknowledges the importance of contingency planning for a supplier collapsing or prematurely leaving. As commercial negotiations were in progress when we took evidence the Ministry was unable to share the specifics of its plans in this area

    Recommendation: The Ministry must establish a clear mechanism for identifying suppliers at risk of failing or withdrawing from their contracts that includes setting out what action it will take in these circumstances to maintain an adequate service... The proposed payment mechanism has been reviewed by consultants and by some probation staff, albeit not in an operational environment.

    Recommendation: The Ministry should set out how it intends to satisfy itself that the proposed payment mechanism is workable... We would also want the NAO to have full access to contractual information that is relevant to assuring Parliament that value for money is being served in these contracts.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And from Transforming Rehabilitation - Seventeenth Report of Session 2016–17

      1. The Ministry of Justice has yet to bring about the ‘rehabilitation revolution’ it promised... Recommendation: We expect the Ministry to update the Committee on progress by the end of 2017 to provide confidence that performance data on rehabilitation services is reliable and complete...

      2. Two years into the reforms, it is unclear whether the extension of supervision to offenders sentenced for less than 12 months is having the desired impact...

      7. ICT systems in probation are inefficient, unreliable and hard to use... Recommendation: NOMS should, without delay, meet its commitments to improve the usability of nDelius and to implement a fully functional and reliable link between NOMS and CRC systems by the end of 2016.

      https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmpubacc/484/484.pdf

      Delete
    2. Investigation into changes to Community Rehabilitation Company contracts - 15 December 2017

      £64m - the additional fee for service paid by the Ministry of Justice (the Ministry) to CRCs in 2016-17 (£42 million) and 2017-18 (£22 million)

      £278m - the additional projected payments by the Ministry to CRCs after changes to the contracts taking effect from 1 August 2017

      TOTAL INCREASE: £342m

      3 By the end of 2016-17, the Ministry had paid £956 million to CRCs in fees for service, £42 million more than it would have done had it applied the terms of the contract.

      5 By the end of June 2017, CRCs had met one-third of the performance targets set by the Ministry (8/24 expected)

      7 Throughout February 2017, the Ministry commissioned external assurance work to better understand the financial positions of the CRCs.

      9 While it was negotiating the contract change, the Ministry paid 14 CRCs additional fees of £22 million.

      https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Investigation-into-changes-to-Community-Rehabilitation-Company-contracts.pdf

      Delete
    3. Transforming Rehabilitation - Ninth Report of Session 2017–19

      The National Audit Office identified in a Report in December 2017 that the Ministry of Justice had had to change the fixed-cost assumptions in their contracts with CRCs from 20% to 77%. In this Report we conclude that this raises serious questions about the Ministry of Justice’s reluctance to challenge overoptimistic bids and its ability to let contracts. We also call for there to be more transparency on the changes made to the Ministry’s contracts with CRCs and what the Ministry expects to get in return for additional funding negotiated by providers.

      CRC performance in reducing reoffending, particularly the number of times an offender reoffends, has been disappointing... The Ministry of Justice has not been applying the financial penalties (service credits) as envisaged in the contracts with CRCs and it remains unclear to us how the Ministry of Justice is tackling underperformance on a day-to-day basis.

      This [NPS/CRC] split causes problems in the delivery of probation services as the risk of an offender can change throughout their time on probation. We call on the Government to ask HMI Probation to conduct a review of how offenders should be distributed between the NPS and CRCs, and to investigate the impact of changing offender risk and how the NPS and CRCs manage this matter.

      Staff morale is at an “all-time low” and staff have high caseloads, in some instances they are handling cases for which they do not have adequate training, and they feel de-professionalised.

      On the longer-term future of the TR reforms we conclude that we are unconvinced that the TR model can ever deliver an effective or viable probation service.

      https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmjust/482/482.pdf


      So what do the dumb fuckers do? They initiate a re-run of TR, imaginatively called TR2.

      Delete
    4. Brown envelopes and boardroom appointments all round...

      Delete
  9. https://www.napo.org.uk/working-links-demise-victory-big-test-ahead

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Working Links demise a victory..."

      I beg to differ. Its no victory. Its the sad, inevitable conclusion to a shameful sequence of greed & dishonesty. Whilst some staff might have had the resilience to withstand bullying, there will be many who are scarred. Unnecessary victims of others' incompetence, disconnect with reality & delusional belief in their ability.

      Grayling & the shameless architects of this debacle should be brought to book. How much has all this cost, over & above the known bungs, adjustments & favours? How much for the consultant lawyers dealing with the WL/Seetec transfer? How much more are KPMG or the other ambulance chasers picking up?

      There'll be no victory until TR is abandoned, probation is on the mend & Grayling etc are publicly named & shamed for their wanton vandalism.

      Delete