1. What has been announced now and why?
The government has set out its plans for the future of probation. This follows careful consideration of the results of the consultation ‘Strengthening Probation, Building Confidence’ held in summer 2018 which received over 450 written responses and captured the views of more than 1,000 delegates from over 39 events.
The key proposals are:
a) The National Probation Service will have responsibility for all offender management
b) The private and voluntary sector will still play a vital role providing interventions
c) Support for the probation profession - to improve professional development and raise the status of the profession.
2. When are you implementing these changes?
In England, we have put in place arrangements to allow us to extend CRC contracts to ensure we have the necessary time to get the transition to the new system right. We intend to use these arrangements to end contracts in Spring 2021. This will ensure a smooth transition, focussing on the seamless continuity of public protection and rehabilitation in the community. We intend to integrate offender management in Wales on a quicker timescale, by the end of 2019. We will now begin a period of further engagement with a broad range of stakeholders to refine the design of future services, and with staff to inform our planning for the transition to these timescales. We will seek to launch competitive procurement processes later this year for the delivery of interventions such as Unpaid Work, Accredited Programmes and rehabilitative interventions. We have set up a separate programme to take forward the delivery of the professional recognition proposals over the next couple of years
3. This isn’t what you proposed in the consultation – why have you changed your mind?
We have listened closely to feedback from the consultation, reflected on reports from HM Inspectorate of Probation and others, and tested the options with our partners and stakeholders to make sure we got this important decision right. We have also taken account of the continuing challenges faced by CRCs and the need for future arrangements to deliver a more stable operating environment. The proposals laid out in the consultation for Wales remain unchanged. On balance, we believe this new model for England – based on these arrangements we consulted on in Wales – offers the most sustainable approach for probation and is the best option to build on the positive changes made under Transforming Rehabilitation.
4. Why are the government not continuing with the Transforming Rehabilitation (TR) model?
Transforming Rehabilitation brought about some important changes that will be strengthened under this revised model. TR opened up probation to a diverse range of providers and extended support and supervision to an additional 40,000 offenders leaving prison. But we accept that there have been challenges resulting from the complexities of contractualising offender management and splitting functions between the NPS and CRCs. That is why we are making changes to allow each sector to play to its strengths.
5. Will you still outsource elements of probation?
Yes. Private and not-for-profit organisations have demonstrated their strength in delivering interventions. We will retain and build on this success by sourcing key services, such as Unpaid Work, Accredited Programmes, and other resettlement and rehabilitative interventions from the private and voluntary sector markets. We intend to do this through competitions for suppliers for Unpaid Work and Accredited Programmes, and through creation of a dynamic framework for resettlement and rehabilitative interventions.
6. Will the model be the same in England and Wales?
The new model builds on existing proposals for Wales which we believe will create a structure that is better able to adapt to meet local needs. There is similarity in that all Offender Management will become the responsibility of the National Probation Services while certain interventions will be undertaken by other providers. There are however some distinctions between how services operate in England and Wales which reflect the requirements of both nations. These will continue under the new model.
The existing structure of HMPPS Wales is different to that in England. In HMPPS in Wales, the structure combines prison and probation services under the same management line. Also in the existing model in Wales, the CRC is already co-terminus with the existing NPS Wales Division.
The justice devolution settlement allows us to make distinct arrangements for probation that meet the needs of Wales. In Wales, the probation system is part of a wider system of governance which operate with a number of devolved responsibilities. For example, education and health and local authorities are governed by the Welsh government e.g. health in prisons. This mean there is a responsibility to discuss cross-cutting issues with the Welsh government. In addition, there are a number of legislative papers the agency must adhere to such as the Wellbeing of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015.
7. How are you expanding the role of the voluntary sector?
We want to see a clearer role for a wide range of voluntary sector providers in probation delivery, including local and specialist services. We will be developing a commercial framework to allow the National Probation Service to directly commission services on a scale that encourages the participation of smaller suppliers and is responsive to the needs of local areas. This will support the involvement of specialist voluntary and community organisations, such as those supporting offenders with complex needs, which are key to reducing reoffending and reintegrating offenders back into society.
8. How much will all this cost? Will there be more funding for probation?
We are determined to ensure probation has sufficient resource to deliver a good level of service and to support a reduction in reoffending and short prison sentences. This is subject the usual cross-Government approvals process and affordability considerations.
Professional recognition
9. What are your plans to better support probation officers?
Probation is a vocational profession. Our changes will recognise the specialism and value of probation work, while supporting staff to develop the right skills and expertise. We will look to bring forward a statutory professional framework with ethical and training standards for different roles, to put probation on a par with teaching or social work. We are working with our Trade Union colleagues to introduce a new Competency Based Pay Progression Framework for NPS staff which takes into account the full range of attributes, skills and experience required to deliver a quality service.
10. Why are we implementing a professional register for staff?
As well as the structural and contractual elements, the plan outlines the desire to make improvements to the services offenders receive in a number of areas, and to better recognise the skills, experience, and professionalism of our dedicated workforce. Therefore, we want to create further opportunities for professional development. We also want to ensure we can safeguard the quality of probation work by ensuring all staff are suitably trained and supported.
Impact on NPS and its staff
11. What does this mean for the current structure for NPS?
There will be structural change to create 11 probation areas across England and Wales. In England, each of the areas will be overseen by an NPS Regional Probation Director who will provide strategic leadership and be responsible for the overall delivery and commissioning of probation services. In Wales, the Executive Director for HMPPS in Wales already has responsibility for all probation services and prisons in Wales and this will remain unchanged. We will strengthen local partnerships. Our new regional structures will allow the probation service to work closer with other statutory bodies, including Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs), to focus on joint aims and co-commissioning
12. How will the extra work for NPS staff be managed? How will this impact on my workload?
One of our priorities will be to look at how we can make workloads more manageable and to prevent overloading on any one part of the organisation. We now have more information to base future projections on, and plan to design future delivery arrangements to be more resilient to fluctuations in caseload volume. As offender management services transfer from CRCs to the NPS, staff assigned to delivering those services will also transfer. CRCs will be identifying their in-scope staff in due course.
13. What are you doing to improve staff workloads and recruitment shortages?
In the year to 31st December 2018, 707 probation services officers were appointed, some of whom will be training to become qualified probation officers. We know that the shift in demand for probation services has placed pressures on the NPS and staff have been carrying high caseloads. In response to this, the NPS has run several recruitment campaigns in the last 12 months and will continue to recruit Trainee Probation Officers Nationally in 2019/20. Staff are the probation system’s greatest asset, and we need to do all we can to make sure they are properly equipped to do their jobs and given the opportunities to enhance their professional skills and develop rewarding careers.
14. How will you protect staff and services during the transition?
These changes are about improving probation services, and ensuring there are sufficient staff to deliver a good quality service. The majority of staff who responded to the consultation were supportive of this delivery model. Maintaining business continuity during these changes is of paramount importance. We will continue to work closely with Trade Unions, CRCs and staff to support the transition to the future model and minimise disruption.
15. Will staff be made redundant in the NPS?
We do not envisage that this will be necessary but we need to do more work before we can be clear either way. We need to carefully review the current and future delivery models and consider where system and process change affects peoples’ roles with a view to minimise the impacts. If staff are displaced, we would seek to work with them and exhaust all redeployment options. Retaining skilled staff is a key priority for the department.
16. Will the changes affect staff pay or terms and conditions in NPS?
There are no plans to change any of these conditions and staff will be fully consulted throughout the process.
17. What about my pension?
For existing NPS staff, there will be no changes to your current pension arrangements.
18. Will I need to reapply for my job?
We appreciate the concerns staff will have about any future changes and one of our priorities will be to minimise the impact of this. It is too early to say what changes are required to deliver the outcomes of the consultation and new delivery model and we won’t undertake any restructure until we have a clear understanding of what the future delivery arrangements will be. We will keep staff informed as our plans develop, and we will consult them at the right time on any changes that may affect them.
19. Will I move workplace?
All HMPPS staff are contracted to work from locations that are suited to their work however we do not expect there to be any immediate requirements for staff to change workplace although future delivery arrangements could require some adjustments. We will aim to minimise these impacts as far as possible and will continue to consult with staff throughout the process.
20. Will there be opportunities for voluntary early departure?
There are no current plans to run a centralised voluntary exit scheme at this time.
21. Will there be any changes in process to the way I work now?
The aim of this programme is to continue to improve delivery of probation services so we will be looking for ideas on how to improve or change processes but we do not expect there to be immediate changes to the way staff currently work.
Keeping you informed
22. How will probation staff be kept informed throughout the process?
Senior Leaders will continue to update staff as we progress and all communication channels will be used to ensure staff are involved and have opportunities to share feedback and ask questions. There will be separate consultation in regard to the transfer of staff – this will happen first in Wales. All available information will be published on the Probation Changes pages on the intranet. We will continue to provide information to CRC staff. Staff can get in touch with questions via email at strengthening.probation@justice.gov.uk
23. How can I get involved?
A series of workshops will be run across England and Wales to share further details regarding future design, change and transition processes. Staff can also get in touch with the programme directly via the email strengthening.probation@justice.gov.uk. Consultation will also continue to take place through Trade Unions. Further staff engagement events will be advertised.
So let us be clear. This is NOT reunification of the Probation Service, or even a return to public ownership. It is simply "The National Probation Service will have responsibility for all offender management".
ReplyDeleteAnd this is merely insult after injury from the utterly disingenuous bastard weasel scum that is NPS/HMPPS:
"Probation is a vocational profession. Our changes will recognise the specialism and value of probation work, while supporting staff to develop the right skills and expertise. We will look to bring forward a statutory professional framework with ethical and training standards for different roles, to put probation on a par with teaching or social work."
"Private and not-for-profit organisations have demonstrated their strength in delivering interventions."
ReplyDeleteDo not worry, profiteering chums. We will not be disassembling TR. TR2 will be rolled out, but in a more understated manner. Big money contracts will be signed, but they will be kept low-key. Fear not.
Will all staff be treated equally in this process. It seems that nps staff are already being offered more information than the crcs. Crc staff have been deskilled in the last few years how can we compete with nps for jobs. Still training po's who will take presedence for employment. Having been shafted once without any recourse whats to stop that happening again. Pay parity should happen now and should have been the same as nps. Our pay in crc remains discriminatory. After the last farce I have little faith in napo even though I pay my subs.
ReplyDeleteWhilst I'm on a rant Will redundancy pay be offered at the same rate regardless of rank or position.we all remember evr. I don't mean to be negative and it is good that they are renationalisating probation. However there will be casualties not least intervention colleagues. Little trust in our employers or the union.
ReplyDeleteEveryone knows there's a staff shortage in probation, both NPS & CRC - even NAPO state there are "500 vacancies across England and Wales, leading to unallocated cases". The NPS briefing says:
Delete"We know that the shift in demand for probation services has placed pressures on the NPS... These changes are about improving probation services, and ensuring there are sufficient staff to deliver a good quality service... Retaining skilled staff is a key priority for the department."
So, just setting aside their capacity for telling massive porky pies at the drop of a hat, what's the issue about redundancy? Why & how could they make staff redundant when there aren't enough staff to go round anyway?
What about the surplus of managers
Delete“We are working with our Trade Union colleagues to introduce a new Competency Based Pay Progression Framework for NPS staff which takes into account the full range of attributes, skills and experience required to deliver a quality service…….the NPS has run several recruitment campaigns in the last 12 months and will continue to recruit Trainee Probation Officers Nationally in 2019/20.”
ReplyDeleteSo, my concern is when CRC staff eventually go to NPS, the Competency Based Pay Progression Framework will be in place and it could be argued that while CRC staff have the skills, they don’t have the experience that NPS staff have (given the split will be 7 years by the time it is reunified - ARMS/ VISOR/ high RoSH) therefore CRC staff will not get transferred on to the same pay as our former colleagues (some of whom we trained with and some of whom have only been qualified a few years)
These are the differences in CRC Q&A
Will these changes level out pay disparities between CRCs and NPS?
There are no plans for pay changes in the NPS to apply to CRCs. In 2018, we reached agreement with Trade Unions (NAPO, Unison and GMB SCOOP) on pay modernisation for probation professionals within the National Probation Service. NPS staff are paid in accordance to grade. Community Rehabilitation Companies are private Community Rehabilitation Companies are private employers and are responsible for setting their own pay for staff.
Will staff be made redundant in CRCs?
It is too early to confirm the impact on CRC staff. The changes we have announced today are about strengthening probation services and supporting staff. Retaining the skills and knowledge of probation professionals within the system is a key priority for the department. However, we are aware of skills gap within the service which we will be addressing in the near future. We are in the process of gathering data on all those delivering services for or on behalf of CRCs to make sure we fully understand the roles and remits. This will inform our future planning.
For existing CRC staff who may transfer into HMPPS, how will the selection process for this transfer take place?
HMPPS will define the scope of the services it will deliver and which services will be competed or delivered by third parties in the future. Current employers will then use the scope to determine which of their staff are assigned to which services and produce an in-scope list. We will need the support from CRCs as employers to understand the current roles of all staff in order to support concrete planning for staff transfers.
What staff transfer methods will be used? Will I be protected by TUPE?
Staff will be transferred by Staff Transfer Scheme(s) using the powers set out in the Offender Management Act 2007. Although, the transfer falls within the TUPE exemption, in the main, the provisions of the Staff Transfer Scheme will follow the approach of TUPE and will protect staff terms and conditions following transfer to the new employer.
What about my pension?
Most new staff compulsorily transferring into NPS will be eligible to join the Local Government Pension Scheme post transfer. The exception is those who retain eligibility to participate in the Civil Service Pension Scheme.
NPS continue to recruit trainees, who will be qualified by the time transfers take place, taking valuable jobs knowing there is a proportion of qualified, skilled PO's and PSO's waiting in the wings. If they can push Wales through by the end of 2019, why can't they speed the process up for the rest of the country instead of drawing out the pain to Spring 2021?
DeleteYou can tart this up which ever way you want in terms of staffing. Those they want to keep who tow the party line will stay, those staff who are a 'problem' will sacked, shafted and have their lives made a misery. Making grand statements on here isn't going to hide the truth of how this is going to play out. Belt and braces to the ready guys.
ReplyDeleteI repeat - THEY ARE NOT RENATIONALISING PROBATION SERVICES.
ReplyDeleteCRC briefing says: "HMPPS will define the scope of the services it will deliver and which services will be competed or delivered by third parties in the future."
NPS briefing says: ""The National Probation Service will have responsibility for all offender management... We will be developing a commercial framework to allow the National Probation Service to directly commission services"
Eleven NPS Regional Probation Directors will provide strategic leadership and be responsible for the overall delivery and commissioning of probation services.
Its merely an expansion of the fat-cat club, with even more scope to commission services from profiteers.
It is NOT what they are saying it is. Remember how TR was enabled? Remember how the legal framework was worded to facilitate Grayling's wet dream? Question everything:
"The majority of staff who responded to the consultation were supportive of this delivery model."
Why is it worded in that way? What 'delivery model' do they mean?
They also say:
"We have listened closely to feedback from the consultation, reflected on reports from HM Inspectorate of Probation and others... On balance, we believe this new model for England – based on these arrangements we consulted on in Wales – offers the most sustainable approach for probation"
So if its a new model based upon the results of the consultation, how can it have been in the consultation?
You are being sold yet another cart-load of high-grade bullshit.
A number of those Regional chiefs are as nasty and thick as hell good luck
DeleteThe devil is in the detail and directors on both sides of the divide are being very tight lipped. At this stage reunification could be more accurately described as restructuring.
ReplyDeleteWhat we think reunification means;
“I’m already NPS. I’m an elite PO/PSO. I’ll receive a few lower risk cases / I’ll continue working in Courts. My manager told me I’m safe. I’m alright Jack”.
“I’m CRC. I’m an elite PO/PSO. I’ll be transferring to NPS. They need me. My manager told me I’m safe. I’m alright Jack.
What unification actually means;
“We’re NPS / CRC POs, PSOs, SPOs, trainers, admin, UPW, programmes, etc. We have no idea what’s really going to happen. None of us are alright Jack”.
Let’s see if they do any better then
ReplyDeletehttps://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5c8f7d2bed915d07af076dc4/Miss_J_Hyland_v_The_Cheshire_and_Greater_Manchester_Community_Rehabilitation_Limited-2424492_2017-Reserved_Judgment_and_Reasons.pdf
641. In our judgment, considering the matters set out above, the investigation carried out by Ms Travis was not a sufficient investigation in respect of this claimant facing these potentially career ending allegations.
Delete642. In our judgment Ms Travis did not keep an open mind, as evidenced by her desire only to speak to “impartial” witnesses, and did not look for evidence which supported the employee’s case even when the potential witnesses were identified to her.
643. We therefore conclude that the dismissal was not fair because the investigation was not in the particular circumstances of this case a sufficient investigation upon which to found the respondent’s conclusion as to the claimant’s guilt in respect of the first and third allegations
But how do you 'make a name' for yourself by demonstrating a lack of the most basic analytical skills and / or a contempt for natural justice, and in the process costing the company tens of thousands of pounds? Unless of course you were under instruction to try to 'get' the person under investigation no matter what - but if you were, then just what the fuck was really going on?
Delete'Private and not-for-profit organisations have demonstrated their strength in delivering interventions.' I do not recognise this statement. Unpaid Work and Group Programme Work require great skill, professionalism and integrity. Service users of these interventions can be complex and difficult to manage. This is not reunification but it is a restructuring of how to take a rent out of public services given the previous failed attempt. If it were true that interventions were a natural private / 3rd sector strength in addressing offending behaviour then maybe there would be clamour for their outsourcing. But there is not, was not. Yes, as ever there is a place for local contracted partnerships with voluntary sector and private sector particularly around employment but this is not that. This is TR2.
ReplyDeleteQuestion 12 says that crcs will be identifying their in scope staff in due course. What does this mean. I can only think that we will continue to be operating under a 2 tier system but all under nps.
ReplyDelete