Just to be upfront with my readers this blog is focussed upon the use and development of Business Processes and Computer Systems within the National Probation Service (NPS) and then a Community Rehabilitation Company (CRC) being based upon my working experiences from 2006 to 2016. I am not a qualified Probation Officer. But I have a long career prior to joining probation in the private sector in Business and Computer systems. First employed in 2006 within the NPS West Midland Trust, Learning and Development Unit, Selly Oak, Birmingham as a Business Support Training Officer.
Now to share with you a High Level Offender Management Vertical Workflow Map which is now 12 years old covering Offender Management Process Flows (circa 2012) within the Staffordshire and West Midlands Probation Trust. I am sure this could be edited in less than a few hours to accurately represent current HMPPS Probation Business Processes since I suspect much of the supporting documentation (paperwork) has remained unchanged. Although the computer record updating may have changed. I just don't know. Maybe it is a starting point to commencing Business Workflow and Process Mapping. Certainly Indeterminate Prison Sentencing has changed with the removal of IPP's by coincidence in 2012 (As usual just after the map was drawn !!!!) although their removal was from memory not retrospective. If it generates any interest I have another High Level Horizontal Workflow Map I can share showing the relationships between all those parties linked to Probation once again somewhat dated but easily updated.
Then I jointly supported the Learning and Development Unit and the Central Birmingham based Business Transformation Unit (BTU) initially supporting the System Testing and Implementation of Delius. Then in 2013 I was appointed as a Transformation Administration Manager within the Birmingham based Business Transformation Unit (BTU). I was then transferred to a CRC in 2014 before being made redundant in 2016.
I cannot blog on the current (2024) HM Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) since I have been outside the Probation Service since 2016. So essentially it is more of a historical record but the effort to write it is based upon me wanting to communicate on “a lessons learnt” basis that may influence and benefit those currently working within the HMPPS. It is also an historical record of the events I experienced at the NPS and then CRC.
So why start blogging on Probation after 8 years outside of the service?
When I was at Probation, like many others, I followed Jim Brown daily since he was telling the “truth” particularly through the blitzkrieg period of change. But over the last 8 years I have only on rare occasions popped onto his blog to see how things are going at Probation, now the HMPPS. So having done one of my normal LinkedIn posts that covered a bit about Probation, I was surprised to get a personal message to call him. Which I did and we had a brief chat on Monday 23/09/24. He asked me if I had any more relevant contributions. I explained that obviously all my experiences are now from the 2006 – 2016 period so lacking relevance to HMPPS in 2024.
So why start blogging on Probation after 8 years outside of the service?
When I was at Probation, like many others, I followed Jim Brown daily since he was telling the “truth” particularly through the blitzkrieg period of change. But over the last 8 years I have only on rare occasions popped onto his blog to see how things are going at Probation, now the HMPPS. So having done one of my normal LinkedIn posts that covered a bit about Probation, I was surprised to get a personal message to call him. Which I did and we had a brief chat on Monday 23/09/24. He asked me if I had any more relevant contributions. I explained that obviously all my experiences are now from the 2006 – 2016 period so lacking relevance to HMPPS in 2024.
Then it occurred to both of us during our conversation that those experiences might help those trying to sort out HMPPS today. I explained that particularly my NPS experience, not my CRC experience, was a very positive part of my career, particularly in respect of the people with whom I worked. Whilst my experience of the Business Systems and Computer Systems was just the opposite. But I had started in 2006 with the best intentions of improving both of these aspects and to be perfectly frank, after 10 years of hard motivated work, I achieved nothing. I don’t know another part of my career where it was so difficult to influence and effect change to Business Processes and Computer Systems. So if any contribution on here could help those now within the HMPPS family achieve these changes now, I wouldn’t feel my 10 years was such a waste of effort. My commitment can only be a positive and constructive one since I don’t do negative or political.
So I walked out of the Probation Offices in Central Birmingham for the last time on the 3rd July 2016, having been disposed of by Reducing Reoffending Partnership (RRP), a Community Rehabilitation Company (CRC) that was now trying to run the Probation Private Services for Derbyshire, Leicestershire, Nottinghamshire, Rutland, Staffordshire and the West Midlands. I was deemed redundant and my services were no longer required. Not the best of timing for them or me. In their case with me having a long career prior to Probation in Business Systems design and implementation in the Private Sector, they needed me and others like me more than ever with the chaos now being unleashed. Instead they were dependant on the ”all knowing” but “knowing nothing” highly paid consultant swarms now descended on Probation. Many just out of university but deemed chargeable to the Ministry of Justice no doubt with a cashback into the RRP coffers. But it also has to be acknowledged that there were some very smart experienced consultants with some clearly wanting to support our side of how we wanted change implemented. That is carefully and progressively.
These consultants actually listened and didn’t just feedback but actively joined us in trying to get some constructive steer on the changes themselves and the rate of change being planned. They also took some risks within their own Consultant Management Companies, who had won the lucrative change management contracts from the MoJ, in supporting our side of the story. But unfortunately they weren’t listened to either, so blitzkrieg commenced at pace.
The tide of change from Government and the MoJ was too strong and too fast for all of us to contain or control it. They had enforced a blitzkrieg approach to changing Probation. Probation had established its fundamental principles over 100 years and these were already being improved upon as a result of the Carter Report, by a Probation Officer, and its implementation through the 2006 to 2010 period. Things were improving in a Japanese style of incremental improvements like the national use of a new Offender Management System called Delius and access to the Police ViSOR System.
So I walked out of the Probation Offices in Central Birmingham for the last time on the 3rd July 2016, having been disposed of by Reducing Reoffending Partnership (RRP), a Community Rehabilitation Company (CRC) that was now trying to run the Probation Private Services for Derbyshire, Leicestershire, Nottinghamshire, Rutland, Staffordshire and the West Midlands. I was deemed redundant and my services were no longer required. Not the best of timing for them or me. In their case with me having a long career prior to Probation in Business Systems design and implementation in the Private Sector, they needed me and others like me more than ever with the chaos now being unleashed. Instead they were dependant on the ”all knowing” but “knowing nothing” highly paid consultant swarms now descended on Probation. Many just out of university but deemed chargeable to the Ministry of Justice no doubt with a cashback into the RRP coffers. But it also has to be acknowledged that there were some very smart experienced consultants with some clearly wanting to support our side of how we wanted change implemented. That is carefully and progressively.
These consultants actually listened and didn’t just feedback but actively joined us in trying to get some constructive steer on the changes themselves and the rate of change being planned. They also took some risks within their own Consultant Management Companies, who had won the lucrative change management contracts from the MoJ, in supporting our side of the story. But unfortunately they weren’t listened to either, so blitzkrieg commenced at pace.
The tide of change from Government and the MoJ was too strong and too fast for all of us to contain or control it. They had enforced a blitzkrieg approach to changing Probation. Probation had established its fundamental principles over 100 years and these were already being improved upon as a result of the Carter Report, by a Probation Officer, and its implementation through the 2006 to 2010 period. Things were improving in a Japanese style of incremental improvements like the national use of a new Offender Management System called Delius and access to the Police ViSOR System.
Although OASys was in most need of re-engineering it was not on the to do list. Probation had never faced a blitzkrieg Government attack before and it was very ill prepared to counter it. Other Government Departments, particularly our own HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) never came in with any support since whilst we were under attack they could standby, avoiding being attacked themselves. Needless to say HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) was also being attacked under austerity principles with many local court closures impacting the application of good and tried local justice principles. The blitzkrieg approach funded by the Government threw money at the private sector to establish the principles of probation moving to the private sector in the form of the CRC’s. So I was transferred to a CRC.
We CRC staff, being ex- NPS staff, were now considered only eligible to be treated with a sort of private sector employment status. Essentially exiled out into the wilderness. With no doubt their planned lowering of pay rates to reflect our drop in both economic and social status. Yes I was now employed by a new lowly entity in the Government MoJ come Probation hierarchy, which was soon to be dropped a peg down on bloc below the unit with the lock and keys the Prisons which were to upstage Probation in the political hierarchy creating the illogical HMPPS.
NPS Induction Training in West Midland taught the hierarchy where the Courts were the very top, supported by the Probation Service with the Prisons as a service locking them up as punishment and to protect the public. Whilst the Carter Report rightly recommended the Prison’s rightly focussed on rehabilitation whilst in a custody setting. Training Prison Officers on Rehabilitation Practices, we were always amazed at how enthusiastic they were about acquiring these new skills and looking forward to applying them within their prison settings. Just the locking up although critical was very boring and contributing to prisoners futures much more rewarding. Probation was a highly respected Court Service which has been that way almost from the beginnings of Probation as detailed in the Probation of Offenders Act 1907. Totally integrated into the Court System allowing them to administer justice and protect the public. Probation was a service geographically distributed in the community operating in support of the Courts as a Court Service.
So that was it. Probation was over for me. I had tried very hard with many other like minded and motivated people to get the Probation Business Processes into a better state. We even organised a group of Trusts covering London, Devon and Cornwall, Nottinghamshire, Staffordshire, South Yorkshire and the West Midland to establish a common National Business Standards System on the TIBCO Nimbus business mapping product we all had installed and were using daily. Although we tried we got little support from the MoJ in terms of this initiative which was in fact seeded from the bottom of the organisation upwards. Never the right way to get something established.
We CRC staff, being ex- NPS staff, were now considered only eligible to be treated with a sort of private sector employment status. Essentially exiled out into the wilderness. With no doubt their planned lowering of pay rates to reflect our drop in both economic and social status. Yes I was now employed by a new lowly entity in the Government MoJ come Probation hierarchy, which was soon to be dropped a peg down on bloc below the unit with the lock and keys the Prisons which were to upstage Probation in the political hierarchy creating the illogical HMPPS.
NPS Induction Training in West Midland taught the hierarchy where the Courts were the very top, supported by the Probation Service with the Prisons as a service locking them up as punishment and to protect the public. Whilst the Carter Report rightly recommended the Prison’s rightly focussed on rehabilitation whilst in a custody setting. Training Prison Officers on Rehabilitation Practices, we were always amazed at how enthusiastic they were about acquiring these new skills and looking forward to applying them within their prison settings. Just the locking up although critical was very boring and contributing to prisoners futures much more rewarding. Probation was a highly respected Court Service which has been that way almost from the beginnings of Probation as detailed in the Probation of Offenders Act 1907. Totally integrated into the Court System allowing them to administer justice and protect the public. Probation was a service geographically distributed in the community operating in support of the Courts as a Court Service.
So that was it. Probation was over for me. I had tried very hard with many other like minded and motivated people to get the Probation Business Processes into a better state. We even organised a group of Trusts covering London, Devon and Cornwall, Nottinghamshire, Staffordshire, South Yorkshire and the West Midland to establish a common National Business Standards System on the TIBCO Nimbus business mapping product we all had installed and were using daily. Although we tried we got little support from the MoJ in terms of this initiative which was in fact seeded from the bottom of the organisation upwards. Never the right way to get something established.
The West Midlands had already led on Business Change with its Modelling District Projects but it was only when we combined with the Staffordshire Trust that we gained access to their more advanced use of TIBCO Nimbus which we quickly adopted. Obviously other Trusts had quite independently taken to using TIBCO Nimbus no doubt being targeted by the TIBCO sales force. Whilst we had some MoJ meetings in London where they were impressed by our TIBCO Nimbus efforts, it was never formally adopted and was not included in any MoJ Directives to the Trusts.
I suspect many in Probation may not even be aware of this TIBCO Nimbus initiative taking place in some Trusts. Even within the TIBCO Nimbus active Trusts their own staff were not always aware of its purpose and presence. Not being a subject included in any National Probation Communications for many using it was not seen as a priority. There was certainly no national sign off of the TIBCO Nimbus Business Processes thereby not making them the de facto way of working for everybody. It was a mess. Had it been better established it may have helped us better deflect some of the blitzkrieg attack on our undocumented working practices. We really had nothing concrete or national to defend ourselves with in respect of standardised business processes. With no defences it was inevitable we would lose the battle.
But the one last stand I took supported by my Business Process Design colleague along with surprisingly an RRP Consultant, was to try and convince the Reducing Reoffending Partnership Board to use our Business Processes already mapped in TIBCO Nimbus as a basis for building the new business models brought about by the creation of the CRC’s It made so much sense. This proposal to the RRP CRC Board was dated the 9th July 2015 and I still have a copy I can share on here in the future. I also initiated a brilliant commercial negotiation with TIBCO to virtually have free use of Nimbus for a period to get it established. What was there not to like. But the proposal got rejected by the RRP CRC Board.
The TIBCO Nimbus Servers were torn out of their server racking and sent for scrap. Somewhere I have photos of them lying on the scrap pile representing many years of process design and data entry work. Then beyond belief they started a Business Process Mapping Project to go around collecting all the information again from relevant Probation staff groups and then re mapping it all in Microsoft Visio a product considered very unfriendly for everyday business users being more aligned with the needs of IT Staff.
So to the end of my story at Probation with the CRC RRP making me redundant on 3rd July 2016. Exactly 1 year after our TIBCO Nimbus proposal to the RRP CRC Board had been rejected. My work Nimbus colleague was kept on to continue but without having TIBCO Nimbus and having to return to using Microsoft Visio the objective of installing business systems onto all employee desk tops where they would be used daily by the service was now impossible. My Nimbus work colleague soon left since Business Process Planning was not a priority in the midst of all the firefighting now required to maintain some sort of Probation Service.
Now just to complete the conversation I had with Jim Brown. He said write me a “taster” and I will see if I want to link to it. This is that taster. But included in it is a early High Level Flowchart for use in the West Midlands that I produced way back to illustrate the importance of having a holistic view of all the Business Systems.
The truth is I have many other resources that are now dated like all the original TIBCO Nimbus Process Maps extracted in a PowerPoint format. Along with various other methodologies and techniques we developed and used like iPresentation and iProcess along with Work Instructions. In fact lots of my historic bits and pieces accumulated over 10 years at Probation that may possibly interest probation staff historically or maybe in some cases prove worth reusing today in the HMPPS.
But to be effective though what Probation needs is what my last American Company had which was what they called its own university (Pollak University). In fact it wasn’t a University in our sense of the use of the word meaning a verified academic learning institution. But it was where all product knowledge, manufacturing knowledge, research knowledge, business processes knowledge and computer systems knowledge was documented, co-ordinated, researched and communicated. It had dedicated librarianship, research and training capabilities. Research papers could be submitted and reviewed and so forth. Essentially a “one stop” place for all knowledge and processes within the business entity. So they called it a University.
I suspect many in Probation may not even be aware of this TIBCO Nimbus initiative taking place in some Trusts. Even within the TIBCO Nimbus active Trusts their own staff were not always aware of its purpose and presence. Not being a subject included in any National Probation Communications for many using it was not seen as a priority. There was certainly no national sign off of the TIBCO Nimbus Business Processes thereby not making them the de facto way of working for everybody. It was a mess. Had it been better established it may have helped us better deflect some of the blitzkrieg attack on our undocumented working practices. We really had nothing concrete or national to defend ourselves with in respect of standardised business processes. With no defences it was inevitable we would lose the battle.
But the one last stand I took supported by my Business Process Design colleague along with surprisingly an RRP Consultant, was to try and convince the Reducing Reoffending Partnership Board to use our Business Processes already mapped in TIBCO Nimbus as a basis for building the new business models brought about by the creation of the CRC’s It made so much sense. This proposal to the RRP CRC Board was dated the 9th July 2015 and I still have a copy I can share on here in the future. I also initiated a brilliant commercial negotiation with TIBCO to virtually have free use of Nimbus for a period to get it established. What was there not to like. But the proposal got rejected by the RRP CRC Board.
The TIBCO Nimbus Servers were torn out of their server racking and sent for scrap. Somewhere I have photos of them lying on the scrap pile representing many years of process design and data entry work. Then beyond belief they started a Business Process Mapping Project to go around collecting all the information again from relevant Probation staff groups and then re mapping it all in Microsoft Visio a product considered very unfriendly for everyday business users being more aligned with the needs of IT Staff.
So to the end of my story at Probation with the CRC RRP making me redundant on 3rd July 2016. Exactly 1 year after our TIBCO Nimbus proposal to the RRP CRC Board had been rejected. My work Nimbus colleague was kept on to continue but without having TIBCO Nimbus and having to return to using Microsoft Visio the objective of installing business systems onto all employee desk tops where they would be used daily by the service was now impossible. My Nimbus work colleague soon left since Business Process Planning was not a priority in the midst of all the firefighting now required to maintain some sort of Probation Service.
Now just to complete the conversation I had with Jim Brown. He said write me a “taster” and I will see if I want to link to it. This is that taster. But included in it is a early High Level Flowchart for use in the West Midlands that I produced way back to illustrate the importance of having a holistic view of all the Business Systems.
The truth is I have many other resources that are now dated like all the original TIBCO Nimbus Process Maps extracted in a PowerPoint format. Along with various other methodologies and techniques we developed and used like iPresentation and iProcess along with Work Instructions. In fact lots of my historic bits and pieces accumulated over 10 years at Probation that may possibly interest probation staff historically or maybe in some cases prove worth reusing today in the HMPPS.
But to be effective though what Probation needs is what my last American Company had which was what they called its own university (Pollak University). In fact it wasn’t a University in our sense of the use of the word meaning a verified academic learning institution. But it was where all product knowledge, manufacturing knowledge, research knowledge, business processes knowledge and computer systems knowledge was documented, co-ordinated, researched and communicated. It had dedicated librarianship, research and training capabilities. Research papers could be submitted and reviewed and so forth. Essentially a “one stop” place for all knowledge and processes within the business entity. So they called it a University.
Now if this blog got to the MoJ and it triggered them to setup up a “Probation University” that would justify all the 10 years I spent and enjoyed at the National Probation Service. The first thing that needs researching, documenting and standardising and communicating is all the Business Processes. This is about adopting an ideology that Probation can have a common set of Business Processes applied right across all geographical and business areas. To make it happen it needs a champion in this ideology and that champion being in a position at the top with the powers to implement it. There is an argument that computer systems in the future will have built into them workflow principles and this has been accelerated by the AI developments. But until these systems are developed and made available it is vital that all Business Processes are standardised and documented in a user friendly way.
Some may consider the Probation Institute established in 2014 could act like the Probation University I have proposed. My view is it should definitely form part of the Probation University. But a concern might be that once it became MoJ financed would it as a "membership" financed organisation have its independence compromised. I don't see it this way. The membership of the Probation Institute are working at the front line of the Service and their constructive contribution is vital and should be within the proposed Probation University framework.
Some may consider the Probation Institute established in 2014 could act like the Probation University I have proposed. My view is it should definitely form part of the Probation University. But a concern might be that once it became MoJ financed would it as a "membership" financed organisation have its independence compromised. I don't see it this way. The membership of the Probation Institute are working at the front line of the Service and their constructive contribution is vital and should be within the proposed Probation University framework.
But the scope of the Probation University is much larger than that of the Probation Institute. The Probation University defines and drives the operational activities of Probation both staff and systems. I appreciate it's a much used cliche to suggest we should all operate like Amazon and some strong views exist suggesting you cannot apply their methods of effectively shipping goods to essentially the practice of a social science. All I would just say is let an Amazon IT system designer with their keystroke counting audit techniques and workflow engineering skills redesign OASys. The time we waste on OASys could then be spent with our clients (Do we call them clients or offenders these days?) doing our social science best practices more effectively.
Within the Probation University the study of Social and Behavioural Sciences should far exceed the focus on Business and Computer Systems. They are our prime activity. It is what we do working with our clients. So Psychology, Sociology, Anthropology and Criminology along with an endless list of other subjects that need to be included within the Probation University framework. If this blog post achieved the setting up of a Probation University whilst I am now outside the organisation it would be amazing since I could never achieve it whilst working within the organisation.
Within the Probation University the study of Social and Behavioural Sciences should far exceed the focus on Business and Computer Systems. They are our prime activity. It is what we do working with our clients. So Psychology, Sociology, Anthropology and Criminology along with an endless list of other subjects that need to be included within the Probation University framework. If this blog post achieved the setting up of a Probation University whilst I am now outside the organisation it would be amazing since I could never achieve it whilst working within the organisation.
Now to share with you a High Level Offender Management Vertical Workflow Map which is now 12 years old covering Offender Management Process Flows (circa 2012) within the Staffordshire and West Midlands Probation Trust. I am sure this could be edited in less than a few hours to accurately represent current HMPPS Probation Business Processes since I suspect much of the supporting documentation (paperwork) has remained unchanged. Although the computer record updating may have changed. I just don't know. Maybe it is a starting point to commencing Business Workflow and Process Mapping. Certainly Indeterminate Prison Sentencing has changed with the removal of IPP's by coincidence in 2012 (As usual just after the map was drawn !!!!) although their removal was from memory not retrospective. If it generates any interest I have another High Level Horizontal Workflow Map I can share showing the relationships between all those parties linked to Probation once again somewhat dated but easily updated.
Enjoy,
Banno
Link to High Level Map below.
Once launched use the normal "pinch-to-zoom" gesture to zoom in and zoom out of the PDF to read the small print.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Pw4dIYts48SVHQxhE1iKxl5r6eil4RJE/view?usp=sharing
Link to High Level Map below.
Once launched use the normal "pinch-to-zoom" gesture to zoom in and zoom out of the PDF to read the small print.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Pw4dIYts48SVHQxhE1iKxl5r6eil4RJE/view?usp=sharing
Thank you - your guest blog seems to corroborate the long-held suspicion that the Home Office/NOMS/MoJ/Probation/hmpps family has suffered chronic compromise by corrupt lobbying, incompetent & uninformed civil servants, associated vested 'business' interests & general pigheadedness.
ReplyDeleteAnyone remember the £££'s spent on PAM & TOM? And a range of other vastly expensive fails like the NOMIS debacle? And OASys has proven to be unbelievably costly & cumbersome, as opposed to the effective tool it was claimed to be.
I’ve not read all of that. I shut off when it said computer system. I skipped to the end and it said enjoy. The only ones enjoying MoJ computer systems are the ones earning millions.
ReplyDelete“A [£234m] government IT project for tracking offenders in England and Wales through the criminal justice system was a "shambles", MPs have said.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8339084.stm
A government IT project for tracking offenders in England and Wales through the criminal justice system was a "shambles", MPs have said.
DeleteOfficials in charge of the scheme - abandoned after costs trebled - lacked even a "minimum level of competence", the Public Accounts Committee found.
It highlighted a "culture of over-optimism" and lack of "rigorous" scrutiny of the scheme.
The Prison Service said it was working to ensure mistakes are not repeated.
Plans for the £234m National Offender Management Information System system, known as C-NOMIS, began in 2004 with the aim of allowing the prison and probation services in England and Wales to follow offenders "end-to-end" through the criminal justice system.
'Grossly underestimated'
But by July 2007 the project was two years behind schedule and its estimated costs had increased to £690m. It was later abandoned.
The committee's report finds that staff "grossly underestimated" the likely cost and neither ministers nor senior management at the Home Office, nor even the project board, were aware of problems until May 2007.
Even now, the National Offender Management Service, which runs prisons and probation, has no idea what £161m spent before October 2007 was used for, it adds.
The committee's chairman, Conservative MP Edward Leigh, said: "This committee has become inured to the dismal procession of government IT failures which have passed before us, but even we were surprised by the extent of the failure of C-NOMIS, the ambitious project to institute a single database to manage individual offenders through the prison and probation systems.
"There was not even a minimum level of competence in the planning and execution of this project.
"The result has been a three-year delay in the roll-out of the programme, envisaged separate databases for prisons and probation instead of the original one, each with different information about an offender, and a doubling of costs.
"This project has been a shambles."
Its replacement, NOMIS, will instead use three separate databases and is not expected to be working fully until 2011.
A Prison Service spokesman said: "The C-NOMIS project was stopped when it was recognised that it was going to be over-budget and late.
"Steps have been taken to ensure that the mistakes made are not repeated.
"The work done so far has not been lost but is being used as the basis of the revised NOMIS programme.
"This will support our commitment to ensuring that prison and probation service staff have improved access to the information they need to protect the public by managing offenders in custody and in the community.
"The prison element of the programme commenced roll out to public sector prisons on 22 May 2009 and is on schedule to complete in summer 2010."
From Twitter:-
ReplyDelete"I forget what PAM was, if anyone can illuminate? Thanks."
Platform for Achieving More - see 'When TOM meets PAM'
https://probationmatters.blogspot.com/2013/10/when-tom-meets-pam.html
From Twitter:-
Delete"Oh Lordy. It’s all coming back like a recurrent nightmare I had previously escaped from.
Thanks for that."
“The Probation University defines and drives the operational activities of Probation both staff and systems”
ReplyDeleteThe potential for a probation university was held within the structures of the old probation training consortiums which are long dead. These consortiums employed practice development assessors, worked closely with the university and training providers, and had a say in the structures of probation practice. Then TR came along and disbanded all of this, probation training ended up under HR and performance teams. Practice and research ended up under effective practice teams and civil servants that’s never stepped foot in a probation office.
It’s no wonder probation training morphed into the PQiP which is totally ineffective in recruiting, training and retaining probation trainees. With HMPPS and the civil service leading them by the reins all that was built up was lost. The Probation Institute failed to claw this ground back as it was initially led by the very same probation leaders and civil servants that enabled our destruction in the first place.
The Probation Institute is the key to all of this but is not universaly supported. If it better incorporates frontline PROBATION practitioners and managers into its workings then this could pave the way to heading or being the core of a probation university.
never forget that napo was the original "professional association" for probation which used to publish practice guidance, run training courses & advise staff... whereas now its just a handful of overpaid, silent sofa-surfers waiting for their redundancy payout from what's left in the kitty.
DeleteYes but now it’s just pet insurance.
Deletehttps://www.napo.pet/
If Napo couldnt fight for its own name then it’s no use expecting it to fight for its members and probation workers.
Delete“Pet Insurance https://www.napo.pet/
Please note that we are not in any way connected with Napo Pet Insurance - if you wish to contact them please see their website or email: support@napo.pet
Please do not use the details below to contact us regarding pet insurance.“
From Twitter:-
ReplyDelete"Combining HMIP, PI, Napo and university staff should combine into an effective probation university."
https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprobation/media/press-releases/2019/03/rabulletin2019-02/
ReplyDeleteMore evidence needed to prove technology leads to better probation supervision
DeleteThe growing use of technology to supervise individuals on probation offers no conclusive benefits, according to new research.
More than 250,000 people are under probation supervision across England and Wales. Typically, probation officers supervise individuals through regular face-to-face meetings. Some Community Rehabilitation Companies – who are responsible for supervising low and medium-risk offenders – have turned to technology instead.
Some individuals are limited to telephone contact only and call their probation officer every six weeks or so. Others use electronic kiosks to check in at an office and do not see a probation officer during their visit.
Research published by HM Inspectorate of Probation did not find evidence to suggest remote supervision leads to better outcomes.
Chief Inspector of Probation Dame Glenys Stacey said: “We have long expressed concerns about telephone-only contact. This research shows there is a lack of high-quality evidence to prove remote supervision helps to rehabilitate individuals or improve public protection.
“Despite strong evidence showing the critical role of the relationship between the individual and the probation officer, it is not protected within the current model of probation service delivery. CRCs have been able to implement operating models that allow telephone-only contact with up to 40 per cent of individuals under supervision.
“In October, HM Prison and Probation Service introduced a new contractual requirement so CRCs have to offer face-to-face meetings at least once a month. While welcome, this change does not guarantee an effective relationship or ensure that risks to the public are adequately considered. The evidence base shows that successful probation delivery is linked to the quality of the relationship, and the frequency of meeting depends on the work that needs to be done.
“We take the simple view that you need to see people in order to support them to change their lives. It is difficult for a probation officer to build a trusting and challenging relationship with an individual under supervision if they only communicate by telephone.”
The research, which was conducted by academics at Manchester Metropolitan University, looked at more than 22,000 research articles published since 2007.
Dame Glenys said: “We are not against the use of technology in probation delivery. However, it should complement face-to-face meetings, rather than be a substitute for it. For example, a probation officer might find it helpful to have a catch-up telephone call with an individual between meetings or to check how a course is going.
“Contact solely by telephone or other forms of technology does not offer anywhere near the level of supervision that we want to see.”
Notes to editors
DeleteHM Inspectorate of Probation is the independent inspector of youth offending and probation services in England and Wales.
There are 258,157 people under probation supervision across England and Wales (July to September 2018).
A Rapid Evidence Assessment on the effectiveness of remote supervision and new technologies in managing probation service users is available at justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprobation on 13 March 2019 00:01.
The Rapid Evidence Assessment focused on the use of technologies in the context of a supervisory relationship, rather than for other more specific uses such as surveillance or delivering interventions. The full methodology is in Annex A of the bulletin.
This research was prepared for HM Inspectorate of Probation by Professor Chris Fox, Jordan Harrison and Andrew Smith from the Policy, Evaluation and Research Unit at Manchester Metropolitan University (mmuperu.co.uk).
This is part of a series of Research & Analysis Bulletins, which are aimed at all those with an interest in the quality of youth offending and probation services. HM Inspectorate of Probation uses findings from the bulletins and other research publications to develop our inspection programmes, guidance and position statements.
People are social beings with a myriad of emotional responses and differing mindsets that technology and AI cannot recognise.
DeleteTechnology and AI is shifting the focus from the individual to types, and preventing types from re-offending is a far greater endeavour then preventing individuals from re-offending.
Probation should be people working with people, individuals, not types or technologically defined cohorts.
The constant emphasis on risk assessment and the risk adverse culture that grows from that emphasis is damaging for all.
The vast majority of people leaving prison do so when they have reached their pre determined release date regardless of what their risk assessment indicate. The risk assessment therefore is only ever going to be an informative tool for the supervising officer, and not the be all and end all of the whole probation period.
In a case where "the computer says no", I want to know "what the probation officer says".
Is the probation officer there to work with me as an individual being, or there just to convey to me what technology has decided I need to do?
'Getafix
IMHO we’re using the technology in the wrong way. Clunky and confusing. Court asks “how many RAR days has x done?” and according to Delius its ZERO. In a year. Ask for an update on someone’s progress, an opinion on their likely future compliance, and their OM will tell you at length. But that’s not written down anywhere. If it’s not recorded, it never happened. Trouble is the focus is on filling in the clunky parts over actually documenting the work we do. You could write the best PSR ever, but if you don’t do OASys in time, it’s a fail. If you don’t complete the report screen on Delius, it’s a fail. We need to use the tech right. And those old-skool officers need the support to do so. It’s the same as those who argue against cashless payments “because of old people”. This is the world we live in, surely it’s better to support those who are struggling to include them in it than other them?
DeleteI recognise we live in a digital world.
DeleteHowever, my point was why, do we want (or need) probation officers, if everything they do (or could do) is dictated by technology, and they have no autonomy to deal with people on a human level?
We can only move forward when the computer says yes?
It's either people investing in people, or a computer driven service that arrests everyone's development and aspirations.
Don't construct barriers when looking to break them down. It's a bad partnership.
'Getafix
Where Baroness Warsi leads, so the courageous Rosie Duffield MP follows:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3vkdy997rko
Duffield's letter said she intended to sit as an independent MP "guided by my core Labour values... The sleaze, nepotism and apparent avarice are off the scale. I am so ashamed of what you and your inner circle have done to tarnish and humiliate our once proud party.”
Sounds familiar, eh, Probation?
“All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others”
ReplyDeletehttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cg56zlge8g5o
"Our country is not a dormitory for people to come here and make money. It is our home.... Culture is more than cuisine or clothes. It's also customs which may be at odds with British values... We cannot be naïve and assume immigrants will automatically abandon ancestral ethnic hostilities at the border, or that all cultures are equally valid. They are not."
Remember. Do not complete the peoples survey.
ReplyDeleteI totally disagree with your point....years and years of staff showing they are unhappy with high completion rates has more clout than a few staff showing they are unhappy because people like you felt not completing it at all sends a stronger message, which I personally don't think it does
DeleteNo....they've always said it will be in October's pay (the pay we just had was September's)
DeleteAgree 1420 I think it's a stupid move not to record all the failing of the employers structures and in a survey you can let them have as it is.
Delete14:20 it has allowed the narrative of failing staff having a moan to persist, not completing it is a much better decision, a conscious act to signal no one takes any action arising from the staff survey so why waste time completing it. Management have an action to maximise completions, there is actually a league table produced, so I strongly urge do not complete. PS I am not the original poster
DeleteThe more employees that complete the survey the more this means the employer has achieved its objective to engage with employees. This is irrespective of what the employees have to say.
DeleteWhat is being said is if ZERO people below manager grades complete the survey that would mean the employers objective would not be met.
Anyone get the back pay/pay rise this month?
ReplyDeleteThought it was October pay but not sure as I heard the unions weee challenging it, whatever good that will do. Nice to see the prison service pay rises flaunted on the intranet to rub our noses in it
DeleteDon't be silly zero could not happen. Management will write happy stuff outcome will be whatever they say.
DeleteDon't do the people survey, that sends a better message. Don't feel guilty taking the sweets meant as a bribe!
ReplyDelete"There was not even a minimum level of competence in the planning and execution of this ... This has been a shambles... Steps have been taken to ensure that the mistakes made are not repeated."
ReplyDelete* nomis (all iterations): 2004-2010
https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/0809292.pdf
* tr: 2012-2021...
https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/article/comment/probation-outsourcing-case-study-failure
* organisational responsibility for sfo's: take your pick
* 97% of probation delivery units examined by the watchdog were falling below the standards set for good practice.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/article/2024/jul/22/cut-unsustainable-probation-workload-in-england-and-wales-urges-watchdog
And how many of the senior team at noms/hmpps/moj have lost their jobs over these expensive & egregious systemic failures?
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-deploys-urgent-support-to-struggling-rochester-prison
ReplyDelete“The membership of the Probation Institute are working at the front line of the Service”
ReplyDeletePlease tell me what the probation institute has to do with probation work? Full of academics and couldn’t be further removed from the coalface.
Not academics half if them are exe Napo or chief officers . Some in disgrace given their appalling managerial records . Awful bunch of non fits any longer.
DeleteBashing people who are trying to do something positive to maintain the profession is counterproductive. The Probation Institute does good work with very little financial support. The probation profession has damaged itself by turning on its own advocates and supporters. What a bunch of losers. It does not even support its union or its institute. Easy to be pushed around as it has no strong body independent of the employers. Maybe time to reflect on the fact that probation is its own worst enemy and those that bash Napo and the PI without getting involved are themselves a plague upon probation.
DeleteAnd so the crazy fucks are walking us into ww3.
ReplyDeleteYou probably won't publish this, JB, and that's fair dinkum. But I wanted to write it down as its happening for my own sake.
netahnyahu's extremist israeli govt - armed by the USA, funded by most of Western Europe - have abused & weaponised the concept of antisemitism. They're dragging the world down into their deep dark rabbit-hole.
Since the terrible acts of 7 Oct 2023 they've pushed the boundaries week by week, day by day; they've played everyone for fools, shifting their "war goals" & sacrificing the hostages at the altar of a full-fat war.
Its almost a year since the Hamas atrocities, but people seem to have forgotten that the israeli govt lied about what happened, that the idf killed hundreds of innocent Israelis, that the idf have killed tens of thousands of innocent civilians in Gaza, that they've destroyed hospitals & universities & world heritage sites & hundreds of UN workers + hundreds of journalists, that the idf threw Palestinian bodies off the roofs of buildings, idf snipers have shot hundreds of women & children...
"We’re seeing in real-time what settler-colonialism is and what it does. In the past, people didn’t witness the process on live-stream, so they had the excuse of ignorance. Today, we have no such excuse. We see it all, including the gleeful celebrations from the most depraved people on earth, people who went on boat tours so they could watch Gaza be reduced to rubble and fantasise about colonising the land." - Normal Island News.
Anon 22:49 And I've thought long and hard about publishing because I really am not keen on the blog being taken over by this - but I know many readers will share the sentiment you voice. One can only hope a way can be found to exert greater pressure on the Israeli government - but that is so difficult especially so close to the US elections.
Deletehttps://insidetime.org/newsround/prisoners-released-early-despite-risk-concerns/
ReplyDeleteA watchdog’s assessment of the Conservative government’s early release scheme for prisoners has concluded that at one jail, one-third of prisoners let out had been “raised as risk concerns”.
DeleteAt HMP Winchester, 124 prisoners were freed under the End of Custody Supervised Licence (ECSL) scheme between January and May 2024, according to the prison’s Independent Monitoring Board (IMB). Of these, 32 per cent were raised as risk concerns, the IMB said in its annual report.
In addition, 38 per cent of the 124 were released homeless because no accommodation could be arranged for them within the time available, while 21 per cent breached their licence conditions and were recalled to custody. ECSL was introduced in October 2023 by then-justice secretary Alex Chalk to tackle the capacity crisis in jails. Initially offering release 18 days early, it was twice extended until it offered release 70 days early. A total of 10,000 prisoners were released early under ECSL before it was scrapped this month when the new Labour government introduced its alternative early release scheme, SDS40.
Under ECSL, prison governors who feared that one of their inmates due for early release posed too great a risk to the public could apply for them to be kept in custody longer, until their scheduled release date. In these cases, the decision on release would be taken by a panel of Prison Service officials.
In May, justice minister Laura Farris had to correct the record after she misled Parliament by wrongly claiming that prison governors had a veto over ECSL releases. She said from the House of Commons dispatch box on May 14: “We have a governor lock. That means that the governor of any prison can prevent an individual prisoner from being released early if they do not think that it is suitable to do so.” Six days later, her words were rewritten in Hansard to state: “We have an exemption process. That means that HMPPS can prevent an individual prisoner from being released early if there are concerns about their risk.”
Charlie Taylor, HM Chief Inspector of Prisons, made repeated warnings about prisoners being released homeless and recalled to prison swiftly under ECSL. He said in a report on HMP Lewes that one man was released directly from the segregation unit under ECSL whilst his inspection team was visiting, only to be brought back into custody before the 11-day visit was over.
In a report on HMP Peterborough men’s jail, HM Inspectorate of Prisons said: “Despite them having no address to go to, managers had been obliged to release some men 18 days early under the ECSL [End of Custody Supervised Licence] scheme, only for some to return to prison before even their original release date had passed.”
Sky news 8pm tonight.
ReplyDeleteSpecial report on releasing prisoners into rough sleeping.
https://news-sky-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/news.sky.com/story/amp/prisoners-on-early-release-reoffending-to-escape-homelessness-13225597?amp_gsa=1&_js_v=a9&usqp=mq331AQIUAKwASCAAgM%3D#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&aoh=17277620904393&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&share=https%3A%2F%2Fnews.sky.com%2Fstory%2Fprisoners-on-early-release-reoffending-to-escape-homelessness-13225597
'Getafix
The uk's 'war on the poor' continues:
Delete* While nothing has been confirmed yet, the government is yet to rule out proposals by the previous Tory government to replace the benefit with vouchers and one-off grants. The eligibility criteria could also be tightened under a PIP consultation
* While Labour has already confirmed it won't change council tax banding, which would allow councils to charge more, it has refused to rule out scrapping the single-person household discount.
(Yahoo News UK, James Hockaday)
Will it be the usual, Ian Lawrence and Napo banging on about TR. Maybe we’ll finally hear from the Probation Institute. No, neither know or say much about frontline practice. HMIP and the Chief PO will sidestep the real problems and feed into blaming prison overcrowding on poor probation staff.
Delete