I notice Russell Webster has filled in some of the gaps regarding the MoJ plans for the future look of probation. It's difficult to say whether this extends our knowledge beyond what was given during recent 'launch' events, but I found taking notes difficult due to poor acoustics.
Unpaid work
Officials shared some of the current problems with Unpaid Work which they are hoping to address in the new contracts with the 11 new “Innovation Partners” (the successors to the current 21 Community Rehabilitation Companies) who will be delivering both Unpaid Work and Accredited Programmes in each of the 11 NPS regions. The main problems are:
- Not enough good quality placements, with too many on the day cancellations.
- Under use of the 20% of Unpaid Work hours which may be used to address service users’ employment, training and education (TT) needs.
- A lack of intensive placements for service user unemployed.
- A lack of appropriate placements for female service users.
- Too many orders not completed within the 12 month period.
- Excessive travel time.
Civil servants presented figures showing that the total volume of accredited programmes commenced under community orders (and suspended sentence orders) has fallen since 2006. This has led to a situation where the low volume of referrals can make it hard to secure viable numbers deliver individual programs; leading to longer waiting lists which reduces confidence in the availability of programmes, which then further reduces referrals.
The MoJ wish to address this situation by ensuring that in the future Accredited Programmes are the intervention of choice for all service users on community orders where eligibility criteria are met. This is expected to increase the volume of Accredited Programmes and therefore, presumably, the value of the new contracts.
Resettlement
Resettlement services will be commissioned via the “Dynamic Framework” in a separate competition from the 11 big contracts to deliver Unpaid Work and Accredited Programmes in each probation region. There is no decision yet on how the £280 million annual budget will be split between these two competitions.
Although the Dynamic Framework is supposed to make it easier for smaller voluntary sector providers to win work to be delivered on a local (or regional) basis, it is clear that the big providers who are bidding to be “Innovative Partners” delivering the regional Unpaid Work and Accredited Programme contracts will also be able to bid.
Some features of the plans for resettlement became a bit clearer. Prison officers will have the lead through the Offender Management in Custody (OMiC) system for ensuring that serving prisoners participate in the appropriate prison programmes. Handover from prison staff to NPS responsible officers (based, as far as I can tell in a service user’s home probation area, rather than in prison) will take place between 10 and 3 months pre-release. The NPS responsible officer will be the person deciding what resettlement services an individual service user requires during this pre-release period and on release and will match them with appropriate services delivered by providers who have been successful in winning contracts through the Dynamic Framework (these contracts, by the way, are currently anticipated to vary in length from between 1-4 years).
Regional outcomes and Innovation Fund
We were also given outline details of the new regional Outcome and “Innovation” Fund which will reserve £20 million from the 280 million budget to be spent on innovative, cross-cutting approaches, with the intention of engaging a wide range of voluntary sector providers. The aim of the fund is to:
- Build capacity and drive innovation in approaches to tackling wider system outcomes
- Encourage joint investment and co-commissioning
- Leverage additional funding locally and nationally by joining up service provision for offenders, particularly those with multiple and complex needs.
Russell Webster
"ensuring that in the future Accredited Programmes are the intervention of choice for all service users on community orders where eligibility criteria are met. This is expected to increase the volume of Accredited Programmes and therefore, presumably, the value of the new contracts."
ReplyDeleteIt will also increase my workload by raising the number of breaches I have to do for clients who meet the "eligibility criteria" but who are far from suitable.
Re-post: seems appropriate -
ReplyDeleteAnonymous6 June 2019 at 07:02
Snake oil, get yer luvverly snake oil here, snake oil, only a million parnds a pop, garanteed to make everyone stop doing what they shouldn't. Cures burgling, kiddy-fiddling, drink-driving, removes risk & everyfing. Snake oil...
£280m/year - tenders for resettlement & progs etc are for £3bn - that's a tie-in of at least 10 years' worth of snake oil provided to NPS by private companies.
A clear victory for the unions!!!
It's time 'accredited programmes' were placed in inverted commas. We now know that the MoJ has not been bothering to evaluate these programmes and yet is prepared to spend close to 300m to force these interventions down people's throats. This is truly analogous to flogging snake oil. Confidence in these programmes is going to drain away. And for all we know they may turn out to make things worse, as was the judgment on SOTP. But everyone must continue to pretend that 'accredited programmes are effective.
DeleteWow. This government created most of these problems through austerity and privatisation and now they're trying to solve the problems by creating privatised monopolies' for unpaid work, programmes and resettlement services. You couldn't make it up.
DeleteThere's no austerity for the private sector.
Deletehttps://www-mirror-co-uk.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/dwp-quietly-hands-private-firms-16243454.amp?amp_js_v=a2&_gsa=1#referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.mirror.co.uk%2Fnews%2Fpolitics%2Fdwp-quietly-hands-private-firms-16243454
Tory ministers are quietly handing private firms an extra £630million to test sick and disabled people for benefits - despite an avalanche of complaints.
DeleteWelfare chiefs are accused of "rewarding failure" after they extended contracts with corporate giants Atos and Maximus without going out to tender. The firms' deals to assess people for Personal Independence Payments (PIP) and Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) were each extended in recent months to July 2021.
Now the eye-watering cost has been confirmed by the Department for Work and Pensions, which slipped the details online without fanfare late last Friday. The documents said extending Atos' PIP contract by two years would cost taxpayers up to £394.7m, while the ESA contract - run by a subsidiary of Maximus - would cost up to £236.4m for a 16-month extension.
In total, DWP chiefs have approved up to £631.1m on the two contracts put together. It was the second time each firm had its contract extended by the DWP despite an outcry over the "failing" privately-run tests.
Last June Atos was warned to "start delivering or else" by MPs on the powerful Work and Pensions Committee. And 74% of ESA tests and 73% of PIP tests that went to appeal in the last three months of 2018 were overturned, the highest rate on record. Yet the corporate giants will now have enjoyed their lucrative contracts for eight and seven years respectively by the time they finally come up for renewal.
The DWP said the contracts were extended to ensure "stability" while it redesigns the assessment process to make it better for claimants long term. When she announced the move in March, DWP chief Amber Rudd argued it would pave the way for "a more joined-up claimant experience" in future.
But Genevieve Edwards, of the MS Society, branded the extensions a "kick in the teeth" for people claiming PIP for the "painful and exhausting" condition.
She said: "We've been told all too frequently that assessors don't understand MS and the process doesn't capture the reality of living with it. It's nonsensical to reward this lack of understanding and failing system with extra millions of pounds, when what is really needed is an overhaul so people don't have to fight to get the support they need."
Atos delivers the majority of PIP assessments under the name Independent Assessment Services (IAS) through a contract it has held since 2013. ESA assessments have been delivered since October 2014 by a firm called The Centre for Health and Disability Assessments Ltd (CHDA) - whose parent corporation is US outsourcing giant Maximus. Capita also has a PIP assessments contract, which is also being extended, but talks are ongoing over the details.
Labour's Shadow Minister for Disabled People Marsha De Cordova said: "It is scandalous that hundreds of millions of pounds more have been handed over to private companies, such as Atos and CHDA, that are wreaking havoc on disabled people’s lives.
By extending these contracts, this Tory government has once again shown its disregard for the appalling inaccuracies of outsourced assessments for PIP and ESA, which have had a devastating impact on so many disabled people. Labour will end the hostile environment that these assessments have created and bring them in house."
The data was uploaded last Friday to the DWP's website but then removed on Monday - following the Mirror's enquiries - with officials claiming parts were "inaccurate". Despite the removal a DWP spokeswoman told the Mirror today that the data was in fact accurate. It's understood the price tag is a maximum budget and could end up being less.
A DWP spokeswoman confirmed: “These figures refer to the previously announced extensions of the PIP and HDAS contracts to 2021, and not to any additional extensions or new costs. "We’re committed to providing the best possible service for disabled people, which is why we’re continually improving the assessment process for PIP and ESA. We regularly monitor our assessment providers to ensure they are delivering against the high standards we expect.”
DeleteA spokesman for CHDA, whose parent firm is Maximus, said, “We are pleased to be continuing our partnership with DWP to deliver the Health Assessment Advisory Service. Since taking over the service we have fundamentally improved the experience for those we assess. The time spent in the assessment process has more than halved, we have doubled the number of clinical staff working in the service and consistently met the majority of our performance targets. We will continue to work in partnership with charities and disabled people’s organisations to improve the service further.”
A spokesman for Atos' IAS said: “We are absolutely committed to providing a professional and compassionate service for every claimant. And as we continue to work with the DWP and listen to all feedback with a clear focus on achieving this, we shall also make continuous improvements.”
Some news on pay in the RRP CRCs.
ReplyDeleteDear colleagues,
As you know, we are committed to conducting an annual pay review and increasing employee’s pay by one spinal point, for employees with six months or more service (as at 01 April 2019). I can confirm that the pay increment will be reflected in June’s payroll and backdated to 01 April 2019. For colleagues who have reached the top of their pay band, we will process a one-off payment which is equivalent to 1% (pro-rated for part-time workers) and this will also be processed in June. The one-off payment is subject to pension contributions and tax and NI deductions.
I apologise that there has been a delay in confirming this to you. Over recent weeks we have been in discussions with our Trade Unions about our approach to pay who submitted a proposal that asked us to consider increasing the pay increment and changing our pay structures to mirror the new NPS pay structure under the Pay Reform which was announced last year.
Unfortunately, at this time we are not in a position to change our approach to pay. As you know, we have finite resources and we must continue to balance those resources as best as we can across our multiple priorities.
I know that the subject of pay and reward is important to you and we are committed to reviewing our pay structure as part of the tender process for the next set of probation contracts. In addition, we will continue to review the position with our Trade Unions and the next formal review will take place in April 2020.