Friday 13 May 2022

Views On Reunification

Included within the HMI Probation Annual Report published in March was a staff survey of views on the reunification and it was published in full. The following highlights confirm a high degree of dissatisfaction:- 

Key findings and implications 

We received 1,534 responses to our survey, which represents about one in ten (9%) of Probation Service staff. Responses were received from every region, and from all functions within the service. Just over half of the respondents had previously worked in CRCs (51%) and just under half in the NPS (47%); a small minority (2%) had come from elsewhere. While a large sample, capturing views from a broad range of frontline staff, it is not fully representative. 

Headline findings are as follows: 
  • About six in ten (61%) believed that senior leaders communicated their strategies for the new, unified, Probation Service sufficiently well. However, a similar proportion (58%) believed that the changes had not been implemented well. 
  • Over half (55%) of probation staff were dissatisfied with the guidance received about how to manage work at the point of unification. 
  • About six in ten of applicable staff (58%) were ‘always’ or ‘mostly’ receiving case-focused supervision, and just over half (52%) were satisfied that managers paid sufficient attention to staff wellbeing. Six in ten (60%) had sufficient training and development opportunities 
  • About half (51%) found their workload ‘not so manageable’ (30%) or ‘not at all’ (21%) manageable. 
  • Just over half (53%) had sufficient access to services to meet the needs of people on probation, and about two-thirds (68%) had sufficient access to services and agencies to manage risk of harm to others. 
  • Just over half (52%) were satisfied that their current premises and offices supported delivery and engagement, and about six in ten (62%) were satisfied with the ICT services. 
  • Just over half (52%) had not made a final judgement on whether unification had made probation better or worse: 19% said it was ‘too early’, 28% felt there had been ‘no change’, and 5% did not know. 
  • Only six in ten (60%) stated they felt positive about working for the Probation Service (recently employed staff were more likely to be positive). 
  • More than three-quarters (77%) did not think anything had been particularly well managed during the changes, and about seven in ten (71%) thought that there were aspects of the unification changes which should have been done differently. 
When analysing the drivers of the staff responses, we found notable differences by region, with the responses from those working in Wales, where unification has had longer to bed in, tending to be more positive. 

Analysis of respondent comments to open questions revealed these key issues: 
  • there is a cultural divide between former CRC and NPS staff; CRC staff feel that they are perceived by former NPS as less skilled, as “second class” 
  • induction training was a trial for former CRC staff with too much information being delivered, and not enough time allocated to absorb the training 
  • high caseloads and workloads remain a problem for many and have hampered unification 
  • ICT problems have made unification more stressful 
  • many staff are positive about unification and the future, noting the change process was conducted amidst the pandemic and our society’s recovery.
2.2 Analysis of commentary

Our survey had three open text questions: 
  • Is there anything that you think has been done particularly well in managing the changes? Please tell us more 
  • Is there anything you think should have been done differently in managing the changes? Please tell us more 
  • Please add any further comments about your experience of the changes 
The responses across the three questions tended to converge upon general themes. We have thus analysed the commentary in aggregate and drawn out these key themes. We identify region and former organisation for direct quotes. As we assured strict confidentiality, no further identifiers are given. 

Serious divisions exist between former CRC and NPS staff 

The new service faces the challenge of helping to foster a new identity for all staff, and leave behind the divisions of Transforming Rehabilitation. Many former CRC staff told us they have felt disrespected during unification, that their skills and knowledge have been minimised, and they have been condescended to and treated as inferior. These comments from ex-CRC staff sum up the frustration: 

“There is a clear sense that some staff and managers within what was NPS NW believe that anyone from the CRC is not competent.” (Greater Manchester, CRC) 

“CRC staff were treated like new employees with no acknowledgment of existing skills.” (West Midlands, CRC) 

“CRC staff have been treated like second class citizens.....awful!” (London, CRC) 

“Not enough has been done to address the culture of us and them. As a member of CRC staff I am made to feel second rate to NPS staff.” (East Midlands, CRC)

This statement from a former NPS employee indicates the type of attitude that needs to change: 

“CRC managers / staff should not be job-matched into position that were not vacant. CRC SPOs should not be managing NPS staff.” (London NPS) 

This experience related by a former CRC employee reinforces the point: 

“An example of legacy NPS/CRC stigma is one I experienced first-hand. I completed a handover with a legacy NPS colleague who was shocked that I was able to 'act with such professionalism' as normally his dealings with CRC colleagues was below par.” (East Midlands, CRC) 

Some believe they have been treated unfairly in work allocation and access to resources:

“NPS [are] being allowed to 'cherry pick' the most complex cases to give to CRC colleagues.” (North East, CRC)

“Little has been put in place for CRC staff in terms of admin support or liaison with the courts. Legacy CRC still feels like a "bolt on" and lesser cousin of legacy NPS.” (West Midlands, CRC 

Some ex-NPS colleagues feel colocation may help promote unity: 

“In the local area where I work, physically and culturally things are very different, we still work from separate offices and it is very much day-to-day working that nothing has changed and it is still 'CRC and NPS'.” (North East, NPS) 

These negative experiences are leading to a degree of nostalgia for CRCs: 

“Empty promises..."Best of both worlds" is absolutely not the reality. In a way I'd rather we'd been told that we're joining NPS rather than paint a picture of a new collaborative organisation because they haven't been able or willing to deliver this. …. We had a great SMT in the CRC who were genuinely supportive and transparent in their leadership approach...now I have no idea who anyone is. We've gone from having 4 senior leaders to having 40. I feel like a very small fish in a huge pond and somewhere there is a hole in the pond lining.” (North West, CRC) 

“NPS legacy staff believe that I and my colleagues are lacking in the experience they feel they have over us. Not good. Still a division. The office I will be moving to is like a step back in time from what I am used to. NPS legacy and CRC legacy seniors cannot agree on best practice, as NPS legacy seniors want us to "fit in with them, business as they know it", not helpful, I can’t wait until I can leave.” (West Midlands, CRC) 

“CRC staff are viewed as the poor relative, and the ones who have a lot to learn. The reality is both services have valuable skills and experiences that should be explored and shared. CRCs had the capacity to be creative and you weren't restricted in your role in terms of what you could or couldn't do.” (North East, CRC) 

“The CRC had a slimline way of working and it appears that the NPS haven't progressed any new systems in the last seven years since the split. All the information now is parked and referred to as NPS rather than The Probation Service, which is supposed to be a new organisation taking the best bits of the CRC and NPS to bring a new service to PoP and Probation Practitioners. Instead - the feeling is that it is still and will remain the NPS.” (Greater Manchester, CRC) 

“I personally think the way CRC worked was a more efficient way and cared about their employees. Staff were not just a 'number'.” (North East, CRC) 

Some ex-NPS staff have themselves felt left out during the process: 

“There is a heavily CRC to Probation Service emphasis for the change activity, which is understandable. Ex NPS staff have been largely overlooked in the Unification process.” (Greater Manchester, NPS)

“I am a PQiP who was seconded to the CRC when I started my training. The transition for me has been awful as I have been missed out of communications as I did not feel like I belonged to either CRC or NPS. Even though I have always been a NPS employee I have missed out on things due to my secondment. It has massively impacted my training.” (West Midlands, NPS)

The rapid pace of induction training was difficult for ex-CRC staff 

Many ex-CRC staff comments concerned information overload and the demanding pace of training immediately after unification: 

“There has been a lack of support re: new systems and negotiating processes for legacy CRC staff. Understanding is often assumed and accessing information and processes can be very time consuming. Time has not been set aside for legacy CRC staff to complete required training. My workload is currently excessive, and I am working a 10 - 12 hour day and often one day at the weekend as standard. I do not get overtime and cannot take toil due to the pressures of work. This is is neither acceptable or sustainable.” (Greater Manchester, CRC)

“Moving from CRC to NPS is difficult. Being bombarded with information left, right and centre whilst trying to manage caseload is difficult. I have found it stressful. I am very dubious about how 80 hours of online training is gonna help practitioners who haven't worked with MAPPA cases for years. It is very important the legacy CRC staff are supported and are monitored when they start having MAPPA cases again.” (West Midlands, CRC) 

“My experience of the changes has been that high-minded missives are sent out from senior managers saying how wonderful it's all going to be but this aspirational vision then gets totally lost and bears no resemblance at all to the implementation. It has been chaotic and stressful, with no sign of any positives in the near future.” (Kent, Surrey and Sussex, CRC) 

“Legacy CRC staff have received a significant influx of new information, guidance and training, which has been wholly overwhelming.” (South West, CRC) “Too much information sent out in email. It was information overload. Changes should have been sequenced over a longer period.” (East of England, NPS)

High workloads and caseloads have made unification even more difficult 

Unification came at a difficult point in history as we emerge from the pandemic lockdowns. We have previously noted the pre-existing negative impact of high workloads and caseloads on probation work and staff (HMI Probation, 2021). Unification made those existing pressures of workload and caseload more acute, and staff felt this was not appreciated by senior leaders.

“Unification needed to happen. We shouldn't have split in the first place, however, the workload has increased at a very quick pace which has been overwhelming and unmanageable, particularly at a time when there are lots of system changes.” (East Midlands, NPS) 

“Senior Leaders had an unrealistic idea that once caseloads merged, workload would become more manageable, without recognising that unless staff are retained or replaced or indeed recruited, the issue of significantly high caseloads will remain. The staff training programme, particularly the timescales in which this needs to be completed, is unrealistic, given that staff don't have the time to complete their daily tasks, let alone required training.” (East Midlands, NPS) 

“I went from feeling confident and at the top of my game to feeling isolated, stupid, scared and now lacking in confidence. Caseloads are dangerously high, staff going off sick, important work being missed.” (West Midlands, CRC) 

“CRC staff should have been given some workload allowance to enable them to attend all of the Teams events, training events, and to have time to read all of the documents which have been sent via email, etc.” (North East, CRC) 

“Caseload is way too high. Workload and pressure is too high. Impact on mental health causing me to leave probation.” (Wales, NPS) 

Quite a number of staff were concerned that their new laptops and ICT systems were not functioning well, and there was a lack of training and documentation available to staff. Many were again frustrated that there was not enough time allowed to get to grips with the new systems: 

“I don't think we had enough IT support from the organisation and as most of the systems changed we were left stressed with trying to work things out for ourselves.” (North East, CRC) 

“IT systems should be fit for purpose.” (Yorkshire and the Humber, CRC) 

“The new plethora of IT systems could have been staggered rather than arriving all at once.” (East Midlands, CRC) 

However, a few staff were pleased with the new kit: 

“I felt like the IT changes went quite well and we have got a better system now.” (North East, CRC) 

Some staff had more personal and detailed criticisms of their unification experience, such as: 
  • disputes about the regrading exercise 
  • problems with getting paid on time and the right amount 
  • the civil service ‘bureaucracy’ 
  • the new premises being of lower quality than the former CRC premises. 
Some staff expressed a more positive orientation to unification. The following comments reflect the view of those who are taking a longer-term, perhaps more realistic, view of the changes: 

“Superficially, little seems to have changed so far though I acknowledge we are early into the unification process.” (Greater Manchester, NPS) 

“I think it would have been a lot different without Covid-19.” (Yorkshire and the Humber, NPS)

“Things look like they may be starting to embed slowly, but it does feel like we hit reunification before anyone was quite certain how it would all pan out, which has led to some confusion for all involved.” (Kent, Surrey and Sussex, NPS) 

Some were glad to ‘be back’ in a unified probation service, working with new and old colleagues: 

“I think it is really positive that we are unifying, and this is a step in the right direction and is welcomed from staff. There is a general feeling that it will take a long time to recover from the split, particularly with the current staffing issues but this is something that staff want to work towards.” (Greater Manchester, NPS) 

“We have been told many times that legacy CRC colleagues will be anxious about the changes and we should be nice/friendly with them. That has really annoyed me - why would there be any thought that we would not be friendly???” (Greater Manchester, NPS) 

“So much information, opportunities and training, really looking forward to my new career.” (Greater Manchester, Other) 

“Overall, it has been a very smooth transition. So nice to have a decent IT service. NPS people have been very welcoming and I think we've all adapted really well to the changes considering the pandemic in the mix as well.” (East Midlands, CRC) 

“Prior to unification there was a "them" and "us" divide between NPS and CRC staff with NPS staff appearing to occupy the moral high ground. This changed completely after unification and I was pleased with the warm welcome we received in our shared building where former NPS staff went out of their way to implement re-integration of the former CRC staff.” (London, CRC) 

“I think it has gone smoothly for me personally - no issues.” (East of England, CRC) 

“I'm happy about the recent changes. I've been in the service for over 20 years and witnessed what feels like continual change, some of which for no good reason, and sometimes only to revert back to the way it was before! Maybe let the model settle down and just tweak to improve delivery as required, please.” (Wales, NPS)

Conclusion 

Probation staff have divided views about the unified service at this, relatively early, point in the life of the new organisation. Around half are as yet undecided whether unification has improved the service on the ground. 

Former CRC staff are more likely to have a negative view, driven by experiences of being made to feel less worthy than their former NPS colleagues. An effort at all levels of management is needed to counteract any condescension and insults being experienced; former CRC staff skills and professionalism need to be valued, and any regressive attitudes need to be suppressed. 

Another source of the dissatisfaction amongst former CRC staff was the rushed and stressful induction process, characterised by information overload, and exacerbated by ICT problems and lack of time for training. 

Wales emerges as an area where frontline staff have more confidence in senior leadership, and more satisfaction with the processes of unification. While it is possible that the longer run-in period has softened memories of merger, there would appear to be positive lessons to be learnt from the Welsh experience in terms of building a more optimistic work culture. 

It was concerning that ethnic minority staff reported less case focused supervision than their white colleagues. This finding needs to be investigated further by senior leaders in the service with an ‘explain or reform’ focus. 

Although it was disappointing to find that only six in ten felt pride in working in probation (but higher for recently employed staff), many probation staff told us they were positive about the future and pleased to be ‘back’ in a unified service. Around half of staff do not have a settled view on unification, and there is the potential for positive engagement if service leaders can build an inclusive workplace. 

Service leaders have a great challenge ahead to foster this all-important inclusive culture based upon shared probation values, mutual respect, manageable workloads and blended caseloads, space for reflective learning, and meaningful line management. These survey findings help to identify the threats and the promising currents of opinion to undertake that task.

22 comments:

  1. Following on from the HMI report, Tuesday may be a date of interest for some.

    https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/102/justice-committee/news/170795/mps-to-quiz-inspectors-on-the-criminal-justice-systems-recovery-from-covid-disruption/

    'Getafix

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Justice Committee will question the inspectorates of services including the police, CPS, prisons and probation on the Government’s progress in restoring standards in the criminal justice system to pre-pandemic levels.

      Watch Parliament TV: The work of the Criminal Justice Inspectorates
      Inquiry: The work of the Criminal Justice Inspectorates
      Justice Committee
      The session on 17 May follows the release of a report by the four inspectorates, acting as the Joint Criminal Justice Inspectorates.

      The report found that: “While the constraints on daily life have now been dropped, the CJS [Criminal Justice System] is a long way from recovery and in some parts continues to operate at unacceptable levels.

      “Prisoners still spend 22.5 hours a day in their cell; hundreds of thousands of hours of unpaid work go uncompleted in the Probation Service; and Crown Court backlogs remain high.”

      The Joint Inspectorates report also points to issues relating to high volumes of cases and overcrowding in prisons, exacerbated by problems with retention of solicitors, barristers, and prison and probation officers.

      The cross-party Committee will discuss with the Chief Inspectors of the four services what the Government should do to restore service quality, to cut court backlogs, and to return conditions in prisons to pre-pandemic levels.

      Witnesses
      Tuesday 17 May

      At 2:30pm

      Justin Russell, Chief Inspector of Probation, HM Inspectorate of Probation
      Charlie Taylor, Chief Inspector of Prisons, HM Inspectorate of Prisons
      Andy Cooke QPM DL, Chief Inspector of HM Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services
      Andrew Cayley, Chief Inspector of the Crown Prosecution Service

      Delete
  2. It was a disturbing time as the nps staff indeed sense a superiority of themselves being the selected specials. It was also a real life treat to see the brown eyes blue eyes experiment in action. The situation is little reversed since amalgamation . The snobbery of probation is not an interview recruitment question so it must develop from the training. The split saw cooperation levels plummet. Nps quoting the rate card on sentence outcomes like they ruled over CRC staffing . It was awful bad display of personal superiority . It divided old friends and values. Certainly makes you realise the usually benign internal competition becomes unleashed as a brutal rejection of once colleagues. The management whipping up sides. It's not all them though one pso manager in a CRC openly tweeting moronic calls that crcs can show them . We can do this with our CRC private leaders. Let's just get on with it as our future. His sort of dismal outlook to support the CRC rather than work to actually subvert the system kept the split running longer than it did.
    The organisation is full of these myopic thinkers. The horizon being something of an abstract they will never appreciate .

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yes great but right now I am worried about job with the government annoucing the axing of 90k jobs - can you allow something on this please! I'm everyone is worried about their future - campaign now to stop the rot please!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Many will not agree this is a chance to retire earlier than likely if your not popular. I mean older also many will ask to go via any possible redundancy possiblity. The nonsense claims from Napo on a job safe clause in nps was just pathetic. We want to go help.

      Delete
    2. Police, prisons, have both a chronic problem with recruitment and retention.
      I find it hard to see how a government so focused on being tough on crime could seriously consider staff cuts to the front line employees of these services.
      However, I do think we will hear a lot of noise about civil service cuts in the coming weeks and months , but I think there's much more low hanging fruit to pick from before any consideration turns to front line justice services.
      There is though some interesting stats being floated around by the Tax Payers Alliance today that we might hear more about in the short term.

      https://www.politics.co.uk/news-in-brief/civil-service-sick-days-worth-350-million-each-year/

      'Getafix

      Delete
  4. Reunifying probation was like merging KFC and McDonalds. Fried chicken cooks struggle to flip burgers and nobody can agree whether it’s Chicken Burger or Sandwich. Don’t expect HMIP to condemn probation’s dumbass one-size-fits strategy which didn’t recognise expertise, threw everyone together and shut the front door.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why insult KFC or big Mac we all know these days cooking fast food is better qualified than working in probation. Their management respect the staff and try and develop skills.

      Delete
  5. The managers and directors were responsible. CRCs constantly lauded for ‘innovation’ and NPS for their ‘skills’. In reality there was wheat and chaff on both sides. Divide and rule strategy 101 and now they want to whitewash it out of existence.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I sat and listened to my regional director a few weeks ago making the same old pathetic excuses in relation to staffing and lack of progress re pay. 'Just hang in there' 'you know how these things work' Pathetic response makes me feel demoralised,disrespected and under valued. Sick of being overworked and concerned about how these issues are impacting on my mental health. Renumeration is pathetic. Many offenders are paid more than a PSO at the top of their band for unskilled work. When are we going to get some collective backbone and start complaining about these issues which are having a detrimental impact on our lives and health?

    ReplyDelete
  7. The Chief Inspector of Probation, Justin Russell, says key areas of probation must be ‘addressed urgently’ following recent disappointing inspection ratings.

    The unified Probation Service began in June 2021, affecting some 220,000 people on probation and 16,000 staff. HM Inspectorate of Probation has completed six inspections since this time, covering Wales and Kent, Surrey and Sussex East of England regions.

    Mr Russell, speaking ahead of an appearance before the Justice Select Committee on Tuesday 17 May, said in a statement:

    “In June last year I said that unification of the Probation Service within the public sector would not be a magic bullet for the deep underlying problems within the service. Our first six inspections since then – the latest published this morning – bear this out. We are seeing all the warning signs of a Probation Service in survival mode. Too many of the areas we have inspected this year – both in England and Wales – have shown weaknesses in nearly all aspects of their work. Chronic staff shortages, high workloads and the ongoing impacts of the pandemic are severely hampering their ability to effectively divert people on probation away from crime and, vitally, to properly protect the public from further risk of harm.”

    Disappointing inspection ratings

    “Of the six inspections we have published since unification, we have rated four probation services ‘Inadequate’ and two as ‘Requires improvement’. Two of the services – West Kent and Essex North – scored just one point out of a possible 27. We knew services were struggling, given the impact of Covid-19 and the demands of unification, but these results are worse than I feared. There is a long road ahead if they are to meet the standards that should be expected – and secure a future where they can thrive, not just survive.”

    ‘Chronic’ staff shortages

    “Many services are experiencing exceptional staff shortages, with a half of positions in key grades in some areas unfilled. Staff tell us their workloads are unmanageable and high vacancies at manager level mean poor supervision too. And this is feeding through into the quality of supervision people on probation receive. Of the 350 cases we have inspected since unification, 60 per cent or more were unsatisfactory in terms of the quality of work undertaken to manage risks to the public.

    “Recruitment is further hampered by substantial delays across regions in obtaining security clearance for newly appointed staff, often in excess of four months. But much of this is outside each local area’s control. I recommend the Probation Service and HMPPS review what can be done to resolve this as soon as possible.

    “To their credit, many staff we spoke to during inspections were positive and ambitious to improve their service. Such commitment must be supported and developed. It would be disastrous if these dedicated probation officers were lost due to poor leadership, high caseloads and lack of regional and national support.”

    ReplyDelete
  8. https://www-bbc-co-uk.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-61467398.amp?amp_js_v=a6&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQKKAFQArABIIACAw%3D%3D#aoh=16528587200332&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s


    https://www.gazette-news.co.uk/news/20144842.probation-services-north-essex-branded-inadequate-report/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Three contributions From Twitter:-

      "Someone needs to have a little chat with Chris Grayling. This was all predicted by Probation staff and unions at the time but were completely ignored. And this is post reunification! Tory govt at their very best!"

      "Absolutely. Whilst staff can be replaced fairly quickly, it will takes years for the vast experience that was lost to be replaced at a time when both highly experienced staff as well as less experienced staff are seeking to leave."

      "And it becomes self-perpetuating. I reckon it takes years of experience before you can make the job manageable. New staff need to be given time - and I mean years - to gain the experience, but we have NQOs managing complex Lifers."

      Delete
  9. A probation service must improve its work to "manage the risks people on probation may pose", a report said.

    Northamptonshire Probation Delivery Unit has been rated as "requires improvement" after an inspection by HM Inspectorate of Probation.

    It said staff had told inspectors their workload was "not manageable" and it impacted their ability to deliver.

    Despite shortcomings, the inspectorate said the unit had potential to "push on to a better future".

    A spokesman for the Ministry of Justice said: "We are making the required improvements and are recruiting more staff, improving training and providing greater managerial oversight so we can stop more people reoffending in the region."

    The report said the unit needed to "focus on keeping people safe in assessments and plans".

    "In our inspection of case activity, keeping people safe was the lowest scoring aspect of case management and we saw this being prioritised in too few cases," it said.
    While the report praised the "commitment and enthusiasm of staff", it said employees reported they were "working above capacity".

    "There is a 'fatigue' across all roles and a sense of frustration that they are unable to deliver to the quality they strive to achieve," the report said.

    It added that the feedback from people on probation was "largely positive".

    The inspectorate said the unification of probation services across England while recovering from a pandemic had "not been without its challenges" and the impact had been seen in Northamptonshire.

    It said the leadership team understood "challenges and risks" and communicated these to team members.

    The inspectorate praised the service for the advice it provided to courts and its "dedicated work with women on probation and with the local police force and partners in children's safeguarding".

    It also called on the unit to ensure staff had relevant training and priorities were clearly communicated to probation practitioners.

    It also made recommendations to HM Prison and Probation Service, including reviewing workloads and ensuring providers are adequately resourced.

    ReplyDelete
  10. INSPECTORS have branded probation services in north Essex inadequate following an inspection which found potential victims of domestic abuse are being let down.

    A report compiled following an inspection of the Essex North Probation Delivery Unit delivered the lowest possible rating in eight out of nine areas.

    Among concerns raised by inspectors were fears safeguarding checks with councils and domestic abuse checks with the police were being missed.

    Justin Russell, chief inspector at Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Probation, found high staff vacancy rates are leading to high workloads for the staff who remain.
    He said: “This has inevitably fed through into the quality of work we inspected.

    “Only a quarter of the cases we inspected were sufficient in relation to the quality of work needed to keep the public safe and less than half were up to the mark in relation to work to prevent reoffending.”

    Commenting on the lack of safeguarding checks, Mr Russell said: “Where they were taking place, they were often not being followed up if information was not returned.

    “Where this information was returned, there was limited analysis of what it meant for assessment of risk levels and management of the case.”
    and licences have begun between August and September last year.

    More than 50 interviews were conducted with probation practitioners.

    The inspectors said data provided by the service showed 53 of 62 individuals convicted of a sexual offence are still waiting to begin their assigned rehabilitation programme.

    Mr Russell said: “The service must improve in order to help those they supervise change their lives for the better and to protect the local community.

    “We know leaders and staff at Essex north will be disappointed by this rating, but they have shown understanding and a drive to develop since our inspection.
    “They need urgent support to enable them to make the significant improvements that are needed.”

    Inspectors noted the challenges posed by Covid-19 and the transition to a new “unified” probation service.

    They were concerned some issues, such as staff vacancies, pre-dated these events and have not been resolved.

    However, the attitudes of staff at the service and their motivation to improve was praised.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Probation is absolute crap. Why would anyone want to come in and work for a crap service like this. Please listen, if you are thinking about joining think again. It is not worth the effort.

    ReplyDelete
  12. The inspectorate seems absolutely obsessed with "social services and police checks"...I'm absolutely fed up of it. The quality of information returned by both agencies, if returned at all, is so poor that completing these so called checks is hardly worth all the effort and attention paid to it. All we've done is overwhelm both agencies with ridiculous checks...I've totally lost the plot. This has come up now so many times in so many inspections and yet nobody ever asks the question "why"...why are these relatively simple checks not being completed? Just like everyone else ...IM FED UP!!!

    ReplyDelete
  13. "It would be disastrous if these dedicated probation officers were lost due to poor leadership, high caseloads and lack of regional and national support.”

    Well, poor leadership was on show in buckets today at the London all staff call...."you meed to record, record, record, record...and after you've recorded, record some more" ...I mean SERIOUSLY this is the low level to which our service has stooped, this was one of the key messages from this "senior leader"...of course improving data quality was chucked in there. I pity us all, I pity the people embroiled in this disaster...a service which is meant to address complex needs, but all it does is "record" those needs, "assess" those needs and refer the problems on to commissioned out services staffee by untrained jeyworkers while it's own trained probation officers are stuck at desks recording shite into delius, and even more shite in OASYS

    ReplyDelete
  14. Announcement by MoJ. It's all going to be rosy again!

    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/1-500-new-probation-officers-to-protect-the-public

    'Getafix

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And how many probation staff will leave while we’re waiting?

      Yes they’ll take on 1,500 trainee probation officers in 2022-23.

      It’ll take 15-18 months to train them. Many will drop out or leave after qualifying.

      Delete
    2. In 18 months there’ll be less than 100 left. Demoralised by the stress of being overworked and underpaid

      Delete
  15. Probation will go the same way as Social Services. New recruits with average starting age In early 20's and often straight from Uni with little practical experience. In Social Services the average career lifespan for a Social Worker is now 5 years! 5 years? Hardly worth all the training. It used to be a job for life but the average human can only stomach 5 years before they come to the conclusion it's better out than in. It's not sustainable and that why Social Services is in utter meltdown and Probation close on its heels.

    ReplyDelete