Many in probation would say OMiC or Offender Management in Custody has been a disaster and a clear sign of HM Prison Service having the whip hand in HMPPS. The Howard League is clear about what needs to happen:-
We have heard a lot about prison overcrowding over recent weeks, not least because of the Howard League’s own efforts, but there is overcrowding in probation too. And that matters, because the probation service is going to be asked to do more in the future.
Shabana Mahmood has made a welcome commitment to recruit 1,000 more trainee probation officers but as she acknowledged in Parliament, this is not new investment but a redeployment of resources. Probation will need that new investment and one place where the money could be found is in the budget currently earmarked to build new prisons. We shall see if the Ministry of Justice is able to follow the logic of its own announcements in the coming months.
In the meantime, what does probation reform look like? The Howard League is clear that the probation service should be delivered within a localised structure and with independence from the prison service. See, for example, the evidence we gave to the Lords Justice and Home Affairs Committee inquiry into community sentencing.
Such a restructuring will take time, however. What could ministers do right now to address concerns around probation caseloads and ensure, as we have said, that probation is equipped to be the ‘ultimate guarantor of public safety’? Here is one idea.
The probation service currently seconds a significant number of qualified and experienced probation officers to prisons. At the time of the last joint inspection in 2022, it amounted to 135 senior probation officers and 626 probation officers (although the targets for recruitment amounted to 206 senior probation officers and 797 probation officers).
Readers might be questioning why there are hundreds of probation officers working in prisons. They would not be wrong. The joint inspection into the reasons why, the Offender Management in Custody’ (OMiC) model, found that it was “simply not working”. Inspectors found shortfalls in public protection work, information sharing, and relationship building between prison staff, probation workers and prisoners. They went on to remark:
Despite transfer of almost 800 probation officers to POM [‘prison offender manager’] roles in prisons, we found very little added value from these posts. They had little direct contact with prisoners and were not clear about their roles and responsibilities under the OMiC model. Handovers to COMs [‘community offender managers’] were often of poor quality and little work was completed to prepare prisoners to work with COMs for their resettlement. We found little contact by POMs with prisoners, to work with and complete sentence planning with them.When something is simply not working, it is time to try something else. The government should redeploy those probation officers working in prisons within the community. Work to prepare people for release from prison can be done just as effectively, if not more so, beyond the prison gates.
There may be resistance from within HMPPS and from those probation officers seconded to working in prisons. It is, as one former chief probation officer has remarked, a simple case of “the pressures in the prison probation officer role not matching those of the community probation officers. There is absolutely no chance of a ‘prison offender manager’ being caught up as the responsible supervising officer in a Serious Further Offence review.”
That shouldn’t stop the Ministry of Justice grasping the nettle, to reiterate our current mantra, and making the change. To deploy so many probation officers in prison when community workloads are so high is just irresponsible.
Andrew Neilson, Director of Campaigns
Comments
This is an interesting take. As an OMiC Senior Probation Officer, I can hardly be distinguished as being impartial to the above, however, I can certainly provide a ‘front-of-house’ view. The concerns I have with this proposal:
1. Many COM’s are overstretched to such an extent that they are unable to prioritise their custodial cases. Therefore, many POM’s go above and beyond the OMiC model to make up for the shortfalls from community teams. If OMiC is dissolved, there will be tens of thousands of prisoners who may feel neglected.
2. OMiC staff retention is generally healthy – transfer POM’s into the community against their will, then they will simply leave the service. Alas, we will have staffing issues in both the community and custody.
3. Due to community staffing levels, OMiC has never had the opportunity to launch as intended. The sensible thing to do would be to wait for the conclusion of the acute recruitment drive and then assess the shortfalls of OMiC.
In contrast, my view is that OMiC has the capacity to work effectively with the following proposals:
1. POM/COM handover date is pushed from 8.5 months prior to release, to 3 months before release. This will allow the COM more breathing space to prioritise community cases, and will put the onus on OMiC/resettlement teams to complete Approved Premises referrals/ generic accommodation referrals.
2. Parole reports, in my view, are the wrong way round. As drawn on above, POM’s generally spend more time with cases as they are more accessible – so they know them best. Parole reports should be led by the POM, with the COM providing an RMP to effectively manage said prisoner should they be released.
--oo00oo--
Andrew. I agree and would suggest a further clarification of the role of OMU, POM and COM as experience suggests that there is much confusion over who does what and particularly when it comes to the continuum of sentence planning – preparation for release – post-release supervision. OMU and POM can be the same person but have limited planning/discussion/hand-off with COM. COM personnel changes are frequent. So yes, leave the OMU to focus on sentence planning and pull the POM and COM roles together outside the prison to prep the individual for what comes next and then support them through it. That’s a much simpler system. And the continuity of an individual POM/COM probation officer building a relationship through planning for release whilst an individual is inside and supporting that same individual post-release could provide enormous benefits to all. Even if there is a handoff to a specialist community PO a month after release, having the continuity from the POM/COM ensures a simpler and, logic would suggest, more effective transition.
Andrew. I agree and would suggest a further clarification of the role of OMU, POM and COM as experience suggests that there is much confusion over who does what and particularly when it comes to the continuum of sentence planning – preparation for release – post-release supervision. OMU and POM can be the same person but have limited planning/discussion/hand-off with COM. COM personnel changes are frequent. So yes, leave the OMU to focus on sentence planning and pull the POM and COM roles together outside the prison to prep the individual for what comes next and then support them through it. That’s a much simpler system. And the continuity of an individual POM/COM probation officer building a relationship through planning for release whilst an individual is inside and supporting that same individual post-release could provide enormous benefits to all. Even if there is a handoff to a specialist community PO a month after release, having the continuity from the POM/COM ensures a simpler and, logic would suggest, more effective transition.
From Twitter:-
ReplyDelete"I'd very much like the Chief Inspectors remit changed so inspection of HMPPS HQ senior leadership capability was a stand alone priority. No national public sector organisation in the country has less public visibility and worse accountability. And the results are everywhere."
Everything at the moment is geared to making community Probation third class in the criminal justice journey: POM/COM handovers. The Parole Board not demanding more support from prisons around Part Bs or Cs for access to offenders and tediously, reminding us 'gently' of the need to get these reports done. It's not the prison that potentially misses the deadline, it's the probation officer in the community. Prisons not bothering to tell us when they've been released: no alert or email with good notice. No resettlement work done by prisons. No offence-focused work made in prisons. ECSL utterly favouring the prison (and disgracefully POMs getting financial bonuses for dumping the cases onto community probation). I have no doubt that SDS40 will be similar- but they need to be transparent about bonus payments this time. As the person mentions in this blog: the COM is expected to do most of the work in parole hearings. As they rightly point out, the offender has been in PRISON for all this time, not the COMMUNITY. So the emphasis requires a volte- face back to the POM. It is unacceptable to have a two-tier HMPPS and reducing that inequality will go some way to improving the culture. The prisons are in no position to dictate anything to community probation, but have baked-in processes or free rides from scrutiny that allow this dynamic. The probation Director General has denied that there is this inequality, but it's as plain as day and experienced by most community if not all probation officers. Until offender X has left the prison gates, he/she is wholly the responsibility of the prison. As he/she is when in the community, the responsibility of the probation officer there. No if's but's, maybe's or compromise. This fudging and 'advantage prisons' point scoring has to be eradicated.
ReplyDeleteI’m a POM and I haven’t received any bonuses for ‘dumping’ cases on the community.
DeleteI think your post, which claims point scoring has to end, is exactly that - trying to score points against prison colleagues by making inflammatory comments. I could sit here reciting the problems with OMiC for days.
Having experienced it from both the community and the prison side it clearly does need to be reformed but that is not something we as have any control over and so I continue to do my best within the framework as it stands.
No one I work with thinks ECSL or SDS40 is a good idea so I don’t think it’s fair to lay blame on POMs in the way you have, as if prison staff have had a choice in any of this. If you think all POMs are gleefully celebrating passing off cases to our community colleagues or that we view COMs as ‘third class’ then you are sorely mistaken.
I value the work that community officers do (I was one myself for many years) and constantly defend the pressures on their time
to the people I work with in prison when they complain about having minimal contact etc.
I would never throw community colleagues under the bus, we all have different pressures and division at a time like this is not the answer.
Well said. Coms have release dates on Delius !
DeleteI am a SPO in a resettlement prison where my trained staff have very little time to spend with prisoners. This is what they want to do but instead they spend time being a messenger service for other agencies, serving documents for the home office and making up for shortfalls in keyworking due to chronic prison officer shortfalls . Our useless it systems that don’t talk to each other , repetitive pointless form filling and a rubbish communication system within our prison (we still use written applications) all compound the problem. The OMiC model in a resettlement prison does not leave resources for one to one work with prisoners. The model envisages weekly meetings with a prison officer key worker. This has never happened . Please don’t suggest that the lack of this work is due to lazy staff. It most certainly isn’t .Supporting cases (short sentences as those handed over to COM ) leaves resources for transactional tasks only such as HDC paperwork etc .
ReplyDeleteWe all need to remind ourselves that the systems are wrong . I don’t encourage my staff to be negative and insulting towards community staff so please don’t insult prison POMs who are also under a lot of pressure too.
When are we going to stop using the term "offender"? The CRCs pretty much obliterated it. The NPS embraced it. The Day One Target Operating Model for the reunified Probation Service said they were going to stop using it (leading to the fairly awful Person on Probation - now PoP).
ReplyDeleteCOM/POM - the "O" word is right there and people are wearing these titles with pride (usually bashing each other on this blog I might add).
The term "offender" is dehumanising, labelling and flies in the face of everything we are supposed to be achieving. Desistance relies on someone who has transgressed, seeing themselves differently, shifting their identity away from offending. Yet we call them all offenders, put the "O-word" in our own job descriptions and pepper all the documents we ask those who use our services with it so they can see it every time they interact with us.
We should do better. Language is important. It might help OUR identity which seems lost currently.
From Twitter:-
ReplyDelete"The problem with the Probation service is the current leadership of the Probation service itself. They are unable, or unwilling, to understand their incompetence *is* the problem. They would rather continue to drive the service into the ground rather than give up power."
“At the time of the last joint inspection in 2022, it amounted to 135 senior probation officers and 626 probation officers”
ReplyDeleteRumour has it 75% of them are to be transferred back to local probation offices.
From Twitter:-
Delete"That is a rumour/untrue. Just to clarify - not 1 POM has received a bonus on the back of ECSL. Rumours can be dangerous, research them before you believe them. OMiC will work once the service staffed sufficiently."
Was it not reported by NAPO?
DeleteI worded in a prison for 5 years as a PO. Pre OMIC . I saw my caseload every 4-10 weeks depending on risk - parole - release- need . In reports the COm concentrated on release - I addressed current risk. We liaised frequently before reports were done to share info and discuss issues. Reports were not regurgitating oasys - they were an analysis of risk and update of current situation. In a readable format not the ridiculous format they have evolved into!! -
ReplyDelete“the COm concentrated on release - I addressed current risk.”
DeleteBut what does that really mean when the prisoner is locked inside a prison? You’re not addressing much having little chats every 6 weeks while the probation officer (com) is doing all the release planning with a caseload of 60 others.
Omic has always been a dosser role for probation officers.
I’m not the original poster but I currently work within the Cat D estate. I am constantly assessing current risk and ensuring it remains safe and manageable for prisoners to firstly be in open conditions and secondly to have access to ROTL. The COM completes the initial paperwork but does not have time nor the knowledge of the prisoner to continuously risk assess.
DeleteLikewise in closed conditions risk assessment is constant.
Just because someone isn’t in the community doesn’t mean they stop posing any risk - what is the risk to staff, self, other prisoners, visitors, what is the appropriate level of contact with children, can someone be managed in a Cat C environment or do they need a higher/lower security? What interventions are appropriate? How does any security intel link to risk? Etc.
I worked as a po in a large local prison (650+ capacity) in the 90's. A team of five POs covered everything probation-related. We organised visits from outside POs, covered work for POs who couldn't visit for any reason, we wrote pre-sentence, parole & any other reports where necessary, we had daily surgeries, we ran a "first night club" in reception (jointly with prison staff, finishing 9pm), we delivered unwelcome news to prisoners - all pre-OASys, mostly using telephones, pens & paper. Management & supervision came from an ACO covering what was then called the Throughcare & Aftercare team.
DeleteBeing sent to a prison cul-de-sac was, in those bad old sepia coloured days, regarded as a 'punishment detail' or being put out to grass. It was certainly bloody hard work.
Its strange to hear the PO in prison role now being referred to as "a doss" with bonuses.
.. do you mean as opposed to previously being known as the elephants graveyard for probation officers?
DeleteBefore probation trys to do something else, it firstly has to decide what it wants to be.
ReplyDeleteIt will only stand as an independent service once it can clearly define its role and purpose within the criminal justice system.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/probation-staffing-crisis-inspections-safety-b2584503.html
'Getafix
"Before probation trys to do something else, it firstly has to decide what it wants to be."
DeleteProbation doesn't have a choice; it is whatever the incumbent administration wants it to be.
The probation service as an organisation, the staff & what used to be the professional organisation (napo) have no voice.
Since the late 1990's 'Probation' has been defined by anything but probation - just a carousel of self-serving politicians, senior civil servants & influential other factors, e.g. loud academics, wealthy private enterprise & data-driven analytics:
wallis, narey, wheatley, spurr, romeo, oasys, clark, ogrs, sara, howard, waddington, ross, kempshall, bonta, andrews, blunkett, straw, grayling, g4s, serco, sodexo, capita, etc, etc, etc.
What chance change?
Probation has never been allowed to be what it wants to be, not for the past few decades. And it’ll be no different under Starmer, Mahmood and Timpson.
Deletehttps://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/probation-staffing-crisis-prisons-inmates-b2584468.html
Deletespurr was on't wireless this lunchtime (bbc r4 wato) trying to revise history in his favour (again), filling the void of deafening silence from present incumbents with utter garbage. How do these charlatans do it?
Deletethe man is without shame
just launched my lunch listening to spurrt spouting shyte on bbcr4 world at one... the brassneck of the arrogant shithead, deflecting all responsibility for the dissolution of probation, pretending to give a shit. He gleefully oversaw & drove through the destruction of the probation service between 2010 & 2019, drawing it to the bosom of his prison service fiefdom. He's just a disingenuous revisionist prick who thinks he's entitled to fill the vacuum of silence from romeo & whatshername.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c7259wpl1x9o.amp
ReplyDeleteThis is shocking video of the police. It is a despicable breach of reasonable force a disgusting attack on a man down already. I imagine a force inquiry and a P45 is on its way.
From Twitter:-
ReplyDelete"It is to be welcomed that Shabana Mahmood has announced a review into how the prisons crisis came about . It would be good to know who is carrying it out, what the terms of reference are and what the time lines are. Decades of secrecy around HMPPS are part of the problem."
Basic custody got in touch a few weeks back and I was asked/instructed/expected to make a DTR, CAS-3, CRS and as a last resort an AP referral. Prisons: this can be achieved with a telephone and the internet. These forms are very time consuming. ECSL: an annex D is the responsibility of the COM to evidence push back on risk not identified already (Prisons, please listen... don't use the annex D to get us to do more work. They should be oven-baked risk assessed when we're allocated the case... after all they're in prison and you have trained risk assessors in custody even if the MOJ initial allocation has had zero risk assessment!) When you ask a prison for offence-focused work to be carried out or if it has been achieved up to pre-release, the answer is usually a resounding 'no'. Again, this can't be acceptable. Communicate with inmates. Please don't leave them festering and unhappy and not communicated with until release when they're annoyed. We're not here to clear up shortcomings not achieved in prison. Don't move London prisoners to the middle of nowhere a month before release to a London PDU. This makes initial appointments difficult. Prisons, without irony, are a law unto themselves and no one pulls them up on it. COMs can turn up to prisons and be treated like 5th spokes in the wheel, despite we're all supposedly part of the same HMPPS. The divisions are created because of the emphasis and power dynamic being in the control of the prisons. I can't highlight this enough. If prison staff and probation staff in prisons are upset about this, listen to COMs and be much more supportive. A further inequality exists in that COMs have zero pushback. But prisons can demand at will and the COM has no agency to say no. The Parole Board does not pull prisons up on (un)timely video links or visits- but we love a 'gentle reminder' from the PB (we don't!) for what is out of our control. With 45-50 cases there is only so many times I can keep asking for a video link until the deadline passes and then there's more 'gentle reminders'. Please don't form like Voltron and hide behind outmoded processes- none of this works. Too much literal silo and barbed wire fence thinking is not good for you, for us, or the POPS.
ReplyDeleteI think you need to understand OMIC. You speak as though prison staff do all of these things on purpose with a smile on our faces while COMs struggle. Prisons do not have the power you think they have . It is the system, specifically under staffing that cases the problems . We re not stupid, we can fill forms in as well as you . We simply do not have that resource within the current OMiC resourcing model. COMs are not traeated as 2nd class by my staff, we just rarely see them. We understand what you are all going through as we are your colleagues. Be angry at the system not fellow staff
ReplyDeleteThe Ps in HMPPS stand for prisons and primacy, I don't think staff are deliberately making COMs lives more intolerable or their workload harder. But sending out an email expecting me to do all the resettlement work is not reading the room or showing empathy. I know forms are time consuming but we don't have the resource either. You have resettlement depts funded by the MOJ. So they can be availed in these times of hardship and difficulty. You can make sure that prisoners are better prepared for community transition: that's not a system failure, that's a necessity to prevent likely recall (and then they end up back with you anyway). You can do offence-focused work. You can treat COMs as brethren, not adversarial or civilian, especially on visits. You can stop having your admin send out reminders about this process or that: how many people am I supposed to be answerable to? Yes, the system has favoured the prison because society wants more people locked up and in some cases executed. But that's playing to the knee-jerk hang 'em and flog 'em brigade. The system is grossly uneven and it's an appeal to create a level playing field. Also please tell us when they're getting out: not let them out at 8pm and then have them roam the streets until the initial appointment the next day. You, know, because that makes them angry and i'm not really up for apologising for failures elsewhere. It isn't what it isn't. Saying it is what it is, is passive surrender to something which isn't inevitable. It's a way of normalising something that shouldn't be to make it acceptable. This is where we are and where are further headed.
Delete06:11 perfectly sums it up
ReplyDelete