We are committed to disseminating and promoting research findings in a range of ways, helping to: (i) build a common understanding of what helps and what hinders probation and youth justice services (ii) align research, policy and practice. In this document we set out an A-Z of key research messages and concepts, with accompanying links to further reading.
Some might feel this is a useful endeavour and worthy of HMIP resource allocation at a time of obvious crisis and stress within the Probation Service. Others might disagree:-
Some might feel this is a useful endeavour and worthy of HMIP resource allocation at a time of obvious crisis and stress within the Probation Service. Others might disagree:-
"What a ghastly document this is....HMIP are so arrogant....they have it all wrong and are part of the problem....just look at the Irish system, who are clearly leading the way, and look at the research....HMIP want to tell US as practitioners to implement all of this, yet fail to criticise the system for failing to allow any of this to happen.....just love how "P" stands for personalisation and "R" stands for "RNR"....Public protection and risk management approaches aren't supported by evidence yet they scream at every PDU for not doing these to their exacting standards."
This is the pathetic “research” I’d expect from the supposed practice experts at HMIP. Its main purpose for existence is to inspect probation which always fails. How mundane and monotonous when it’s inspectors aren’t even allowed to tell the truth and blame ministers, NOMS, HMPPS and Amy Rees for destroying probation. What “best practice” innovation is next from HMIP?? Painting by numbers for sentence plans?
ReplyDeleteLet the PoP hold the brush and you’ll get a brownie point on your CBF for thinking about OPD, neurodiversity and lived experience. Senior managers will like that!
DeletePainting by numbers for sentence plans was already implemented in london and pushed down our thoughts for many years with the obligatory Delius entry to "monitor compliance"
DeleteIt was called the Web, and while well meaning and based on sound principles of asking people to map their lives and rate each element of their life, the fact it was presented as a childish cartoon "spiders web" literally infantalised and discredited the whole process......plus the obligatory and mandatory element of it even though the approach wasn't suitable for some, pushed many practitioners away and led to a mutiny against it in some quarters.
For an organisation supposedly about understanding people and behaviour change it never ceases to amaze me how badly wrong they get things with their own staff
I remember that rubbish. They forced everyone to use The Web because a HMIP inspector liked it. Everyone hated it except the training team that created it.
DeletePerhaps parliament will oversee the production of something similar for medical services - no - of course not - it is ridiculous as anyone who has studied to become a social worker/probation officer at the peak of the training regimes - started by practitioners in the 1920s (from the award of the CQSW 1974 onwards into the DIPSW regime) - it is a subtle complex business that cannot be reduced to slogans, pretty pictures and jargon although all can assist explainations to non-practitioners.
ReplyDeleteI’m truly appalled
ReplyDeleteTrauma informed ? The least trauma informed service i know
ReplyDelete"Trauma informed" is the fashionable label. It is so not followed through in culture practice, training. I sometimes doubt those writing this piffle have any understanding of trauma tbh. Actually don't know what they're talking about
DeleteAnother fashionable label "Professional Curiosity". When that first came out as a thing, I heard the word "Professional" linked to "Curiosity" and leapt to the erroneous conclusion that what was being encouraged was a deep empathetic interest in the individual. Time to really talk. Nice.
Turns out this was translated by HMPPS command, and HMIP, as , in essence, don't believe anything they say, check them out, anything they say and you find out, get it into a risk assessment , and watch your back
Which brings me neatly round to being informed about trauma: you've been in prison, you're anxious and already traumatised by that and whatever got you there. Your continuing (partial) liberty depends on a person who has been told to build an empathic relationship with you, but who won't believe a word you say, and will recall you if you slip up. So much for that then
Gosh you are so, so right! What could have been a useful concept has been mis-interpreted to the extent of creating dangerous practice. By proliferating the mantra that everything has to be "verified" and "evidence based" dis-credits the person's own views on their own internal world, failing in our aim to formulate meaningful and collaborative assessments. Whoever writes this stuff fails to understand that it is simply not possible to "always seek evidence" for what the person says, and as a consequence, weakens our ability to explore and address relevant factors, and ultimately our ability to "manage risk".
DeleteWhat shocks me is that this is not ministerial policy - no minster stood up in parliament and dictated through law, or otherwise, that this concept had to be interpreted through such a draconian lens. We, ourselves, decided that this was the way.
Interpretations of professional curiosity such as "use an investigative approach" are translated by staff as "use an investigatory style of dealing with your people". As you say, distrust and disbelieve until proven otherwise is the style of interaction encouraged, and use the appointment to "constantly monitor for evidence of risk factors". This leads to interactions such as:
Appointment 1: I asked him where he got his expensive trainers from - he said his uncle bought them for him as a birthday present. I told him this seems unlikely and we explored whether he has reverted back to offending.
Appointment 2: He said he wouldn't engage or answer any questions as I disbelieve everything he says - I told him he must engage - that it is his responsibility to build a good relationship with me.
Appointment 3: Failed to attend
Appointment 4: Failed to attend
Breach
I joined Probation 20 years ago to try and contribute to society and to make a difference. I have been clinging on desperately to that but am spending more and more of my time providing data, more data and yet more data, updating various systems and spending less time on meaningful work. I am not proud to work here any longer and am ready to walk! I find myself ranting to anyone who will listen or moaning and the positivity I used to be well known for has left my body….. I try to think that I’m doing it for the money but it goes against who I really am! I do not think I will be in this Employment for much longer….. it’s so sad to think about what it’s become!
ReplyDeleteFrom Twitter:-
Delete"So understand this. The crappy pension is all that's keeping me here. That and the cases, who are mainly more honest with me than management. And they end to be nicer people tbh."
Anyone who worked at Working Links the disgraced CRC privatised Probation company will remember a similarly dismal and moronic road map for the whole Working Links project....produced shortly before the company was liquidated by it's parent company Aurelius.
ReplyDeleteWorking links was not disgraced what are you referring to. They over extended their borrowing and got all assets stripped by Aurelius .
Deletehttps://www.gov.uk/government/publications/probation-professional-register-interim-policy-framework
ReplyDelete1. Purpose
1.1 This policy introduces a professional register and professional standards for probation qualified staff. The purpose of the register is to recognise the competence and commitment of probation qualified staff to high standards of professionalism and provide assurance to HMPPS, government and our stakeholders/partners that those individuals authorised to assess and manage the risk of people on probation have the right qualifications, knowledge and skills to do so.
1.2 Once this Policy Framework is fully implemented it will be mandatory for all staff who have an essential requirement to have a probation officer qualification in their job description or in Statutory Guidance to maintain registration. These groups will also be able to use the title Registered Probation Officer. There will also be an opportunity for other staff holding a recognised probation qualification to join the register on a voluntary basis. They would be required to maintain adherence to professional standards, including the CPD requirements.
"to assess and manage the risk of people on probation" the job description. How deeply depressing. It was alwlays part of the job. Not the job itself.
DeleteAnd what's with using the title "Registered Probation Officer" like we have "Registered Barrister" or "Registered Doctor" ?
DeletePresumably the unregistered ones will be those who didn't do their meaningless mandatory learning, which qualifies you for absolutely nothing other than proving you can click through pages of shite without falling asleep
DeleteThe problem with a probation professional register is that it’ll be another tool used by managers to threaten staff and there’ll be a little unit of staff somewhere who’ll get off on striking people off the register.
ReplyDeleteSFO = struck off
Miss targets = struck off
Vetting failure = struck off
Performance improvement plan = struck off
Well that was an utterly tedious read…and somewhat embarrassing. It serves as a reminder of just how low probation has sunk. It reminds me of a board game that was rolled out in the old North East. Designed to tackle some practice issue (god knows what) in a fun way….What they really mean is you aren’t capable of reading those long winded grown up documents. But you will if it’s written for a 5 year old with big writing and funny drawings. That how far probation has slipped from its professional image. Without immediate access to money, supported accommodation, medical and social services people leaving prison will be more likely to offend. Alas we have no housing, benefit punishments, mental health services in disarray and little or no social supports. You can have all the interventions in the world but if someone’s facing a night on the streets with no money for food, they won’t give a fuck about your intervention. It’s not rocket science.
ReplyDelete