Please read my comment below. You might need to rethink your views about Management Oversights and SPOs avoiding blame... Alison Moss
As the SPO who was sacked over the Campbell case, (not the one referred to as involved in the article) I have a great deal to say about the way the SFO was handled by the NPS and, of course, the topic of scapegoating. Also I have answers to some anomalies, for example why the inspectorate found it odd’ that no one was disciplined at the time (my own disciplinary action started 19 months after the SFO actually). But I am not able to explain the full story and the manner in which the NPS handled this until all proceedings are concluded. Alison Moss.
All the best in your battle Alison, Grayling et.al., should be in the dock for this, not you. Anon.
Thank you for your comment. I really appreciate your support. I have had very little support over the past 5 months since I got the boot, after 27 years in the job, having worked with hundreds of colleagues. But four or five colleagues have been SO fantastic that it makes up for the silence from all the others. Alison Moss
Just noticed your responses Alison - must have been extremely traumatic for you. I find it's an extremely difficult area for the blog precisely because I'm only too well aware these cases involve real people; real colleagues, but at the same time I feel it's important that the story about what really happened and where responsibility should fall is told. I can always be contacted in confidence via the email address on the profile page if you feel it might be helpful. Take care, Jim Brown.
Thanks Jim, I know what you mean about real people and real lives. Lisa Skidmore lost her life, I only lost my job and that puts it alll back into perspective. I will tell the full story on the blog and also in the wider public arena in time but it will take months before the inquest and tribunals are concluded. Just focussing on trying to rebuild my life at the moment, it is not easy. Alison Moss.
Hi Ali, As an ex Napo member I know (Just a little) of your case....your comments, above, reminded me of you ........and all the other hard working professionals within the Probation Service and CRCs who are dedicated and work tirelessly to manage risk. I can only imagine how difficult it has been and must still be for you. I wish you well .......and for what it's worth you have my support and thanks. Anon.
Much appreciated thank you. Alison Moss.
--oo00oo--
From Amazon:-
In July 2016, serial rapist Leroy Campbell was released from prison, having spent seventeen years behind bars for yet another horrific sexual offence. Just four months later, he brutally raped and murdered a stranger, Lisa Skidmore, in her own home. He subjected her to a horrendous two-hour ordeal. Weeks earlier, he had warned probation staff he felt like committing another rape. Could anyone have prevented him?
Numerous professionals were involved in “rehabilitating” Campbell and all believed he was safe to roam our streets. How did he manage to fool them all?
This is an important book: a compelling insight into this case which examines sentencing guidelines. It also gives case studies of other dangerous criminals who were under probation supervision, only to rape or murder again.
The author, Alison Moss, was the Senior Probation Officer in Campbell’s case. She describes what happened two years after the murder when the Skidmore family called upon the government, including the then Prime Minister Theresa May, to ask why Campbell was free to target Lisa.
In July 2016, serial rapist Leroy Campbell was released from prison, having spent seventeen years behind bars for yet another horrific sexual offence. Just four months later, he brutally raped and murdered a stranger, Lisa Skidmore, in her own home. He subjected her to a horrendous two-hour ordeal. Weeks earlier, he had warned probation staff he felt like committing another rape. Could anyone have prevented him?
Numerous professionals were involved in “rehabilitating” Campbell and all believed he was safe to roam our streets. How did he manage to fool them all?
This is an important book: a compelling insight into this case which examines sentencing guidelines. It also gives case studies of other dangerous criminals who were under probation supervision, only to rape or murder again.
The author, Alison Moss, was the Senior Probation Officer in Campbell’s case. She describes what happened two years after the murder when the Skidmore family called upon the government, including the then Prime Minister Theresa May, to ask why Campbell was free to target Lisa.
Only then was it decided that someone needed to be held to account for Lisa’s murder. Eventually, the blame was placed firmly on the shoulders of one individual.
Will be an interesting read
ReplyDeleteI wouldn't suggest this blog has become a tightly censored echo-chamber reflecting only the moderator's views... but 19:25 is the single post you select for publication? Really? Gee whizz.
ReplyDeleteAnon 20:55 I'm afraid it is now 'censored' in order to prevent deliberately inflammatory, insensitive or abusive comments. I have no problem at all publishing views that are not mine, as long as they are considered and cogent. Unfortunately in the process it destroys dialogue and spontaneity but that's the way it is and I turned the computer off at 9pm. We've been losing lots of readers recently and I suspect that's been because of the drop in quality of contributions. We will have to see if things improve, but I've decided moderation stays in place at least for the time being.
DeleteOM, long in the tooth now, I have several SFO's on my CV. In every case, without exception, my organisation has shat on me. I hate them for the lack of care they extend to case holders. They have got this so wrong. They talk of lessons learned but they dont learn them.
ReplyDeleteIn my last SFO investigation I was hugely assisted by the HMIP SFO thematic inspection report which poured criticism on the NPS SFO process as being unfit for any kind of purpose. For the first time, but not the last, I felt a smidgen of sadness that HMIP was more understanding and protective of my professional context than my employer. To anyone going through this 'blessed' process read the HMIP report and I think you will find it useful and supportive
ReplyDeleteThe probation system is not doing enough to learn lessons from serious crimes committed by offenders under supervision, according to inspectors.
DeleteNearly a quarter of a million people are on probation in England and Wales. Around 0.2 per cent of these individuals are charged with serious further offences each year while under supervision. These crimes include murder, rape, and other violent and dangerous offences.
HM Inspectorate of Probation examined the way probation services review and learn lessons in these cases. Inspectors also looked at how HM Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) quality assure those reviews, and use information to improve national policies and practice. Victims and their families were asked about their experiences too.
Chief Inspector of Probation Justin Russell said: “Serious further offences have a devastating impact on victims and their families. The review process must examine the period leading up to the offence and how the probation service managed the risk of serious harm.
“Our inspection found that individual reviews were good in parts, but a fifth (22 per cent) of those we inspected failed to give a clear judgment as to whether all reasonable steps had been taken to manage the risk of serious harm. At a national level, more needs to be done to identify trends and themes to drive changes to probation policies and guidance.
“Until this work is done, the government and probation services are not doing enough to learn from past mistakes. Lessons must be learnt to prevent more tragedies in the future.”
Probation services in England and Wales are delivered by a mix of providers. The National Probation Service (NPS) supervises high risk offenders in the community, while 21 Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRC) supervise low and medium risk offenders.
When an individual who is on probation commits a serious further offence, a manager in the relevant NPS division or CRC conducts an internal review.
Inspectors found:
Serious Further Offence reviews often set out the timeline of events, but are less effective at explaining why the offence took place. Reviews should draw clear conclusions on failures of probation practice.
Serious Further Offence reviews focus solely on probation practice, unlike reviews conducted in other parts of the criminal justice system, such as those following domestic homicides. Offenders are usually known to other agencies, so these interactions are not explored and important opportunities for joint learning are being missed. Inspectors recommend external agencies that have been involved in the case, such as the police and children’s services, should be involved in the Serious Further Offence review. Consideration should also be given to whether this should be mandatory for all homicide cases not currently covered by other multi-agency procedures. There should be a requirement for SFO reviews that include findings on the actions of other agencies to be shared with those agencies.
Individual probation officers involved in cases are interviewed by the Serious Further Offence review teams, but often do not see the final reports and have limited opportunities to question the findings. Some staff view the process negatively and believe its primary focus is to attribute blame. The Inspectorate concluded this ‘culture of fear’ undermines the ability of organisations to learn from the process.
Relatively few victims or their families ask to see the Serious Further Offence review and take up of this offer is not monitored centrally. More effort needs to be made to increase the uptake of this offer.
DeleteVictims and their families that do ask to see the review found the process open and honest about failings, and appreciated the chance to discuss the case with a senior manager.
The Inspectorate found the content and length of the reviews would be difficult for some victims and family members to digest. Inspectors also urged greater consideration to individual circumstances before disclosing reviews, for example to ensure vulnerable victims have proper support.
HMPPS is responsible for quality assuring Serious Further Offence reviews and providing feedback to probation services.
Inspectors found:
Reviews are not analysed nationally to identify themes, which could improve policy and practice.
Staff shortages have led to backlogs and unacceptable delays – the HMPPS quality assurance process should take 20 days but takes six months on average.
There is a lack of independent oversight and transparency in the process with HMPPS auditing the quality of its own work.
Mr Russell said: “Significant resources are rightly invested in the Serious Further Offence review process. In our view, the current arrangements are inefficient and lack independence and transparency.
“We recommend an independent agency should get involved in quality assuring this vital work. The agency should look at a proportion of completed reviews each year and publish its findings on a regular basis. This will help to increase public confidence in the process.
“Following our inspection, we have made a number of recommendations to the Ministry of Justice and HMPPS. These aim to refocus the Serious Further Offence review process on learning lessons, improving probation policies and practice, and increasing access for victims and their families.”
Earlier this year, the Secretary of State for Justice asked Mr Russell to conduct an independent review into the case of Joseph McCann, who committed a series of serious further offences while under probation supervision. The first part of that report will be published in June 2020.
Doing your job as best as you can in overwork situations bad admin poor IT late records failed attendances pressure not to breach, the absent workloads management agreement and no distinctions for proper case time allocation. Any good union would take employers to court threaten legal protection raise formal statutory grievances on multiple infringements and force employers to protect the public by protection of staff first as priority. Sadly we don't have that anymore and we have to look at why we have a such a pathetic unprofessional crock in Napo . Napo don't know much these days feckless low grade ego trippers who have squandered resources. Unison hide in the bigger staff avoiding probation officers plight as not the bulk of its members. SFO outcomes will likely remain the stick against po staff. Fear rules.
ReplyDeleteThank you for picking up on my book so quickly. It only came out yesterday. The Leroy Campbell Case, why he free to rape and murder? Who was to blame? A kindle book - free today - and the paperback should be available in the next couple of days on Amazon.
ReplyDeleteAlison - This is clearly a very important book that for many sheds much light on how probation functioned both during and post-TR. It covers a multitude of current criminal justice issues in addition to concerns regarding the current state of probation and its future. This is very much of interest to readers, practitioners and policy makers. I wonder if I could invite you to get in touch confidentially via the contact details on the profile page? Thanks, Jim.
DeleteJust read your book and was totally shocked and appauled. I really hope Alison is Ok because of this and feel embarassed to still work for this organisation!
DeletePS please, please read it. As well as describing the SFO in detail, I also describe exactly what happened to me in the disciplinary process. It was shocking. I only hope my book can help to prevent this from happening to anyone else in the Service and bring about change, so that reviews and disciplinary hearings become independent.
ReplyDeleteLooking forward to reading it. Went thru an obviously rigged disciplinary myself with union rep - who it later turned out had an otherwise undisclosed relationship with the senior manager making the accusations. Lucky for me the Hearing Chair wasn't stupid & allowed me to deliver my own summing up when union rep tried to tell the hearing I was admitting all allegations.
DeleteA "Guaranteed sacking" for gross misconduct ended up as minor infraction of data protection (inadvertent but yes, it was), a slap on the wrist & internal enquiry about the wasted time & money, and the lies told by others coerced into submitting false evidence to the kangaroo court.
I think TR saved the skins of all involved as the Trust ceased to exist shortly afterwards. Guess where I was shafted. And guess what the CRC did next.
But I wouldn't have coped any longer. I was on the ragged edge as it was after way too many months suspended & I'm much happier no longer embroiled with such a dysfunctional coven of vile bullies.
Learned how to be a barista; now I'm getting paid to write, paint, travel (not so much for the last year) & generally enjoy life.
I remember last year one of my cases allegedly committed an offence of rape. Having had site of police evidence it was clear to me that he did not fit the profile of the offender. Despite this he appeared in court charged with one account of rape and one account of sexual assault against adult female.
ReplyDeleteThe serious further offence process was initiated at court and the case was put on hold and all documentation relevant to the case was printed off and Case file seized. I was given clear instructions not to have access to the case pending the SFO enquiry. I was made to feel like I had done something wrong. No account was taken of the high case load I was carrying at the time.
I was interviewed and asked questions about my management of the case. Basically the interview conducted by an ACO made me feel belittled and guilty that I did something wrong. I came out the meeting feeling overwhelmed and deskilled.
In a bizarre twist of turn the police had in fact arrested the wrong person and no further evidence was offered by the CPS. Consequently, the offender was released without charge.
However, I did not receive any apology or explanation for being put through this terrible experience. I raised the issue with my manager and told that this is the way things are done.
It just seemed to me that managers just want to quickly blame someone or point the finger at others at the first opportunity.
We need to change the way we work. We need to treat staff with respect and not someone to point the finger at. It took me some several months to recover from this unfortunate experience. I hope for things change for the best in the future although I have my doubt.
Ali, I have just finished reading your book. The way you and the PO holding the case were treated was appalling. I still work for the Service but it has changed so much over the and I am not convinced much of it has been for the better. Good luck.
ReplyDeleteI dont have a kindle. Is there another way of getting this book? Sounds so positive to get something out from a different perspective than the government department that audits its own process in this.
ReplyDeleteI didn't either you can download an app and read off tablet or mobile.
DeleteHi yes you can download the Kindle app into your phone
Deleteyour b;og comments much improved with moderation, but must be wearing you out, but thanks
ReplyDeleteI have just read a fair chunk of the book and feel sick to the stomach. I feel so sorry for Alison. It is an utter disgrace that an organisation that presents as promoting fair treatment and honesty can treat an employee in this way. It does not surprise me as I have seen how the truth is suppressed deliberately as it does not fit the agenda and how other types of investigations made are flawed and biased. It is shocking.
ReplyDeleteThank you so much for your supportive comments. You sum it up really well
DeletePS it's now out on paperback. Happy to send anyone free copies if you email me
ReplyDeletemossalison1@aol.com. Discretion assured.
Ali, credit to you for sharing what I believe is essential probation reading.
ReplyDeleteMany of us have been shafted by probation on occasion, by SFO and complaint processes. These processes can be horrendous and there is no protection or support.
Probation senior managers, Heads of Service, ACOs and Directors, are always willing to throw everyone beneath them under the bus.
Senior Probation Officers sometimes wear the Teflon too, but only if they’re in the inner-circle and if senior managers are not comprised.
The SFO process is a blame game and the aim is to find fault no matter what. Most probation colleagues are manipulated through the process and made to believe it is development, when it is not. Anything that puts a negative maker next to ones name is potentially career ending.
Just finished reading it. You didn't do anything wrong Ali, like your barrister said, not sending him back to the hostel probably delayed the 'inevitable'. This could happen to any of us at any time. Horrendous.
ReplyDeleteThank you for your lovely comments, really supportive and heart warming
DeleteProbation colleagues receiving digital or paper copies of this book should consider sharing with colleagues. I’ll be leaving my copy in a probation office with a message in the front cover;
ReplyDeletePlease take this book away and read it. When you finish please sanitise and share it with a probation or CJS colleague, or leave it in a probation or CJS staff area.
"Boris Johnson’s government is due to introduce a bill in the spring to make photo ID mandatory from 2023 for all UK-wide and English elections"
ReplyDeleteAnyone else aware of this?
"In an intervention that could prove embarrassing to ministers, US groups that were at the frontline of efforts to combat vote-blocking efforts by Donald Trump and his allies, said ID laws disproportionately affected people from poorer and more marginalised communities."
The Government's cover story?
* A Cabinet Office spokeswoman said mandatory ID was “a reasonable way to combat the inexcusable potential for voter fraud in our current system and strengthen its integrity”
That will be coupled with boundary changes:-
Deletehttps://www.thelondoneconomic.com/politics/boundary-revisions-will-hand-tories-huge-majority-in-2024-209286/
No doubt the Tories motivation for doing it is they think they'll pick up more votes that way - much like when Labour proposed extending voting to 16 and 17 year olds because it would have increased their vote share rather than out of any genuine concern that that age group was without franchise.
DeleteBut leaving all that to one side, voter ID does seem like a sensible idea. It's always surprised me that anyone can go to a polling station and presuming they are the same gender, give the name and address of their neighbour and be given a ballot paper with no further questions asked.
Its sort of weird that this has emerged as a theme now, as in totally awful that the MoJ/HMPPS, a secretive and defensive cabal, have been allowed to pursue and investigation process in-house, and quality checked by themslves. It all makes sense now: the crushing of individuals in order to protect the centre. The more polarised the gap between the ministry and Real Life, the worse this gets for practitioners trying to do a professional job connected to real life
ReplyDeleteFor the record, lest we forget those who have been lost to the pandemic:
ReplyDelete@ 12 Feb "where covid-19 is mentioned as a cause on a person's death certificate" = 135,613
Or, as HMG would prefer:
@ 28 Feb 2021 using govt 28-day method = 122,849
Of course, no-one in Government is to blame. They did everything they possibly could. They even broke the law. And they spent £billions. They need our gratitude for their support. Its all perfectly normal.
Sounds familiar...
"the crushing of individuals in order to protect the centre... the more polarised the gap between government & real life..."
The neo-Nazis are still in the ascendancy over in the US. Trump was speaking for one & a half hours at the right wing CPAC conference today. NBC's report said:
ReplyDelete"The former president began his roughly 90-minute address by asking the crowd: "Do you miss me?" before reviving false claims that he beat President Joe Biden in November... "This election was rigged," Trump said, prompting the crowd to chant, "You won! you won!"... Trump said that he is "not starting a new party," but put fellow Republicans who have crossed him on notice, name-dropping each of the 17 Republicans who voted to impeach or convict him"
There have been claims that the CPAC stage & lighting design was modelled on a Norse rune used by Nazis during World War Two.
Hyatt, the hotel group whose premises are being used, said: “We take the concern raised about the prospect of symbols of hate being included in the stage design at CPAC 2021 very seriously as all such symbols are abhorrent and unequivocally counter to our values as a company.”
The same symbol featured on flags carried by white supremacist groups involved in the Jan 6 storming of the US Capitol buildings.
No-one at CPAC offered any denial or apology: "Stage design conspiracies are outrageous and slanderous."
Currently going through sfo process, feeling very worried now.
ReplyDeleteI didn’t mean to alarm you. I don’t know if anyone else actually sacked as a result of an SFO and my freedom of information request revealed no names. But my advice would be to seek legal advice if you feel the investigation is unfair or following a biased agenda.
DeleteThis maybe of use/interest to some who have not otherwise had sight of the information: -
ReplyDelete"Domestic violence
Press release
New laws to protect victims added to Domestic Abuse Bill
A raft of new amendments to the Domestic Abuse Bill will be presented, providing greater protections for victims and further clamping down on perpetrators.
Published 1 March 2021
From:
Ministry of Justice, Home Office, The Rt Hon Robert Buckland QC MP, and Victoria Atkins MP"
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-laws-to-protect-victims-added-to-domestic-abuse-bill?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications&utm_source=14f91fd9-b0a8-4b17-94a0-15fd8973d185&utm_content=daily
They going to provide a briefing for us on that or send it in a vauge email or nothing at all then if we miss something later say our work is not of the standard they'd expect!!!!
Deletehttps://insidetime.org/the-big-break-out/
DeleteI am still reading through Alison Moss book. Fascinating insight and feel so sad with the way she was treated. Feel disgusted that an organisation that makes itself out to be a caring profession treats its staff in the way. This needs investigating further.
ReplyDeleteWhat also needs to be looked at is a mother case of nepotism within NPS. How friends, partners and family members are able to acquire positions of management. I may do a guest blog on this subject as I know at least 12 people who have secured positions of management because of ties to family or being very close friends.
Anon 09:08 I'd normally be very keen to encourage a guest blog piece on anything - but what you suggest sounds like it might name names and I have no desire to have resort to libel lawyers.
DeleteSounds like good counsel there JB . For 908 some comfort only 12. Having worked in varying capacities across the whole spectrum there have been an incredible number of leg ups and opening of doors for roles for the most incompetent. Nepotism cronyism are by words for the worst levels of internalised choosing of the do
Deleteas I say group. This infiltration of a single vision mono track leadership culture for the chosen runs right through to the top. Most leadership's rarely start at the true non connected bottom. They have a code an ilk and a sub text to their group. Don't be surprised
Meritocrisy is long dead and most staff see these appointments for what they are. It cannot be better understood until the events describe occur. Management start rank closing then manage or orchestrate a corrupted process find a scapegoat or two and immidietly blame down and close matters. Believe me there are lots and lots of examples . They practice on lower grade staff for years in attacks on performance or working practices. Pushing boundaries and buttons. When these narcissist break an individual finally they move to the next. Telling all your story will only see your name top of the next attack list open consciously and from the many in charge. Just be carful get through which is what we all try and do for now. When your out perhaps it could run .
Is there a reason why Alison doesn't actually name the Head of NPS, or the Head of NPS in Birmingham who were central to some sections of the book? If both are identified by their job roles at the time, wouldn't that be the same as identifying them anyway? Given the obvious concerns about integrity (a central 'value' of the Civil Service) and in the interest of protecting others who may have to deal with those managers in future, please can Alison provide the names here to avoid any possible misunderstanding.
DeleteI think these practices need to be outed. Long as the one doing it protects themselves. No names identifying details and generalise. Diff to do and present a story but yes they'd come for you if you exposed the double standards, hypocrisy and cover ups that go on.
ReplyDeleteI'm of the view that it's the deprofesdionalisation of probation, and it's attachment to the civil service that is responsible for how probation officers are treated when a SFO investigation is triggered.
ReplyDeleteI think an SFO investigation starts from a position of seeing the probation officer as an 'employee' of a large organisation, rather then a professional individual trained and skilled within their own field.
Professional judgement becomes something about the ability to keep records up to date and follow instruction, and not much about the decisions and calls an individual has made in a 'professional' capacity.
SFOs are always going to happen at some stage, and anyone holding a caseload, regardless of size or risk could be holding the next one.
Question is, when the next SFO does enevitabley happen, should the officer holding the case be viewed as an employee of a large governmental department,(just another Mcdougals Fred the flour grader), or a skilled and trained professional, charged with making complex decisions and judgement calls in their own right?
'Getafix
Your point is at the heart of many crossed and angered views here gtx. I recall the days when something bad happened the team meetings would see a flurry of professional support re checking evaluating the issues and all contributing to the officer concern care and recognition of their upset. Self questioning reflection and ways that may have been a factor to prevent SFO although not termed that then were all normal things without officer recrimination. Today so many colleagues are involved in one case it seems easier to find a single missed entry or late breach whatever there is to just blame the one. Accuse the staff and then absolve the wretched procedures as self righteous.
DeleteWe need to establish all our professional judgement skills again. Revisit ownership of a professional standards which need and must have safeguards. This means 1 workload limitation
2 tiering of the work duty responsibilities whichn are prescribed in written role boundary. 3 Timings properly agreed for all pieces of work. 4 case allocations process timely and gate kept for best skilled staff and workloads balance. We must re establish our frontline and professional judgement as a competency and as part of the reason why probation officers decesions are respected and calculated than that of the flawed oasys being the tool we are judged upon.
HM Inspectorate of Probation quality assurance of Serious Further Offence (SFO) reviews
ReplyDeleteIn June 2020, responding to our thematic inspection of the Serious Further Offences investigation and review process, the Secretary of State for Justice asked HM Inspectorate of Probation to provide ongoing independent oversight as part of the SFO quality assurance process. We will commence this work in April 2021. In this consultation we are seeking your views on our proposed approach, which we are currently developing in collaboration with the HMPPS SFO team.
Our approach aims to provide assurance that:
there is independent oversight of the quality assurance of a sample of SFO reviews
reviews of SFOs are thorough, robust and objective
reviews are not just focused on process failures but are broader and look at system/culture and policy
poor practice is identified, and the action plan addresses failings
learning points are identified and disseminated
good practice is identified and disseminated
where relevant, partnership work is examined and areas for improvements identified
issues relating to national policy and procedures are identified
The quality assurance of reviews will be undertaken against a clear set of standards with four distinct areas of focus:
analysis of practice
overall judgements
learning
victims and their families
We propose to look at how well each SFO review meets these four standards. We will use a four-point scale to rate each of the four standards and to give an overall rating. Our ratings are:
‘Outstanding’
‘Good’
‘Requires improvement’
‘Inadequate’
In addition to quality assuring SFO reviews and undertaking benchmarking sessions with SFO reviewers and central quality assurance teams, we are setting up multi-agency learning panels. The aim of these panels is to promote collaborative learning from SFO cases and to influence improvements at local and national levels for other agencies. We are exploring effective methods for ensuring the panels have a good representation of relevant agencies.
We welcome any views on this consultation. If you would like to contribute, please download the quality assurance of Serious Further Offence reviews consulatation document (PDF, 261 kB). The consultation closes on 05 March 2021.
All contributions should be sent by email to consultations@hmiprobation.gov.uk (E-mail address) by 05 March 2021 00.00.
If you have any questions about the consultation, please email Simi.Badachha@hmiprobation.gov.uk
oh lord these deadlines are so tight. On top of the day job.
DeleteOh yeah. "We have consulted widely". When someone asks me what I think, and when I would be available to share my thoughts, I would be consulted. Telling me I missed the deadline which was yesterday, but I have been consulted is infuriating
Deletehttps://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprobation/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2021/02/Consultation-on-HMI-Probation-quality-assurance-of-Serious-Further-Offence-reviews.pdf
Deletedirect link to the consultation document
Tried to reply to Anon at 15:41. It’s still the sane staff in post today. NPS Head Sonia Crozier (Flynn), Birmingham head Neil Appleby. Solicitor said I should name them in the book but I felt uncomfortable doing so.
ReplyDeleteSonia Crozier CBE, the Twitter champion.
ReplyDelete‘Stepping stones’ a new one to one manual for supervision and includes good lives model.
Funny how hashtag is #evidance