Tuesday 23 June 2020

Latest On TOM

HMPPS have just published an update to the Draft Target Operating Model for probation services in England and Wales and as you peruse the following highlights, have in mind the following observation from the Prison Reform Trust:-
"The role of central government in probation in recent years has been entirely destructive. Whether that continues to be the case will depend on whether the ministry has the humility and good sense to devolve power to a local level. That rarely comes naturally to central governments of any persuasion. It’s too early to tell how this one will behave.”
3. Further detail on changes 

NPS delivery of Unpaid Work, Accredited Programmes and Structures Interventions 

3.1. Under our revised approach to probation reform, Unpaid Work, Accredited Programmes and Structured Interventions will no longer be contracted out to Probation Delivery Partners but will instead be delivered by the NPS directly. We consider that bringing these services into the NPS will put us in the best possible position to respond to any further disruption caused by COVID-19 and enable a smoother recovery out of exceptional delivery arrangements we have had to put in place. These services have been delivered by probation services in the past and as such, we have confidence in our ability to deliver these again. 

3.2. Our approach for all these services for Day 1 will be to move existing CRC staff and delivery models into the NPS with the minimum disruption with ongoing work thereafter to embed and improve service delivery. The transition to a level of service as envisaged by the draft Target Operating Model is likely to take time given the backlogs to Unpaid Work and Accredited Programme created by exceptional delivery arrangements as well as a likely spike in court orders once jury trials resume. This would be the case regardless of which organisation delivery sat with but we consider that bringing this work in-house gives us greater flexibility to deal with this. 

Unpaid Work 

3.3. The design intentions for Unpaid Work are primarily to address the issues with current delivery and to improve quality and sentencer confidence. Effective Unpaid Work placements are crucial in contributing to the Government’s manifesto commitment to toughen community sentences. 

3.4. We plan to achieve this through a focus on the following areas: 
  • Quality of assessments; 
  • Interface with Sentence Management; 
  • Sufficient quality placements with increased focus on education, training and employment (ETE); 
  • Local engagement and delivery; 
  • Effective administration and recording.
3.5. As detailed in the draft Target Operating Model, the current requirement to commence work within 7 business days does not provide sufficient time to assess and place appropriately and allowing 10 business days for the completion of the Unpaid Work assessment form will enable a full risk and needs assessment. We had envisaged that this would then be shared with the Probation Delivery Partner to match to an appropriate placement and that within 10 days, the Probation Delivery Partner would deliver a full Unpaid Work induction and instruction to attend a first work session. 

3.6. As the revised model removes the interface between the NPS and Unpaid Work, it provides a new benefit for single requirement orders compared to the previous model as these can continue to be managed by Unpaid Work teams. This will facilitate efficient delivery of orders primarily focussed on ensuring Unpaid Work hours are completed and the removal of the interface will speed up the process, enabling the starts timescale to be reduced from 20 to 15 business days. The Unpaid Work assessment form completed by the Probation Practitioner will be incorporated into OASys and so there is no proposed change to the completion of this. 

3.7. It remains a priority to increase the level and scope of work placements available to meet the requirements of the Court. Female service users will be offered a choice not to be placed in all male work environments and appropriate placements will be sought in the local community to meet diverse needs. Sufficient placements and some flexibility alongside other strategies will avoid short notice cancellation of work placements. It will be the responsibility of the Unpaid Work team to review all active cases at the 6 and 9-month stages of the Unpaid Work requirement to ensure all hours are completed within the 12-month period prescribed by the Court and to flag with Probation Practitioners where appropriate action is needed. 

3.8. Whilst the main pathway to address ETE needs remains with the Rehabilitation Activity Requirement as a specific element of the sentence, considerable potential remains within the Unpaid Work requirement for on the job training and skills development that can support future employment opportunities. A feature that defines a ‘good quality’ placement is one that can utilise the 20% allowance for ETE activities for those eligible and as outlined in the draft Target Operating Model we plan a renewed focus on placements providing ETE. Under the revised model we intend to review ETE provision that CRCs have in place currently and how we might continue effective arrangements as well as seeking additional opportunities to secure improved ETE. 

3.9. We will retain our commitment to limit travel time to Unpaid Work placements to a maximum of 90 minutes each way, of which a maximum of 60 minutes each way can be spent under supervision and credited against the sentence of the Court. CRCs are not always achieving this currently so further investment will be required in Placement Coordinators to source placements locally, undertaking local engagement and ensuring sufficient transport solutions. There are currently systems in place so that local people and community organisations can identify work projects for Unpaid Work teams to complete and these will need to be strengthened under the revised model, requiring Unpaid Work teams to actively seek the views of local people and organisations when adopting new Unpaid Work projects.

3.10. We recognise that we will also need to review logistics of Unpaid Work delivery including consideration of CRC estates and assets that we might need to meet locality requirements and how we capture relevant data on placements and scheduling from CRC systems and record this going forward. We will also need to consider how we manage administrative support for which there is not a uniform model under CRC contracts. 

Accredited Programmes and Structured Interventions 

3.11. Accredited Programmes are the intervention of choice for HMPPS, as they are supported by a robust evidence base. The NPS currently deliver specific Accredited Programmes (e.g. for sex offenders) which will ease the transfer of other Accredited Programmes to the NPS as there is already expertise in this area and we anticipate that there will be eligible staff for transfer with similar expertise. By bringing these under a single organisation we will also benefit from synergies in delivery of these programmes. 

3.12. Eligibility and suitability checks will continue to be undertaken by the NPS to ensure those meeting the criteria get the opportunity to attend an Accredited Programme. Delivery of the Thinking Skills Programme (TSP) and Building Better Relationships (BBR) Programme in all regions can be achieved by the NPS. In the short term other Accredited Programmes addressing needs such as Resolve and Building Skills for Recovery which are currently being delivered in some locations can continue, subject to review of the delivery suite by the Regional Probation Director to ensure local needs are met. Design intentions to meet equality requirements and timely completions can also be met through our revised approach and will be supported by the recently approved flexible delivery model, which allows for remote and one to one delivery to meet specific needs. 

3.13. We stated in the draft Target Operating Model that the maximum time that an individual would be expected to travel to attend an Accredited Programme or Structured Intervention would be 90 minutes each way. To achieve this under the revised model we will need to secure suitable local accommodation that meets Correctional Services Accreditation and Advice Panel requirements. 

3.14. Further scoping of the CRC and NPS estates is required to understand whether this can be met through existing provisions as well as a review of those arrangements put in place by CRCs that will need to continue (e.g. providing drivers to transport individuals to interventions because of public transport challenges). As with Unpaid Work, we will also need to ensure we have appropriate systems and processes in place to provide a record of the delivery of interventions which can be quality assured. 

Staff transfers and regional structures 

3.15. - 3.16. We expect that CRC staff who deliver Unpaid Work, Accredited Programmes and Rehabilitation Activity Requirements in the three need areas which will become Structured Interventions will be assigned to transfer to the NPS, which will mean many more staff coming into the NPS than under the previous model. There will be some staff in mixed roles which are part Sentence Management and part interventions where decisions on role allocation will need to be made.

3.17. To oversee and deliver this work we will need to have dedicated teams within the regional structure. Further work is required to determine roles and structures within these but we anticipate that there will be a new regional senior leadership role to oversee teams focused on Unpaid Work and Interventions. For Unpaid Work, we will need to consider arrangements for delivery of ETE and peer mentors, which in some instances may be sub-contracted under current CRC contracts. Similarly, for the delivery of the BBR programme, we will need to consider arrangements for the Partner Link Worker role which some CRCs currently sub-contract. Revised approach to Dynamic Framework 

3.18. To support preparation of procurement activity, our development of the Dynamic Framework design had progressed since publication of the draft Target Operating Model. Under the previous model we had planned to let over 200 contracts at PCC level for rehabilitation and resettlement support for Day 1 in the following need areas: 
  • Accommodation; 
  • Education, Training & Employment and Finance, Benefits & Debt; 
  • Dependency and recovery; 
  • Personal wellbeing; 
  • Women’s services; 
  • Services for young adults in Wales. 
3.19. Delivery expertise of much rehabilitation and resettlement support sits in the market as these services have not routinely been delivered by probation in the past. We consider that the Dynamic Framework continues to be the most appropriate mechanism to secure this. This is because it establishes the foundation for future procurement of these services locally and enables delivery of specific and consistent requirements. 

3.20. We recognise though that the impact of COVID-19 on many organisations’ ability to bid along with our own internal capacity to run the competitions, evaluate them and support mobilisation means that we need to revise the scope of what we can procure via the Dynamic Framework for June 2021. 

3.21. - 3.22. To balance the need to reduce the complexity of our initial call-off plans with ensuring sufficient specialist services are still in place for Day 1, we have revisited whether alternatives are available in the short-term to avoid the need for call-off competitions across some categories of need for Day 1. For instance, for some of the original intended Day 1 scope, there are existing alternative sources of provision that Regional Probation Directors are better linked into, and can commission or co-commission directly. 

3.23. Our decision on what to continue to procure for Day 1 has been informed by the following considerations: 
  • Where statutory or alternative provision is weakest; 
  • Ease of delivery in-house (including opportunity for co-commissioning by regional teams, staff skill-set and physical delivery capability – e.g. whether premises are required); 
  • Current usage – both levels and how it is delivered; 
  • Extent of need (e.g. is there a specific pre-release resettlement requirement as well as post-release rehabilitative need). 
3.24. For Day 1 we have also considered where it might be appropriate to procure services at a regional level rather than at a PCC level, thereby reducing the number of lots and making delivery for June 2021 more viable. A regional approach does not preclude local delivery. We intend to discuss with Regional Probation Directors the geographical footprint required in their regions for effective service delivery and how we can facilitate this (e.g. co-location with probation offices), as well as considering locality and responsiveness of services in our evaluation of bids. 

3.25. We will open qualification for all categories of need under the Dynamic Framework, even if some are no longer in scope for our initial phase of Day 1 procurement activity. This is important, as our ambition for a wide range of service needs to be able to be met via the Dynamic Framework remains. 

Impacts on staff 

3.26. Supporting staff through this process is critical to its successful transition and delivery. Our approach remains to work closely with Trade Unions, current employers and staff to support the transition and minimise impacts on people’s roles. Whilst we need to do a more detailed review, using updated data returns from CRCs around specific staff impacts of the new model, changes in respect of Unpaid Work, Accredited Programmes and Structured Interventions mean we envisage that staff currently delivering equivalent services under CRCs will be assigned to transfer to the NPS. This provides certainty for a significant group of staff that would otherwise have been reliant on outcomes of the Probation Delivery Partner competition to inform what would happen to them. 

3.27. As outlined in the draft Target Operating Model, we will protect staff terms and conditions following transfer and most new staff compulsorily transferring into the NPS will be eligible to join the local government pension scheme post transfer. The exception is those who retain eligibility to participate in the civil service pension scheme. 

3.28. The practicalities of bringing an increased volume of staff from an increased number of employers into the NPS will necessitate renewed Trade Union negotiations and longer lead in times for enabling activity such as payroll build and testing and vetting. It is also likely to mean that we will need to focus on getting fundamental requirements in place for Day 1 and implement further changes such as restructuring post transfer. As part of the transition we will ensure that those staff moving into the NPS are fully orientated and supported. 

3.29. The establishment of a separate workforce programme, working in close collaboration with probation reform, to develop and build our workforce is in recognition that our people are our most valued asset. We acknowledge the likely increase in training needs created by this change and remain committed to identifying and addressing learning, development and experience gaps for our staff. 

3.30. We recognise the anxiety that staff will be feeling around change to this new system and want to be able to support them through it. This includes providing stimulating work that motivates and engages staff. We want to build a positive work environment that attracts, retains and develops skilled people and champions positive behaviours and practices. We intend to publish our Workforce Strategy shortly, which will set out intentions in more detail and ensure that wider changes happening in probation go hand-in-hand with positive changes for our workforce.

4. Next Steps
 

4.1. We will very quickly reprofile the probation reform programme to reflect the revised model. This will include reprioritising resource to those areas that will support a smooth transition and reviewing key milestones to June 2021 and beyond to ensure successful implementation and embedding of the changes. 

4.2. We intend to publish an updated version of the Target Operating Model for the future of probation services early in 2021 to provide further detail on the new system, informed by the changes that we have announced as well as the opportunities presented by new ways of working that we have had to introduce as a result of COVID-19. 

4.3. We will develop a revised illustration of the changes to support engagement with colleagues and stakeholders to promote awareness and participation in the future changes. 

4.4. We will continue to work with senior leaders within NPS and CRCs to explicitly address the culture(s) we currently have and what we are aiming for in the future. This work will be inclusive and recognise the diversity of our workforce and delivery. 

4.5. We will continue to engage closely with stakeholders and partners across the criminal justice system in developing our plans.

14 comments:

  1. Polishing more turd. More senior management noted UW. More staff into lgps but no pay increases an levelling of current underpay. The deliberately won't do it fairly.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It will be interesting in due course to compare and contrast the spouting, the promises, pledges and undertakings With what is actually delivered.
    The coronavirus has got to be paid for yet and you can bet those those with the resources won’t be digging deep so guess who will have to.
    Don’t trust them, these people are not your friends!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Latest mailout from Napo today:-

    Napo and POA agree joint approach to prison recovery

    Ian Lawrence and Katie Lomas met with colleagues from POA yesterday to agree an approach to prison recovery work. We have built a positive working relationship with our sister union in connection to the implementation of OMiC and we believe there is real value in continuing to work together in the interests of members who are based in prisons. We will continue to keep in contact at national level to share information and support each other’s efforts to raise and resolve issues. POA health and safety reps will be working on risk assessments and safe systems of work for the OMUs in prisons and they will seek input from Napo members and reps in doing so. If you are based in a prison please make sure the POA H&S rep is in touch with your branch H&S rep and support the joint work on this.

    If you have any concerns about this please contact your branch reps initially so that they can be raised with the relevant divisional/regional managers. Katie Lomas is Napo’s lead for OMiC if you need further support and advice klomas@napo.org.uk

    Health and Safety - no room for a complacent recovery

    If moving into the Exceptional Delivery Model regime was tough, and trust us it was, then the planning and implementation of the Recovery Phase is going to be a difficult ask. Napo has spent many a long day engaging with the 23 employers where we are represented to acknowledge the valuable contribution that the unions have made in response to the unprecedented emergency that we are nowhere near the end of.

    Front and centre has been the essential requirement that all employers have a legal obligation to consult the trade unions on their plans to reinstate services, and that’s why Napo has held a series of events for members and their representatives by way of two seminars for Probation and Cafcass members and on line Health and Safety training. Napo has today submitted a list of our accredited Health and Safety representatives to HMPPS where we are claiming that additional workload relief must be provided to them so that we can take part in the critical risk assessments that must be in place before any activity is resumed be it returning to a workplace, increasing face to face contact with clients and also within the Approved Premises and Prison estate which present especially difficult challenges for staff.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Problems emerge and they need sorting quickly.

      At the time of writing we have just finally received some risk assessment model templates from HMPPS which as we understand it, have been used to start shaping the recovery plans across NPS Divisions. We are analysing these to make sure that they have taken on board our National input but that’s not the end of the matter.

      Unfortunately, we have also learned that Divisional Directors were themselves given a ridiculous timetable to work with and that in some cases have submitted plans to HMPPS Gold Command to reopen offices which have not been discussed with local trade union representatives at all, and this needs rectifying.

      Putting it succinctly this is totally unacceptable; and we will be taking this up directly with Probation Director General Amy Rees. We don’t want to have expend vital energy in drawing up a public shortlist of unsafe workplaces across employers but it’s an option we will keep in reserve. Meanwhile, we are reminding senior leaders of Napo’s key demands for the recovery process:

      * No work should start in offices/courts/ family visits before an up to date risk assessment and individual RA is in place.

      * All risk assessments, at local and national level to be subject to consultation with Napo

      * Napo reps to be given sufficient paid time and accompanying workload relief to allow them to work with their employer on this consultation process

      * That this and other Covid19 risk assessments should be reviewed and revised as necessary in line with changes in current advice and this is to be done involving staff and their Napo reps.

      * That the work place will need a deep clean before opening.

      * Equalities issues such as the impact on disabled staff, pregnant women and maternity and the now recognised factors relating to BAME staff in relation to Covid19 should be factored into this risk assessment.

      Our work benefits everyone

      The foregoing provides a snapshot of Napo’s work on behalf of our members which benefits all staff and those who are not at this stage members of a trade union. The remarkable developments in Probation and the hugely successful member focussed events that we have organised on Health and Safety in the last week, is further evidence that our campaigning and professional work is a cut above the rest.

      Napo HQ

      Delete
    2. Bit of smoke blowing from nafo. Says very little as Lawrence cannot demonstrate exactly what hard work means . He tells us to trust him , on previous performance he has to be joking. Where is the money owed first foremost. Then on payment no strings as part of the agreement talks should be clear with published framework. Instead nafo engage while the employers ignore them as usual. Writing to ms Rees will achieve nothing because we all know nafo won't do and cannot do anything. We need a real leader not the pretender.

      Delete
  4. "our campaigning and professional work is a cut above the rest"

    Hahahahaha

    Unless by "the rest" they're referring to the National Union of Chocolate Teapot Makers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Haha brilliant. He claims to be trade union but does nothing for most grades. He needs to listen to resolve the pay issue first use the unrest to settle the bad faith action by Rees and co. On their salaries they couldn't give toss for the pennies they agreed a 2 year deal where is the action from the mouthy standing foursquare behind us then. Oh yea hiding under the desk with Barton and co. Sort the money idiot .

      Delete
    2. The Directors, at the behest of the HMPPS Golden Triumvirate of Buckland/Farrar/Rees have already submitted their plans.

      Before you can say "renationalisation" all offices will be open, business as usual, 1m signs plastered everywhere.

      Napo once again deliver the usual too little too late performance whilst passively assisting HMPPS to continue to do just as they fucking please at the expense of staff Ts&Cs.

      Delete
    3. essential requirement that all employers have a legal obligation to consult the trade unions

      This is an obligation although they ignore Napo generally. The employers know this but Napo appear to have just understood. However consult means very little, a negotiator as underskilled and weak as the blow hard Lawrence all they have to do is say they told you. The question what enforcement can you deliver to ensure they honour the agreements already in place and not honoured do the job unions.

      Delete
  5. https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/coronavirus-sign-language-boris-johnson_uk_5ef238c5c5b6045b10191957?ncid=news-aol

    Wonder if he's called Tom?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Giggle No.2

      https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-53157952

      - Trump says he told his admin to slow down the testing because it made him look bad

      - WhiteHouse staff say he was kidding, joking, having a laugh

      - Trump then says he wasn't kidding - he meant it

      - Govt Healthcare Officials say Trump has never asked them to slow down the testing


      It could almost be Boris's UK government : )

      Delete
  6. I think it's pretty telling that at the same time they've decided to ease lockdown, open almost everywhere up again, and are working out recovery plans they've also decided to stop the daily updates.
    Surely, the updates and information about what's happening now is just as important now as they were when introducing lockdown?
    Are the stopping the updates because the Government and medics disagree and could prove to be embarrassing at the podium?

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jun/24/health-leaders-urge-review-of-uks-readiness-for-covid-19-second-wave?

    'Getafix

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Some interesting comments by a pollster (yougov, perhaps?) on news channel this morning, to the effect that UK is more accepting of the unlock now than they were 2/3 weeks ago because the government has rowed back on its efforts to get people to fear the virus; something that he said was at the fore of their strategy when the govt wanted people to stay at home, when they were on the telly every day with numbers of dead & prayers & thoughts.

      That would chime with the comment by getafix (above) whereby the ending of the daily briefing signals removing the pandemic from the public consciousness as a threat: its all ok now, its gone away - so get out there & spend yer luvverly lolly.

      Delete
    2. and as for PMQs - Starmer putting perfectly reasonsble questions & challenges, Bozo playing to the Tory benches with obfuscation, distraction, deceit & general party political nonsense - even earning a rebuke from Mr Speaker.

      We're back to business as usual.

      Delete