Thursday, 11 February 2021

Assess, Protect and Change

There's nothing more eagerly awaited by front line probation staff struggling on a daily basis with the endless bureaucratic and data-entry requirements of the job than publication of 220 pages about the new Target Operating Model and new National Standards. There are new acronyms, new titles and a new strap line 'Assess, Protect and Change'. Officers become 'Probation Practitioner' and clients 'supervised individual'. Here's a taster:-   

Introduction 

This chapter provides the context for our target operating model, outlining what we hope to achieve through our reforms and the additional investment being made. It also sets out some key considerations that have informed our proposals, including alignment with the HMPPS Business Strategy, how we can create a more equitable, diverse and inclusive system, and how our proposals link to wider changes and improvements to the criminal justice system.

About this document 

This document supersedes the document ‘A Draft Target Operating Model for the Future of Probation Services in England and Wales,’ published in March 2020. It sets out the further design detail and key design changes that have developed since then. 

It is aimed at staff and stakeholders involved in probation delivery and is intended to establish a common understanding of our aspirations for the future of probation services in England and Wales. 

Its focus is, therefore, on how we anticipate the key features of the model working once we have implemented the reforms. We recognise that it will take time to get there, not least given the challenges presented by COVID-19 and the subsequent recovery work needed to get probation services onto a stable footing. The position as of June 2021 – when Community Rehabilitation Company (CRC) contracts end – will, therefore, look quite different, as our focus will be on the smooth transition of services. We provide an overview in Chapter 2 of what services will be in place as of June 2021 (‘Day 1’) and key milestones post Day 1 to get us to our target operating model.

In accordance with the HMPPS Business Strategy principle of an open, learning culture, we will need flexibility to update this target operating model to be able to apply lessons learned from how it is working in practice. The experience of the COVID-19 pandemic has also highlighted that events or wider changes outside our direct control may impact on how our probation system operates. We therefore expect that there will be further iterations of this target operating model following the transition to the new model. 

We have used language intended to resonate with stakeholders and best reflect the intentions behind the new model and the benefits that we are seeking to achieve. In describing the new probation system, this document will, therefore, and as far as possible, use: 
  • ‘Probation Practitioner’ to denote the formerly-used terms ‘Offender Manager’/‘Responsible Officer’ and ‘Officer.’ 
  • ‘Sentence Management’ to denote the formerly-used term ‘Offender Management.’ 
Learning from the more progressive approach CRCs have taken, we will also move away from the term ‘offender’ in those contexts where it is an unhelpful label, instead referring in this document to supervised individuals or individuals. 

Exceptions to this approach will be either to denote a specific Criminal Justice Context (such as Responsible Officer when referring to key legislation requirements) or when referring to parallel programme features, such as Offender Management in Custody. A comprehensive glossary is at Annex B.

The purpose of probation

As set out in law, probation services have multiple aims that relate to protecting against further offences (protecting the public, empowering those that commit crimes to want to make positive changes and reducing the likelihood of reoffending) and addressing the harm caused by the original offence (highlighting the effects of crime on victims and facilitating appropriate punishment). 

These aims are not mutually exclusive and there is overlap across them. For example, by challenging and empowering people to embrace the opportunity to make lasting changes to their lives, Probation Practitioners will, in turn, advance the key aim of protecting the public by reducing reoffending. Indeed, a renewed focus on change work forms part of the Government’s broader approach to the Criminal Justice System, particularly through the ambition (set out in the White Paper ‘A Smarter Approach to Sentencing’) to make greater use of robust and effective community sentences as a credible alternative to custodial sentences. Through increasing the use of appropriate community sentencing options, we will be better equipped to address the complex needs of supervised individuals and to target the underlying causes of offending behaviour, thereby breaking the cycle of offending and keeping the public safer.

Our reform of probation services offers a valuable opportunity to not only stabilise the probation landscape, reinforce its ethics and ensure that core services are properly delivered, but also to innovate and improve the way these services are delivered such that we can better achieve probation’s key aims. In defining the future operating model, we have, therefore, considered the foundations of a strong probation service to be able to achieve this and have distilled it into a simpler description of ‘Assess, Protect and Change’. 

Probation’s statutory aims revolve around three distinct groups with differing perspectives (those that commit crime, victims and the public). We have, therefore, outlined in Figure 1 (below) what Assess, Protect, Change means in the context of both probation services themselves and those that they are intended to serve. 

In Chapter 3, we further consider the implications of Assess, Protect, Change on the role of the Probation Practitioner in the context of delivering advice to court, Sentence Management and resettlement support.

24 comments:

  1. Practitioners not officers. Is this the begining of the end for unequal pay based on out of date titles and irrelevant status claims.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Depends whether they allow PSO's to hold high risk cases.. or not

      Delete
    2. It's the end genericism is in pay reductions leveling has to come and competency based practice has already been agreed. Po distinction is under attack yet there will be no fight as hmpps trumps all

      Delete
  2. Good thing: dropping the "offender" label. My strong sense of relief suggests this is maybe very significant. THey need to follow through and change this throughout delius and OASys
    Not so good thing: the false identification of "those who commit crimes, the public, and victims" as three distinct groups. The majority of my caseload are also victims of crime. We are all the public. Venn diagram anyone? Making this false distinction "others" those who commit crimes, and denies the social context of crime

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. An absolutely wonderful contribution and thank you for making it. I totally agree: our service users are often (usually?) victims of abuse, neglect, social disadvantage and many crimes - how many knife attacks, thefts, assaults have our service users faced in their lifetimes? What often concerns me is the (perfectly valid) portrayal as women as victims, abuse, and the clear acceptance and validity that this victimisation has played in their lives. Men, however, making up potentially 95% of our "market", no, they are seen as making "poor choices", or needing "behaviour change"; with very little attention paid or voice given to the role that their own victimisation, abuse histories, violence, bereavement of friends, depression, mental illness sometimes contributed to by lack of opportunity, lack of access, poor housing, lack of tenancies and stability has contributed. Women need counselling, men need thinking skills programmes and "robust community sentencing", apparently.

      Delete
  3. yet another new choreography, a new dance-to-our-tune routine, & reams & reams & reams of revisionist bollox

    Assess, Protect, Change - was that Johnson's idea? Or just some acolyte's desperate attempt to endear themselves to the needy lardass??

    Hands. Face. Space.
    Kiss. My. Arse.

    It never ceases to amaze how many people who have never spent more than a handful of hours as a practitioner are allowed to spend months making-up this shit, getting paid eye-watering sums of public money...

    ... while those on the frontline who risk their lives, their health & their relationships trying to make a difference get paid a fraction & are treated like shit.
    _______________________________________________________

    https://www.gov.uk/guidance/strengthening-probation-building-confidence

    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/959746/HMPPS_-_National_Standards_2021_-_Supporting_transition_to_the_Unified_Model__English__-_09-02-2021.pdf

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you're risking your relationship, it's not strong enough..

      Delete
    2. beware the the folly of confidence & certainty

      Delete
    3. Hey blame why it's stressful there are consequences to working in pressure regime.

      Delete
    4. Agree its ridiculous people detached from the actual job get paid more with limited to no knowledge of the detail of the role to write practice and policy about it. And it does damage relationships re that other comment

      Delete
  4. Interesting article in the Times today. Can't get full access (paywall), but maybe someone can?
    With a lot of concern being expressed on here recently around vetting, I'm wondering what role is envisaged for these 150 ex offenders?

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/former-prisoners-to-get-jobs-in-probation-service-298m9cccx

    'Getafix

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The government has pledged to employ 150 former prisoners in the National Probation Service by April next year as it vowed to lead the way on changing attitudes to employing ex-offenders.

      Lucy Frazer, the prisons minister, is hoping to persuade more companies to hire ex-offenders by signing up to the Ban the Box campaign, which encourages employers to remove the criminal convictions tick box from their job application forms. They can ask about convictions later in the process.

      Studies have shown that the vast majority of employers put applications straight in the bin if the criminal conviction box has been ticked. Frazer said that employing former prisoners can bring benefits not just to the individual but also the employer.

      Delete
    2. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/prison-leavers-project-improving-outcomes-for-prison-leavers

      Delete
  5. One in five going into workplace unnecessarily amid UK Covid crisis

    Exclusive: employers are putting workers at risk and increasing infection rates in communities, unions say

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The prisons and probation service keep very quiet on this issue. The majority of prisons are outbreak sites. Yet unnecessary staff are still being required to go in and spread the virus.

      Delete
  6. Dozens of former Republican officials in talks to form anti-Trump party

    Breakaway group would run on ‘principled conservatism’ platform, say those involved in discussions

    Dozens of former Republican officials who view the party as unwilling to stand up to Donald Trump and his attempts to undermine US democracy are in talks to form a centre-right breakaway party

    ReplyDelete
  7. Cronyism? Where? Don't know what you mean...

    "The new chair of the Office for Students (OfS) – the independent regulator of higher education in England – is the former Conservative MP, Boris Johnson’s campaign manager, current Conservative peer and longstanding friend of the failing education secretary, Gavin Williamson: James Wharton.

    The panel to select the chair of the Office for Students was skewed towards Conservative supporters, risking its independence. Along with the head civil servant at the Department for Education, Susan Acland-Hood, the five-strong panel comprises Patricia Hodgson, the ex-Ofcom head who was once a Conservative parliamentary candidate; Eric Ollerenshaw, who was a Tory MP from 2010 to 2015; Laura Wyld, a Conservative peer; and Nick Timothy, who was Theresa May’s chief of staff.

    This appointment is staggering, not least because of blatant disregard for the clear statutory criteria designed to guide appointments to the OfS. Indeed, in his pre-appointment hearing at the education select committee, Wharton admitted that he failed to meet the top criterion, having no experience of the higher education sector.

    Wharton went on to tell the committee that running Boris Johnson’s 2017 leadership campaign was not a conflict of interest, nor his longstanding links with Policy Exchange, the rightwing think tank established by Michael Gove, which he described as merely “advisory”.

    Perhaps most concerning, he confirmed that despite being appointed to chair an independent regulator, he will continue to take the Conservative whip in the House of Lords, voting with the government on regulations that govern the very organisation he will represent"

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/feb/11/tory-cronyism-higher-education-james-wharton-office-for-students

    ReplyDelete
  8. posted early jan'21 - "We've already had 6,598 deaths in jan 2021 (within 28 days of a positive test) - we'll cruise to the landmark of 100,000 deaths by the end of this month."

    uk govt (28 days of test) @ 1.1.21 = 76,974

    uk govt (within 28 days) @ 31.1.21 = 109,565

    uk govt (28 day rule) today, 11.2.21 = 115,529


    Wancock now decides to rearrange the NHS deckchairs; its Find The Lady all over again.

    Westminster Amateur Players present - Now You See Me 3

    * Matt shows off his fast hand jobs
    * Boris demonstrates his amazing memory for detail
    * Priti makes people vanish without trace
    * Michael makes an entire continent disappear...

    ... and all in plain sight, £Billions have gone missing

    ReplyDelete
  9. whose lives matter?

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/feb/12/priti-patel-hits-out-at-dreadful-black-lives-matters-protests

    ReplyDelete
  10. As with any trial of a serious matter there are always those employed to defend the defendant.

    Michael Van der Veen is the founder of the Philadelphia law firm van der Veen, O'Neill, Hartshorn, and Levin. He specializes in personal injury and is best known for his local radio ads in Philadelphia.

    His opening salvo was reminiscent of the usual domestic/sexual abuse perpetrator defence, i.e. detract from the behaviour, personalise an attack on the victim/s, make it the victim's fault.

    Schoen took the role of the nasty troll.

    Castor might try to assume the role of 'voice of reason'. but after his rambling bollox the other day its unlikely to be especially impressive.

    ReplyDelete
  11. what a beautiful phrase to invoke a sense of remorse:

    "contort yourself into a contrite pretzel"

    heard on CNN

    ReplyDelete
  12. trump's defence seemed to me to be a carbon copy (remember them?) of his attitudes & behaviours towrads everything else. But then, why wouldn't it be?

    - disrupt
    - distract
    - deny
    - personalise the attack

    The constitutionality of the impeachment trial had been voted upon & agreed by the senate; except that trump's defence continued to argue it didn't apply - 'stop the steal'

    The facts were often set aside to allow for fantastic tangential argument - 'vote dumping', 'use of sharpie pens'; 'dead people'

    There were flat-out denials of clear evidence

    The house managers were individually attacked on every level, from political to professional to personal.


    Exactly the same relentless bullying tactics used by team trump to incite the insurrection on Jan 6 2021.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Before the start of the impeachment trial I thought Trump was guilty but after having watched it closely I don't think the prosecution have successfully proven their case.

    Make no mistake, the video footage was horrendous but all that does is prove criminality against the actual perpetrators.

    The suggestion that because the perpetrators said they were there because Trump told them to it means he incited them is laughable. "It wasn't me sir, it was an older bigger boy that made me do it" - come on! As Probation Officers we would rightly challenge that minimisation if we were supervising the perpetrators.

    Most of the prosecution case seems to rest on one comment by Trump - to "fight like hell". The video montage shown by the defence of Democrat politicians making similarly metaphorical comments telling their supporters to fight blows that argument out of the water.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Legal observer on CNN regarding the defence case:-

      "When you have the law you bang on the law; when you have the facts you bang on the facts; when you have neither you bang on the table."

      Delete