Teaching and Learning post-TR: PQiP for CRC Learners
Kelly Elliott, Senior Lecturer at Sheffield Hallam University, reflects upon her experiences within a CRC and how this is impacting on her teaching and delivery to CRC learners engaged within the Probation Qualification.
Having spent the previous years working within Probation and within a Community Rehabilitation Company following the Transforming Rehabilitation agenda, I witnessed first-hand the effects that this had on staff within the organisation.
Having spent the previous years working within Probation and within a Community Rehabilitation Company following the Transforming Rehabilitation agenda, I witnessed first-hand the effects that this had on staff within the organisation.
Retention and employment of main grade probation officers became problematic in the first years. What was also emerging was how quickly the role of a probation officer was developing within the CRC and how vital it was to ensure that the Probation Qualification and academic teaching on the course began to understand the complexity of the new role and organisations, but also ensured that those completing the course were leaving with the rounded knowledge to deal with these demands.
Having been a Senior Manager within a CRC, I had experienced the feeling of being part of a ‘lesser’ organisation in the eyes of those within the public sector Probation Service and saw how new staff were at times belittled by those they had previously shared offices with. I was aware of the importance of ensuring that the qualification moving forward was balanced and that all learners have an equal experience of the academic programme - hence my fortunate position to move over to become a part of the Sheffield Hallam Team.
Having been a Senior Manager within a CRC, I had experienced the feeling of being part of a ‘lesser’ organisation in the eyes of those within the public sector Probation Service and saw how new staff were at times belittled by those they had previously shared offices with. I was aware of the importance of ensuring that the qualification moving forward was balanced and that all learners have an equal experience of the academic programme - hence my fortunate position to move over to become a part of the Sheffield Hallam Team.
My new role has made me appreciate the fundamental concepts involved in the work of a probation officer and how we teach and deliver that academic knowledge, without getting dominated by specific tools, systems or procedures.
Learners need to understand the fundamental importance of assessment, planning and risk management whether this is completed via OASys or another system. We have to remember that this is a tool – a means to an end - and that the offender/service user is key in the assessment journey, and that the skills needed as an officer to interview/challenge and understand the policies and procedures are key to gaining understanding and sound risk assessments. Both organisations are dealing with complex individuals that pose a risk and learners need to understand behaviour and how to challenge this and how to work in partnership with others to manage these behaviours.
Regardless of personal or political views of what has happened post-TR, I am immensely proud of the work completed within the CRCs, the innovation and resilience of staff within the teams I was part of, and also the understanding that the learners who were undertaking the qualification, placed within these ‘newly forming’ organisations, are developing. We talk about how important an identity is for an offender within a community and how having a positive identity can impact on their sense of belonging. So it is interesting to see that same process being developed amongst the learners in the cohorts who are part of both the NPS and CRC. I witnessed the development of this identity and, more importantly, the ability to challenge each other constructively whilst undertaking a ‘live discussion’ with a current group of learners from both organisations when discussing assessment and planning and the issue of brokerage.
The concept of brokerage emerged within the Probation context following TR. The CRCs, as interventions providers, deliver interventions for both NPS and CRC cases and these are ‘costed’. As a result, the NPS ‘purchase’ the services from the CRCs - ranging from the delivery of Community Payback hours to the attendance on an Accredited Programme. The services available from each CRC were developed into a Rate Card brochure from which staff, in both organisations, are able to choose and develop specific services and interventions for offenders under their supervision from sentencing into custody and within the community.
Learners need to understand the fundamental importance of assessment, planning and risk management whether this is completed via OASys or another system. We have to remember that this is a tool – a means to an end - and that the offender/service user is key in the assessment journey, and that the skills needed as an officer to interview/challenge and understand the policies and procedures are key to gaining understanding and sound risk assessments. Both organisations are dealing with complex individuals that pose a risk and learners need to understand behaviour and how to challenge this and how to work in partnership with others to manage these behaviours.
Regardless of personal or political views of what has happened post-TR, I am immensely proud of the work completed within the CRCs, the innovation and resilience of staff within the teams I was part of, and also the understanding that the learners who were undertaking the qualification, placed within these ‘newly forming’ organisations, are developing. We talk about how important an identity is for an offender within a community and how having a positive identity can impact on their sense of belonging. So it is interesting to see that same process being developed amongst the learners in the cohorts who are part of both the NPS and CRC. I witnessed the development of this identity and, more importantly, the ability to challenge each other constructively whilst undertaking a ‘live discussion’ with a current group of learners from both organisations when discussing assessment and planning and the issue of brokerage.
The concept of brokerage emerged within the Probation context following TR. The CRCs, as interventions providers, deliver interventions for both NPS and CRC cases and these are ‘costed’. As a result, the NPS ‘purchase’ the services from the CRCs - ranging from the delivery of Community Payback hours to the attendance on an Accredited Programme. The services available from each CRC were developed into a Rate Card brochure from which staff, in both organisations, are able to choose and develop specific services and interventions for offenders under their supervision from sentencing into custody and within the community.
A learner mentioned that they did not feel the Rate Card was ‘right’ and that the CRCs shouldn’t be making money in this way. A CRC trainee responded with the following;
"CRC is a business - that’s what it’s about."
As a former Senior Manager I was proud of that comment, though I’m sure for some readers it will be a shock that such views are already been held by staff within the organisation. What followed from an NPS learner, though, reminded me that these individuals are the staff of these future organisations and will help to shape the future of Probation for years to come:
"I think that had it gone the other way (interventions to NPS) they would be charging. No one organisation would do work for others without getting paid, either from that company or money from somewhere."It is vital, within my role and as part of the teaching team that we are able to allow these debates to surface - the conflict of the business culture and probation values continues, as we move into TR2 and the new contract process, and is not going away. We must equip learners to feel confident to discuss these issues, develop their own identity as a probation officer within each organisation and be proud of that identity – while also seeing through some of the politics, rhetoric and what I can only describe from my personal experiences as feelings of bitterness about the situation.
I have also realised that, for those of us who have had a number of years of service within Probation, at times we have to let go of the past and look at how we can move forward and support those who are working in the ‘now’. I feel privileged to be influencing the probation officers of the future and will continue to challenge the rhetoric around ‘lesser or better’ in an organisational context, continuing to hold onto the amazing role that probation officers have in influencing and changing behaviour, protecting the public and the communities in which we all live. As we move into the new round of consultation with potential new providers, areas and uncertainty, it is vital that we are prepared for the change and equip learners to deal with this over the coming months and years.
Kelly Elliott
Senior Lecturer Sheffield Hallam University
CRC / TR Propaganda
ReplyDeleteA divisive piece of post-TR justification. She tells us she was a former senior manager who witnessed CRC staff being 'belittled' by those superior types in the NPS. Did she intervene, using her full authority to put NPS staff on the naughty seat? We don't know. Maybe she walked on by or simply created the scenario because it serves her selfish agenda.
DeleteThe brokerage concept has been around a long time and was not a by-product of TR, but I can see how it fits into her business model and her willingness to treat probation like any high street business. Of course, it's nothing of the sort – it's a government-funded service paid for by taxpayers. All TR has done is create an internal market where previously the two part of probation were a harmonious whole – that did not waste resources on invoicing one part of the public service by another part.
“CRC is a busines - that’s what’s it’s about” - so stop calling it ‘probation’ and their staff ‘probation officers’. Let them have their own “identity” in what according to HMIP are “lesser organisations”.
ReplyDeleteTwat
DeleteProtecting her career for the future.
ReplyDeleteA valid position to take.
Colleagues shafted into CRC trained as genuine POs " have to let go" do we ? The CRC business has the cash to let go staff stuck but wont. The want us leave and their business keeps our money. Hipocryt you let go stitching up colleagues. Pi frauds.
ReplyDeleteThe CRCs are indeed companies- the clue is in the name. Their reason for existence is to make profits and retain and renew their contracts to continue making profits. They care nothing about the probation profession but are prepared to say anything to inspectors to try to hoodwink them into believing they value professionalism. Kelly Elliot clearly believes that transitioning from a brainwashed CRC Manager to an an academic post that she is now able to objectively analyse her experiences. This is clearly not the case. She is herself the new breed of probation staff who passively swallows the corporate lies and narrative hook line and sinker regurgitating this on the pages of the PIs propaganda rag as if it is gospel. Her pride in a learner parroting the corporate line should be deeply disturbing. There is now an ever widening gulf emerging between the CRCs and the NPS who are now paid more and given professional status whereas private sector probation is being asset stripped and their workers deprofessionalised. It is a sorry state of affairs. Would NPS staff even bother to protest on behalf of staff in the CRCs? Some staff in the NPS do not even recognise their former colleagues as equivalent to them anymore. Witness the huge when they received a pay settlement and CRCs weren’t even included because they are nothing to do with real probation.
ReplyDeletehuge absence of solidarity....
DeleteI think we can safely say that this blog has rounded up all the dissidents and become a safe haven for those that have little or no desire to 'let go'.
Delete.. are you being funded by the CRC’s too ? Because CRC funding is the motivation here for Kelly and Sheffield Hallam !
Delete"I had experienced the feeling of being part of a ‘lesser’ organisation in the eyes of those within the public sector Probation Service and saw how new staff were at times belittled by those they had previously shared offices with."
ReplyDeleteIt was always structured thus. Grayling said so. He knew exactly what what he was doing & knew staff would run with it. He has form: "a management consultant with Burson Marsteller and then their European Marketing Director.... When helping its industry clients to escape environmental legislation or sprucing up the image of some of the most repressive governments on Earth, B-M brings to bear state of the art techniques in manipulating the mass media, legislators and public opinion."
"we have to let go of the past and look at how we can move forward and support those who are working in the ‘now’."
From where I sit on the geological scale (probably late Triassic) its not so much the 'not letting go' as the utter frustration, rage & total despair of watching everything that represented a 30 years career being rubbished & replaced AT VAST PUBLIC EXPENSE by vacuous soundbites from wealthy idiots who want to secure the wealth for themselves.
"CRC is a business - that’s what it’s about."
Sound familiar? Back to early 2000's:
"We are a law enforcement agency. It's what we are, it's what we do."
That showed the shift away from what had been largely a system of one-to-one rehabilitation and supervision of offenders by people with a social work background whose job was to understand all the factors that influence a person deciding to commit an offence. - Gordon Jackson, a branch official of the probation staff union Napo in Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire.
Well said g
Delete"The Arms Trade is a business - that's what its about"
ReplyDeletehttps://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/tory-squeeze-means-most-workers-13439869
ReplyDeleteTwo in three jobs now pay less in real terms than seven years ago, just after the Tories took power. A Mirror investigation compared average earnings for more than 400 occupations to find the winners and losers from the long years of austerity.
DeleteWorst off are probation officers whose 2017 take-home pay of 21,039 is £5,492 (21%) less that the £26,531 it would have been had wages risen in line with inflation since 2011.
Paramedics are down 14%, special needs teachers 13%, librarians 12%, midwives 11% , shelf fillers 10% and tyre fitters 8%.
I think all Public Services need to be business like which is a different concept to being a market driven profit orientated business. I know Kelly, she is bright, personable and ambitious for herself and others. I predict she will be a great asset to SHU and Probation more generally. I also think that if CRCs were truly businesses, result orientated to the benefit of wider public concerns they would no longer be in business. TR is a misadventure, it's design incoherent, fragmented, and fundamentally flawed. It will, at some point, find its demise.
ReplyDeleteThis blog made me really sad - I work within a CRC and absolutely despise the way service users are used as " currency " and staff are made to feel that the only thing that is important is meeting ridiculous targets and not loosing the company money - It is unfortunate that there are plenty of other managers with the same attitude as Kelly Elliott and likely to have a massive influence not only on the new staff they're training but on TR2 - of I wanted to work for this kind of business I would have gone to Uni to study business and work for a company that actually renumerated me for meeting targets not bullied and oppressed me as the current CRC does.
ReplyDeleteAgreed vile person
DeleteSo much hate in Probation these days, it's very sad.
ReplyDeleteI agree it is very sad , I wouldn't call Ms Elliot a vile person however I do think those kind of managers are out to impress the privateers / politicians within the current climate - they are so out of touch with the majority of us that remain in hell - they do have a new breed of potential nodding dogs to do their bidding - I do hope these new staff realise we are working with human beings not numbers / financial targets
ReplyDeleteCorporate Kelly as she was known as in SYPT amongst other things is the perfect candidate to push the TR agenda I can’t agree that she is bright but not vile either. Kelly is a management pleaser and will do whatever she has to to rise to the top She certainly never displayed any aptitude for understanding face to face work with clients
ReplyDeleteCorporate Kelly, ha, outed. Bump
ReplyDeleteI’ve been reading this blog for a while now, and I can no longer sit passively at the vile comments some of you are making.
ReplyDeleteDid you actually read the post?
I’m a private sector worker all of my career, living with someone who has been solely in the public sector of probation for theirs. I have to say I’ve been appalled at not only the level of corrupt government contracts that waste tax payers money, but the archaic, self righteous attitudes some people who work in the sector have. I see some of you have turned up on this blog.
Strip your role back to its core: what are you doing? Providing a service. Helping others to better themselves, the community & ultimately cost the tax-payer less.
What funds that role from the government? The budget—tax payers. Ask yourselves honestly, has the government well managed that budget which pays your wage? The government is a business, and its shareholders are you and I. The IS a business. Like it or not.
I read Kelly’s comments as brave and balanced, recognising the bigger picture beyond your spiteful notes. She intended to surface a debate. Good on her.
If you can’t look at things objectively, maybe it’s time you made a career change. Grow up
Career change ok then. Not that simple and no staff asked for the mess. If the government ensured staff employment terms were managed properly leaving the rotten new culture could be more likely.
DeleteSheffield hallam should be appalled their new "senior lecturer" spouts opinion rather than evidence. Upon what research is she basing the fact that NPS colleagues treat their private sector colleagues as "lessor"?
ReplyDeleteI'm glad Kelly is proud that interventions have been marketised....she should therefore be proud of the fact that NPS colleagues have chosen in their droves not to "purchase" these sub-standard services...what matters is that the right services are provided to the right individuals not forcing service users through rate card services. NPS London at one point virtually forced each staff member to "purchase" a minimum number of services....in effect service users were forced into "getting it right" whether they needed it or not with nobody really understanding the purpose and rationale for the programme.
If Kelly offers her corporate diatribe, as a lecturer she should ground these opinions in evidence and research, not personal experience and bias.