Tuesday, 13 April 2021

Probation Officer Well Being 2

A few weeks ago we covered a webinar on the subject of well-being and burnout and it seems it prompted a number of questions to the presenters. I notice these have now been published along with the responses:- 
  • Did you categorise respondents by NPS region/LDU to assess whether there were burnout hotspots? 
Thanks for the question – I have had a quick look at this. Burnout is highest in London and the North East – I’d need to do more to work out whether this is statistically significant, but it looks like it is. We didn’t collect data at the LDU level. It would be interesting to look at caseloads and workloads in the context of this data. It’s probably also worth thinking about the idea that burnout can be ‘contagious’. 
  • Would you consider burnout worse in CRCs? 
We don’t know the answer to this but it would be good to know. I know that caseloads are higher in CRCs which may lead to higher burnout but the workloads are so different that I expect this is not a particularly helpful way of thinking about. There will be different demands around emotional labour, different anxieties around risks, different perceptions of organisational support all of which will have an impact. Our survey could easily be used with CRC staff so we could do a comparison fairly easily. 
  • From your analysis so far, have you noticed any impacts of budget cuts (and wider austerity) on burnout? 
I think the main impact here would be around workloads – stemming from TR. From other research I’ve been doing, I know that cuts to other services in the community have been felt acutely by probation staff as it makes it harder for them to do their job – which will put additional pressure on them. Our survey data don’t show this and it’s not a theme which has come out of the interviews – although they have been very organisation focused. 
  • Was any consideration given to interviewing/sampling CRC staff? 
We did this work as part of a request by the NPS to look at the implementation of the SEEDS2 training and new supervision framework (although we weren’t commissioned by the NPS and it has been carried out independently). Because of this, we did not sample CRC staff. However, we could easily adapt our survey to CRC staff and it would be very interesting to do so. From our previous research on emotional labour we found a lot of similarities between CRC and NPS staff in terms of the work undertaken. 
  • Has any comparison been made with results from staff surveys, which covers wellbeing?
No – but this is a good point and we’ll see if it is possible to do this.
  • The problem is that probation will highly unlikely deal with high caseloads - has been like it for a long while. 
Agreed – but this may provide additional evidence for why workloads should be reduced? It also means that providers must take some responsibility for burnout and not leave staff to deal with it. There are also potential implications for recruitment and retention of staff if the relationship between caseloads and EL is better understood. It’s also worth remembering that caseloads were not the most significant factor when trying to predict burnout.
  • Per head of staff population, did you look at why women have higher burn out. I.e. why high % 
In the broader literature on burnout, women are more likely to suffer from emotional exhaustion and men are more likely to become depersonalised and this was also the case here (the mean average for depersonalisation for men is 1.40 and for women is 1.38) but this is not statistically significant. We’d need to look at this more to find out why this is. There is an important gendered angle here which we need to look into more. 
  • As an SPO - SEEDS is great and I always enjoy this with my staff, but it needs to be given to SPOs too in my opinion 
Yes – this is one of the strongest themes to come out of our interviews and we’ve already fed this back to the NPS. 
  • Would job satisfaction help to an impact on burnout, knowing that some people stop offending etc.… ? 
Job satisfaction is a protective factor for burnout – we’ve got some data on this but haven’t managed to look at it. But we will. In terms of improving job satisfaction – yes, a better understanding of the effects of probation would help because people may be able to have higher levels of job satisfaction if they know they are having a positive impact on people’s lives. People tend to try and find job satisfaction where they can – I think there’s scope for the organisation to do more here. Something which has come out of interviews is the focus on ‘small wins’ which contribute to higher levels of job satisfaction. 
  • [Comment rather than question]: As a former head of a Probation Service (Ireland), there is a huge amount of food for thought (and action) from this research. As a former service director, (and don’t want to excuse anything!) I am very conscious of the challenges of managing an organisation and its demands, while trying one’s best to support staff. Many thanks for highlighting these issues. 
Agreed… this why we’re in academia and not heads of probation services! 
  • Has this study been compared to any previous data relating to emotional labour in probation practitioners and if so what has been the impact of Transforming Rehabilitation for example been on the experience of probation staff? 
This is the first study which has attempted to quantify emotional labour and burnout amongst probation staff in England and Wales (as far as we know!). We have written a little about the impact of TR on NPS staff in our article here.  We will be looking at comparing what we’ve done with studies from other countries.
  • Has your research been shared with NPS senior leaders? 
Not yet, but it will be. 
  • Clinical support is provided via PAM. Did staff find this helpful? 
Generally – no. PAM assist was seen as too generic. People have complained that when they ring them up they have to first of all explain what probation even is before getting the support they need. Participants have compared PAM assist with the support available when they were in a Probation Trust and say it is not specific enough to probation work and so doesn’t fare well. A small number of people have been more positive. People are more positive about the insights sessions with clinical psychologist and everyone who is eligible is very positive about the clinical supervision provided through the OPD pathway.

7 comments:

  1. Interesting to a degree (no pun intended) but some of the academics' answers leave me with more questions about their agenda:

    Q: Would you consider burnout worse in CRCs?

    "We don’t know the answer to this but it would be good to know."

    Then later on, in answer to a different question, they say "we did not sample CRC staff." Why not say that straight away?


    The following just doesn't compute, a double-speak non-sequitur:

    "We did this work as part of a request by the NPS to look at the implementation of the SEEDS2 training and new supervision framework (although we weren’t commissioned by the NPS and it has been carried out independently)"


    As for their previous article from five years ago (‘It’s relentless’: The impact of working primarily with high-risk offenders - Jake Phillips, Chalen Westaby, Andrew Fowler - First Published June 15, 2016) it concerns me that they feel able to write:

    "The article concludes with a brief discussion of the findings in terms of the training and resourcing needs required by those NPS probation officers who are struggling with the shift to primarily high-risk offender management."

    A view that conveniently dovetails with the NPS/HMPPS/MoJ approach of personalising everything, reducing it to the individual, taking responsibility away from the organisation, laying blame with "those NPS probation officers who are struggling".


    Where are the unions, the protectors of the workforce, in all of this?

    ReplyDelete
  2. EVERYTHING this govt touches turns to shitdust:

    "The government's LGBT advisory panel has been disbanded after three members quit last month, the BBC can reveal.

    A government spokesman said a replacement for the panel, which was set up under Theresa May's premiership, "will be set out in due course".

    Some members told the BBC they had been willing to stay on when their terms ended on the 31 March.

    A Conservative backbencher has accused the government of a series of "unforced errors". "


    Yet still the UK thinks the DirtyShagger is the man for the job (shurely man on the job?)

    ReplyDelete
  3. The stench is overwhelming - but it seems the UK has lost its sense of smell.

    "Crothers was the government’s chief commercial officer from 2012 to 2015, collecting a salary of up to £149,000 a year before leaving for the private sector. Companies House records suggest Crothers became a director at Greensill in August 2016. However, it emerged on Tuesday that he joined Greensill as an adviser while he was still employed by the civil service... Crothers confirmed he was “given approval to take up a part-time board advisory role with Greensill Capital starting from September 2015, whilst employed as a civil servant”."

    "The Cabinet Office is understood not to keep records of how many civil servants have advisory roles to firms."



    WHAT DO THEY DO WITH ALL THAT MONEY? Where & how do they spend it? It seems to me they just acquire & accumulate, then spend the rest of their lives complaining & avoiding paying tax.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I guess everyone's gone down the pub; telly pictures show thousands in the streets, masks off, celebrating with hugs; others flock to the national playparks, masks off, hugging...

    In the meantime our elected government continues to model a total lack of self-control to the nation, pursuing the rapid privatisation of everything by stealth while enriching themselves beyond any measure of human decency.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/04/14/priv-a14.html

      Delete
  5. Ross McGuinness
    13 April 2021, 2:05 pm

    A third wave of coronavirus could cause up to 50,000 more deaths despite the rollout of vaccines, a scientist has warned.

    Professor Jeremy Brown, a member of the government’s Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI), said there could be a “big third wave”.

    His warning came as prime minister Boris Johnson said the easing of England’s lockdown restrictions will “inevitably” lead to more infections and deaths.

    Prof Brown, an expert in respiratory infection at University College London Hospitals, said there could be tens of thousands more deaths: "I feel mighty relieved that we are now in a position where a very high proportion of the vulnerable population have been vaccinated so, if control of the virus is lost, then the damage it can do will be relatively restricted," he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme on Tuesday.

    "But when I say relatively restricted, what I mean is that a big third wave could still end up with 30,000 to 50,000 deaths, potentially, if it was a similar sort of size to the previous waves that we've had."


    Ah well, we may's well get to a neat grand total for the sake of the history books, shall we say 250,000?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Alexander Britton - PA media
      14 April 2021, 2:05 am

      "Rapid spread of coronavirus variants could necessitate the reimposition of lockdown measures, a scientist advising the Government said.

      Professor Peter Openshaw said his fellow scientists were “very concerned” after a cluster of cases of the South African coronavirus variant were found in London.

      Some 44 confirmed cases of the variant have been found in Lambeth and Wandsworth, with a further 30 probable cases identified, the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) said."

      The SA variant has ben allegedly traced to UK citizens returning from overseas travel; its believed they came from 'green' countries so, although tested, were not required to isolate or quarantine. So much for our secure borders...

      Delete