"This blog has become the black cloud that just wants to keep raining down on those trying their best to get through the bureaucracy to help people." Blog yesterday
“Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.” Albert Einstein
HMI Justin Russell delivers his verdict on yet another PDU and finds much the same. At what point is the MoJ and government going to face up to the harsh fact that probation is broken and it needs fixing? Merging it completely with HM Prison Service under the 'OneHMPPS' brand isn't going to fix it - it destroys it. Probation must become a separate agency and properly funded.
This is the Press release:-
Probation service for Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland is ‘Inadequate’
The probation service, also known as a Probation Delivery Unit (PDU*), for Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland has been rated as ‘Inadequate’ following an inspection by HM Inspectorate of Probation – scoring just two inspection points out a possible 27.
This inspection is one of two carried out in the Probation Service – East Midlands region recently. The second is Derby City PDU, which received an overall rating of ‘Requires improvement’ (also published on 09 February 2023).
Chief Inspector of Probation Justin Russell said: “Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland PDU are, unfortunately, not alone in the challenges that have resulted in this rating of ‘Inadequate’. They have high workloads and are facing difficulties in recruiting and retaining staff – something we have seen nationally in our recent inspections. Without an adequate workforce, a service will struggle to supervise people on probation effectively and the consequences risk public safety. I urge the Probation Service to carefully consider our findings and bring about the vital support that PDUs, like this one, require.”
Inspectors found morale to be low and excessive workloads were taking their toll across the organisation. Despite this, inspectors found that staff are committed and dedicated to their roles and recognised recent efforts to recruit new probation officers and administration staff. The inspection also credited the service for its innovation, and the promise shown by the creation of specialist teams to support young adults and women.
However, we found the probation court team had a 43 per cent vacancy rate. As a result, people being sentenced without sufficient assessments and safeguarding enquiries being undertaken. Of the cases we looked at, just five per cent had sufficient quality of probation court report work.
Mr Russell added: “This PDU is operating at near crisis management levels. With insufficient staff across the organisation, it is only a matter of time before their ability to properly supervise people on probation and protect the local community is further diminished. I hope this inspection has highlighted, to the national Probation Service, that extensive help is required, and that assistance is provided to the service in prioritising their next steps.”
Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland PDU, and their East Midlands regional service, received 13 recommendations for improvement as a result of this inspection, including to improve vacancy rates, how they manage risk of harm, and provide more effective accommodation support services for people on probation.
The probation service, also known as a Probation Delivery Unit (PDU*), for Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland has been rated as ‘Inadequate’ following an inspection by HM Inspectorate of Probation – scoring just two inspection points out a possible 27.
This inspection is one of two carried out in the Probation Service – East Midlands region recently. The second is Derby City PDU, which received an overall rating of ‘Requires improvement’ (also published on 09 February 2023).
Chief Inspector of Probation Justin Russell said: “Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland PDU are, unfortunately, not alone in the challenges that have resulted in this rating of ‘Inadequate’. They have high workloads and are facing difficulties in recruiting and retaining staff – something we have seen nationally in our recent inspections. Without an adequate workforce, a service will struggle to supervise people on probation effectively and the consequences risk public safety. I urge the Probation Service to carefully consider our findings and bring about the vital support that PDUs, like this one, require.”
Inspectors found morale to be low and excessive workloads were taking their toll across the organisation. Despite this, inspectors found that staff are committed and dedicated to their roles and recognised recent efforts to recruit new probation officers and administration staff. The inspection also credited the service for its innovation, and the promise shown by the creation of specialist teams to support young adults and women.
However, we found the probation court team had a 43 per cent vacancy rate. As a result, people being sentenced without sufficient assessments and safeguarding enquiries being undertaken. Of the cases we looked at, just five per cent had sufficient quality of probation court report work.
Mr Russell added: “This PDU is operating at near crisis management levels. With insufficient staff across the organisation, it is only a matter of time before their ability to properly supervise people on probation and protect the local community is further diminished. I hope this inspection has highlighted, to the national Probation Service, that extensive help is required, and that assistance is provided to the service in prioritising their next steps.”
Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland PDU, and their East Midlands regional service, received 13 recommendations for improvement as a result of this inspection, including to improve vacancy rates, how they manage risk of harm, and provide more effective accommodation support services for people on probation.
--oo00oo--
From the full report:--
This was the first Probation Delivery Unit (PDU) inspection of probation services within Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland since unification of the Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRCs) and National Probation Service (NPS) in June 2021. This was a disappointing inspection. The quality of work delivered to manage people on probation was insufficient across all five of our standards for casework with particularly poor results for the quality of court reports. Overall, we have rated this PDU as ‘Inadequate’.
Although staff were committed and dedicated to their roles, high workloads, a problem that has existed over a prolonged period of time, had taken their toll, leading to low morale across the PDU.
As we have found in other recent PDU inspections, there were significant gaps in probation practitioner and administrative officer grades. These were most pronounced in the court team where there was a vacancy rate of 43 per cent. In addition to resourcing issues, we were particularly concerned about the quality of court work, with only five per cent of cases inspected being judged as sufficient. Essential assessments and domestic abuse and child safeguarding checks were missing in far too many cases. Despite efforts from the PDU and the region to improve the staffing levels, this remains a critical issue and a national approach is needed to assist with the appropriate recruitment and retention of staff.
During this critical time, staff must be clear on their roles and responsibilities; however, messaging from leaders to staff regarding what to prioritise was not understood, which led to insufficient work being delivered to people on probation and to keep communities safe. Opportunities to utilise areas of business where there was more capacity were being missed and the PDU was operating at near crisis management levels.
Improvements were needed in the quality of work to assess and manage risks that people on probation pose to the wider community. This was particularly poor in assessment, where only 31 per cent of cases we inspected had an assessment which effectively supported the safety of other people.
Despite the resourcing challenges, we did see some evidence of innovation within the PDU, with the creation of young adults and women’s teams to improve the quality of work delivered to these groups. These teams were in their early stages and, like the rest of the PDU, their workloads are high, but aspirations for what can be delivered are positive. Good strategic partnership working had also been maintained.
It is hoped that this inspection can help assist with the foundations needed to support the required improvement. This will, however, only be possible if appropriate regional and national support is in place to address the staffing needs.
Justin Russell
Chief Inspector of Probation
“their workloads are high, but aspirations for what can be delivered are positive“
ReplyDeletePositive aspirations by who? For once I wish he’d just say why probation is in crisis, why it has high vacancy rates and why performance and quality is rubbish.
Unless the Probation Service, HMPPS, HMIP and the government acknowledge probation officers are very badly paid and excessively overworked as the primary problems then recruitment and retention will not improve meaning the functioning and quality of work will not improve. Many cannot survive on the pay given to work excessive hours in busy city probation offices.
Secondly, stop changing probation every two years and apply culling or training to senior managers who have failed to support frontline staff, especially those with no idea when it comes to Professionalism, responsivity and health and safety according to a previous post
http://probationmatters.blogspot.com/2022/03/command-and-control.html?m=1
This blog has become the only point of truth and light within the black cloud that just wants to keep raining down on those trying their best despite the ever tightening screws of the HMPPS bureaucracy and lies restricting frontline probation officers still trying to help people against all odds.
ReplyDeleteWith local line managers, local senior managers and alike unable to influence how current policy hampers officers doing their job, and who are notably responsible for creating and maintaining the oftentimes, toxic and bullying environment we have to work in, one must question what can be done to bring about meaningful change.
ReplyDeleteThe Probation Service used to have fantastic training staff, long serving officers had time to nurture the new recruits coming into the service. Staff of all grades stayed, believing the PS to be a good employer. As officers, we could frequently see positive outcomes for those we support.
All of this has been replaced by counting by numbers training that does little to educate and does nothing to help staff retain learning. Staff of all grades are expressing continued discontent or leaving, and those in charge do little to evidence they are listening or even barely interested in the thought of frontline practitioners.
Inspections report failings but influence very little and the unions are of little effectiveness.
The question is, can staff collectively come together to bring about meaningful change and if so, who will lead us in doing so?
The probation service isn't being directed by the prison service, it's actually become an extension of the prison service.
DeleteWhat's more I believe it's now being seen as the failing part of the prison service.
I was struck by a comment on yesterday's blog post that pointed out that whilst the recent publicity and whistleblowing probation is experiencing might do a lot in exposing the problems and pressures that probation services are faced with, that exposure might come with a significant cost to the service.
Might the solutions that must come not further imbed probation within the prison service?
Might the service not become more like 'prison officers working in the community' rather then 'probation officers working in prisons'?
Channel 4 reported on the whistleblowing story yesterday, and although the news was specifically about probation, the video that accompanied the story contained nothing but locks, bolts and bars, and prison gates and landings.
Surely that imagery can do little else but imbued in the public's mind that probation is indeed part of the prison service?
The video can be viewed here.
https://www.channel4.com/news/exclusive-majority-of-probation-service-currently-working-at-excessive-capacity
'Getafix
You make several very important points 'Getafix - yes there is a risk in what's happening - but it just might galvanise some serious debate and action. Secondly, what images are indeed appropriate for something as nebulous as 'probation'?
DeleteIt is happening already;
DeleteDowngrading eligibility criteria and lengths of Probation Officer training.
Red site status stacking cases, conducting reporting centres and suspending core work.
Focus on recruiting PSOs over POs.
Removal of release recommendations in Parole reports.
They could pay POs better wages and pull POs out of prisons into probation offices. Instead the HMPPS sticking plasters while it’s prison driven steamtrain drags Probation further towards the scrapyard.
I sincerely hope that it does galvanise some serious debate Jim, not least because probation supervise a population that's roughly equivalent to the population of Milyon Keynes.
DeleteThey've somewhere along the line stopped being people and become caseloads. They've become the problematic tennant in the probation household, and just like people in prison are processed until they reach the end of their sentence, people on probation are processed until they reach the conclusion of their supervision period. That approach serves no one, and it's a very expensive investment with little reward for anyone involved.
As for suitable imagery? I really don't know. Maybe probation helping someone fill in a housing application would be better then prison landings, gates and keys?
I think the right imagery may become clear once probation can define it's roll in the CJS in it's own right, and maybe that's the fundamental question probation needs to answer. Who are we? Why do we exist?
From a news article on the MoJ website today called "early intervention for life long benefits"
"For me it describes the fact that it is easier, more effective and costs less to support someone to not get into a bad situation in the first place than it is to get them out of it once they are there. "
I recognise significant differences with probation services and youth offending services but surely that sentiment is true to both services?
The article can be found here.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/early-intervention-for-lifelong-benefits
'Getafix
"They've somewhere along the line stopped being people and become caseloads." Thank you Getafix. In a nutshell. Regarding imagery, if I wanted to encapsulate an image of the wasted time and resource, it would be rows of probation staff sitting in rows, typing.
DeleteIf I wanted an image of the potential and the joy, it would be encounters with befriended people on the park benches, the doorsteps, the cap parks, the CAB offfices. Sometimes but not often in the office.
I cuddled a baby last week, with her dad, who a year ago was in trouble and despair. Proud dad, proud probation officer. The room was full of love and optimism. He was never a threat to public safety, just to himself, and to others in being inconvenient, antisocial and using up a lot of court time.the "solution" was never ever punishment or incarceration. It was housing purpose and hope.
https://www.dannyshaw.net/post/the-fallacy-of-falling-reoffending-rates
ReplyDeleteHMIP published their two inspection reports for the East Midlands region today.
ReplyDeleteNeither report is positive and they are likely to have a big impact on members in the region, especially in light of the recent SFO report.
Napo wants to assure all members that we will be urgently applying pressure at a national and regional level to address the key issues.
It is clear from these reports and the SFO report that staffing is at critical.
Whilst step are being taken to address this, that will take time and senior leaders must come up with short term solutions to alleviate the pressure.
Last week Napo met with the Minister to argue the case for all planned changes to be paused to give probation time to focus on the core and vital work that you do.
Napo stands with all our members in what is possibly the most difficult time probation has ever experienced.
Best Wishes
Napo HQ
So no mention of improved pay and conditions then!
DeleteNapo has asked NPS to pause planned changes so staff can concentrate on key tasks. So why are new bureaucratic systems being rolled out so that managers can flog more dead horses? This is madness. Pause the change and let us concentrate on key tasks like risk management and supervision not just ABC cover your ass in case of SFO. Oh, and give us more admin support so we don't spend hours photocopying induction packs and copying and pasting emails, some help with referrals that could be done by admin or someone trained up just for this task and more support with transfers. Someone overseeing our enforcements we can talk to. etc Why do ACO's have full time diary manager and we have diddly sqat? Would you expect a business exec to manage without a PA? Oh, I forgot we are only dealing with life and death, not as imports being the manager of a cheese production factory.
ReplyDeleteACO's have full time diary manager, a deputy ACO and a Business manager who themselves have a Senior Administrator.
DeleteBut down the pecking order on the frontline the POs, PSOs, SPOs lucky to have a single Admin between them all.
Have you done the role of ACO or whatever it is called these days? If not, then you’re probably not best placed to comment on what they do and do not need. Just saying!
DeleteI am a PO and while the ACOs swan by I function every day in a grotty office without admin, without desk space, without parking, without enough colleagues, without a decent manager, without decent pay. I do all that, telling them I’ve had enough and they still give me more work. The probation service is in a staffing crisis and yet these higher paid pen pushers have PAs to manage their diaries. It’s a joke. Just saying!
Delete21:39. It’s Head of PDU nowadays and should be using electronic diaries like the rest of us were told to. Send the PAs and office managers to admin on the frontline and support the POs where they’re needed. Didn’t read the HMIP reports no?
DeleteThe sad reality of the service is finally revealed, although not to it’s full extent. Staff have been struggling for long enough and even when you go off sick, there is a short period of ‘grace’ if we can even call it that, and then it’s back to the old same issues.
ReplyDeleteStaff retention is a huge problem. Throwing money at recruiting so many PQUIPs is not the answer. I know of many reputable, well experienced officers who have left because there is no other choice. We are told there is no fix and when we say we are struggling, we are compared to others who are seemingly ‘coping’. Truth of the matter is they are not. The environment is mundane and seeing so many colleagues burn out is soul destroying.
The Senior management team have their own cliques and if you are not part of it then you may as well talk to a brick wall. Being asked for ideas on how to help is not enough, as often it’s not followed through. Management make changes to tick their boxes and not for the benefit of frontline staff or PoPs.
Can I ask a question to anyone who is currently in probation practice.
ReplyDeleteWe work with people who are under investigation for online sexual offences. When it comes to their PSR interviews most are still being undertaken by telephone. Why is this?
Due to what we learn (or should learn) in pre entry probation training - about the supremacy of non verbal communication - telephone interviews with defendants, surely should be very rare similarly with video interviews.
DeleteHuman behaviour is nature as well as nurture inspired - hence making changes is a complicated business -especially where sexual behaviour is concerned - where in the course of sexual engagement nature can sometimes take over almost completely.
We need to be in a room with our clients and learn to assess how we feel in their company and to as far as we are able allow such assessments to influence our conclusions in our professional judgements.
Social work, after all, is a very complex business.
Surely that cannot be correct?? Wow that’s shocking
ReplyDeleteStandard in some places. There are even remote report writing teams.
DeleteAs someone in a very busy PDU I can say that the vast majority of FDR/PSRs I receive is by phone : a hang over from Covid that has not been rectified. We all know that the courts will go with 99.9% of probation recommendations and that recommendation needs to have a good holistic analysis behind it. Increasingly I am getting an allocation with very little analysis based on just the crowns evidence and no known defence mitigation other than his version teased out over one quick call. Safeguarding checks not completed because of time constraints and an almost apologetic footnote by the author saying these will be carried out post sentence by the responsible officer. Inevitably i get to see my new case on induction , I shake the tree and safeguarding issues fall out,. Child protection issues, mental health, historical DV , all post sentence. Quick justice being the pressure put on our court staff with interventions based on partial information . Not always , but increasingly far too often.
ReplyDeleteIt’s because there are so many agency POs and PSOs that will only work from home doing PSRs and Oasys. Remote working is a thing and agency temps call the shots.
DeleteNot accurate, it’s often because reports are done by OUT OF AREA teams eg NE courts done by people located in North West etc so wfh not relevant here, they are physically in different PS regions so phone contact only means available.
Delete