Thursday 9 November 2023

Sign The Petition!

I don't usually post at this time of night, but there's always the exception such as a change.org petition just launched and wouldn't it be great to give it a boost asap. I'm assuming there is the option not to have personal details published:- 

The Impending Collapse Of The Probation Service - Enough Is Enough

It should come as no surprise to anyone that the Probation Service is well over its maximum capacity to manage dangerous offenders. It is in absolute meltdown, at a point of total chaotic internal destruction, the likes of which have never been seen before.

Following the Damien Bendall inquest probation officers are voicing their fears that more and more serious further offences will occur, resulting in either life changing damage to the victims, or indeed death.

Officers live in constant daily fear that one or more of their cases may be the next Damien Bendall. They are dangerously overworked with most officers being well over the 110% accepted caseload of the Workload Management Tool. Many are holding caseloads close to 200% or more. This means that the offenders they supervise, both in the community and on licence from prison do not complete the rehabilitation work they need. Many complete their entire community orders and prison licences without ever receiving any rehabilitation at all.

A high level of offenders have multiple probation officers during their supervision, as officers are being signed off on long term sickness or are leaving the Probation Service in a state debilitating trauma, mental and emotional breakdown.

It is well known and accepted fact that if an offender retains the same probation officer for their entire sentence then they are more likely to build trust with their officer, leading them to being willing to complete the necessary rehabilitation work they need. With multiple probation officers coming in and out of their supervision there is no continuity. The rehabilitation simply doesn’t get done and officers miss vital risk warnings because communication between staff breaks down.

Victims and their families want justice through staff having the capacity to actually do the job. They aren’t getting justice when probation officers have high numbers of offenders coming in each day, and only have time to spend 10 minutes with each of them. The reality is officers spend more time doing administrative data input tasks than they do with the offenders.

Probation officers spend the majority of their time writing up case notes, making referrals to housing, mental health and substance misuse and other agencies, typing OASys documents that each take hours each to complete, making and taking phone calls to social services, housing agencies, courts, police etc, completing safeguarding checks, doing MAPPA and MARAC updates, breaches, parole reports and attending parole hearings, answering emails, attending teams calls and staff supervision, and much much more.

Everyone would agree this is all very important work, but there are not enough staff to do it. Somewhere in there they are also expected to complete home visits to offenders to ensure they are living where they say they are, and check for potential the risks that may be present at those accommodations. Staff use their own cars to complete home visits, which leave many feeling vulnerable, as offenders then have their personal licence plates. Staff also face daily abuse and threat of physical assault from offenders they are working with. Offenders often attend their appointments under the influence of drugs and alcohol or in a state of unmanaged, poor mental health. This serves to further erode the already very low morale of remaining staff, and heightens their fears for their own physical, mental and emotional safety.

The stark reality of all of this is that the rehabilitation work that officers trained and specialised in does not get completed. Most officers do not even have time to get away from their computers to take their lunch breaks. Most work late into the evening and on weekends without extra pay, trying to stay on top of the endless flow of work.

A high number of probation staff end up on medication for depression and anxiety, in therapy, signed off sick with stress and trauma related illness such as PTSD and in a state of utter breakdown and burnout.

The Probation Service is unable to retain staff for all of the above reasons, and experienced staff are leaving in very high numbers. A large proportion of trainees either leave before the end of their training or as soon as they qualify because of the overwhelming levels of stress.

Probation staff are professionally trained. They joined to make positive change within the wider communities of society and to protect the public from the risks of serious harm. Currently they do not even have the ability to protect their own well-being. The traumatised are supervising the traumatised. Staff are being placed on capability procedures by managers for not being able to complete impossible levels of work. There are not enough hours in the day, and so officers are having to prioritise one high risk case over another, even though both cases have the potential to commit serious further offences, creating more victims and resulting in potential death.

New cases are allocated daily to staff who have reached maximum capacity and have nothing left to give. It impacts on their own well-being and that of their families.

Why would any probation officer stay and continue working in such a toxic environment? Their pay is low, the impact on them personally is high, and their desperate cries for support are ignored.

When the Probation Service was run as local Trusts they had more control over how work was managed, and were able to give offenders the time needed to complete the vital work integral to changing their offending behaviours. The move to privatise the Probation Service marked a devastating spiral into chaos, with vast numbers of experienced staff leaving the Service and going elsewhere. The reunification did not improve the situation. The decision to make the Probation Service part of the civil service, and a part of One HMPPS has led to even more experienced staff leaving. The Probation Service is in a very real state of collapse.

The profession is no longer a vocational career. Those that remain are struggling and broken, often unfit for employment elsewhere when they leave due to the high levels of trauma they suffer. Those with offenders who do commit serious further offences are left to live with debilitating guilt for the rest of their lives, even though they were beyond capacity and suffering stress related harm themselves, and could not have done anything more to prevent the incident from occurring.

Unless something drastically changes, the Probation Service will be run by a majority number of trainees and inexperienced newly qualified officers. Public protection will become a thing of the past. Members of the public will die as a result of more serious further offences being committed because staff do not have time to complete essential work.

Staff at every level are under extreme pressure leading to long term ill health and the development of new medical conditions.

Senior Probation Officers are under obligation to continue allocating cases to probation officers who are already being harmed by their overwhelming and excessive caseloads. Probation Delivery Unit heads MUST be held to account for their failures to protect their staff from serious harm within the context of their employment, and action MUST BE TAKEN NOW.

Enough is enough. The Probation Service is in critical state of breakdown. It is understaffed, overwhelmed and in dire need of greater resources.

To protect the remaining staff, and the public alike, things needs to drastically change and IT NEEDS TO HAPPEN NOW.

--oo00oo--

Postscript 10/11/2023

"There is a new petition which supersedes this one. The new one, if it gains enough signatures will then be discussed by parliament. Please be patient as the new petition is currently undergoing clearance checks. As soon as it is given the all clear, it will go live and can be signed and shared far and wide. Hopefully it will have a positive impact for the well-being of everyone. The link to the new petition will be available in the same places you found this one." 

Sally Day

Update 03:55

It now reads thus "Petitions UK Government and Parliament

We’re checking this petition 19 people have already supported this petition.
We need to check it meets the petition standards before we publish it. Please try again in a few days."

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/651215/moderation-info

74 comments:

  1. The link to the government petition demanding change for a safer probation service for staff and the public alike is below. Once it has 5 signatures it will go live. Please sign and share as much as possible.

    https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/651215/sponsors/new?token=qyJhDorzHSXXj0MC_BZQ

    ReplyDelete
  2. It appears the petition has closed with 51 signatories. No explanation given

    ReplyDelete
  3. Went to sign and it said petition closed?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Couldn't have said it better myself, went to sign the petition but it has been closed with 51 supporters showing. What is going on there I wonder?

    ReplyDelete
  5. I understand the original petition gained 51 signatures quite quickly but then closed because a new petition has been started on the Parliament website, but needs 5 signatures before it goes live. It must have achieved that by now, but doesn't appear to be live so I'm mystified. Watch this space for further news I guess. The new link (possibly for sponsors):-

    https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/651215/sponsors/new?token=qyJhDorzHSXXj0MC_BZQ

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Typically probation. Can’t even create a petition properly. The wording above isn’t great either. Hopefully not a Pre Sentence Report writer! I guess the HMIP reports about lack of knowledge and experience in probation staff is worse than we think!

      Who is Sally Day?

      Delete
    2. Anon 07:59 The author did something. Had a go. Apart from making snide remarks, may we enquire what you've done to try and improve things?

      Delete
    3. It now reads thus "Petitions
      UK Government and Parliament

      We’re checking this petition
      19 people have already supported this petition.

      We need to check it meets the petition standards before we publish it.

      Please try again in a few days."
      https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/651215/moderation-info


      Delete
    4. It is badly written and hasn’t been proof read. Citing the DB case will not gain public sentiment. We have been voicing concerns long before that. Trusts we not always better. Stop slamming trainee and newly qualified staff. I do much to try and improve things every day including helping people to string sentences together.

      Delete
    5. 08:52 don’t worry. The final version has been fully proof read.

      Delete
    6. 08:52 I think you misunderstand. POs are not anti-trainees or anti-newly qualified staff. But trainees and NQOs do lack the experience. Clearly that isn’t their fault, but if all you have left are trainees and NQOs how will they effectively manage situations they haven’t dealt with before? How is that fair or healthy for them? Experienced staff have always supported inexperienced staff so they can continue to develop their own learning. That’s how it should be. This cannot happen if experienced staff continue to leave the service in large numbers. There has to be balance. Experienced staff will continue to leave though unless things improve.

      Delete
    7. No I understand very well. Not all trainees and NQOs lack experience. I know many NQOs and those qualified a few years that are far better at the job than a lot of probation offices that have been doing the job 10-20 years. Yes there are many trainees and NQOs lacking experience or people to learn from but not all so the bashing needs to stop. Imagine those very good NQOs out there always being told they’re inexperienced when they are not. I’ve also worked in offices where there’s been a lot of long term dinosaur staff whose practices have been abysmal.

      Delete
    8. The small print states no libel, no exaggeration no causing offence. It’ll be interesting to see if this petition gets through. I thinking referring to the DB case does cause offence. Quite a lot of sensationalism too!

      Delete
    9. “trainees and NQOs do lack the experience. Clearly that isn’t their fault,”

      Could that be more patronising. Both new and existing staff are leaving. Both learn from each other. Many Pqips are existing pso’s with experience. A lot of POs turned up their nose at helping them long before the staffing crisis. No way in a position to talk about what is fair or healthy. Petition is a good idea, just not written well but when are they.

      Delete
    10. Anon 23:33 The petition is one persons endeavour and not written by committee. It represents an attempt to actually do something, rather than just snipe from the side lines. For that reason alone it would get my full support and that of many other colleagues I suspect. We all have differing writing styles, differing experiences and differing viewpoints - it's what makes us human and separates us from robots and AI.

      Delete
    11. But under the civil service and OneHMPPS probation officers are robots and they’ve already tried to replace us with AI. Have you forgotten the probation machines in London?

      Delete
    12. And Jim. I’ve no objection with the petition. I just don’t agree with it. I’m allowed to say that am I not? I don’t have to have done an alternative to have that view either. I don’t have to agree just because it’s about probation work or started by a probation officer. It does generalise a lot and I don’t agree with that.

      No all NQOs are inexperienced. Some are very experienced so let’s stop the elite PO approach.

      Home visits are not the problem. The problem is being forced to complete them on all cases even when it is unnecessary or unsafe.

      The minority of Offenders attend their appointments under the influence of drugs and alcohol. Even when they do it’s not always problematic.

      I don’t think Victims and their families get much more justice if I spend 10 minutes or 1 hour with each person.

      I don’t face daily abuse and threat of physical assault from offenders I’m working with. Maybe the odd 1 or 2 every now and again.

      I don’t remember training in any actual rehabilitation work. I think most offenders are rehabilitated by their own efforts not mine. I’m not that conceited to say otherwise.

      I’ve long stopped working late into the evening and on weekends without extra pay. Better overtime options would be nice though.

      I think the main reason the Probation Service is unable to retain staff is not the conditions or work but because the pay is rubbish. A large proportion of trainees leave before the end of their training because they find better paid jobs.

      Probation staff are professionally trained. Really?

      It goes on and on. What’s the point of this whinge and moan if only probation staff are going to read and sign it. That won’t get the public on board or the signatures needed.

      Delete
    13. Remember that one

      Short and sweet. You don’t lose the will to live reading it. Doesn’t refer to a sfo case that will make people not want to sign it.

      https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/44403

      Delete
  6. The original petition was created on a platform that wouldn’t bring it to parliamentary attention. The new petition will. However, it has to gain 5 signatures before it can go live (which it has), and then they have to check to make sure that it isn’t libellous before they allow it to be published. I am waiting for it to get the all clear from the government petitions website and then it can be signed. Really sorry for the confusion, but hopefully once this one has been cleared it will go to parliament if enough people will just sign it (which you can do right now!)

    ReplyDelete
  7. Want to say thanks to the person who did this, like others I couldn’t sign but tried several times. I suspect we will all see social media warnings issued today. Instead of that, when will the penny drop that practitioners are really struggling and need some support now. Do our excellent leaders not have any idea of their corporate responsibilities to staff, victims, those we supervise?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anon 08:23 Please keep us posted as to any warnings that might be issued by management whilst we wait for the new petition to go live.

      Delete
    2. Yes we need to be protected. Not a word from Napo of course and why had the unions not done anything. It has given us a ray of hope great.

      Delete
    3. Have you not read your Napo emails ?

      Delete
    4. This action has been hijacked it's all Ian Lawrence's ideas being borrowed. Napo are drafting up-to-date intelligence. Some show stoppers planned. Napo is the union that fights for members as we all know. Just think how much worse it could be without Napo fighting off the employer. . also we won't be upping the subs just yet. Napo you know it makes sense.

      Delete
    5. I will not print expletives here but was very tempted. I thought it was serious post in the first few lines. Please do not mislead readers when the issues facing us are so grave. I don't see any humour.

      Delete
    6. 17:33 NAPO is more supported by staff than perhaps you realise. However, if Ian Lawrence were to step up and actually do something, other people wouldn’t need to. Action has always spoken louder than words. Words alone are cheap. The fact that people do want to support action that hasn’t come from him, speaks volumes. Do you not read the comments? Nobody has any faith in him. That’s a problem. That said, a lot of people have absolute respect for NAPO reps because they do their best to support staff while dealing with poor leadership themselves.



      Delete
    7. Well there will be warnings because the original petition includes names and comments.

      Delete
    8. It is possible to sign the petition and not have your details visible, just to reassure people. I know as that’s what I have done. There is a tone developing of warning people away from signing whether that’s genuine posting and not being aware of the option of not showing your details as you sign it or a bit of mischief eg griping about wording etc. I think it’s a laudable thing that’s been done launching this petition and thank you.

      Delete
  8. From change.org:-

    "There is a new petition which supersedes this one. The new one, if it gains enough signatures will then be discussed by parliament. Please be patient as the new petition is currently undergoing clearance checks. As soon as it is given the all clear, it will go live and can be signed and shared far and wide. Hopefully it will have a positive impact for the well-being of everyone. The link to the new petition will be available in the same places you found this one."

    ReplyDelete
  9. There seems to be some growing discontent with our "PoPs" in Merseyside. A second office in the past few months has been set alight overnight....

    ReplyDelete
  10. From Twitter:-

    "Tough times for Probation. There's no quick fix when we have poor/no executive leadership and voice. Being under a regional Mayor/PCC is probably preferable...no significant changes til after the GE. It's crisis mgt at present, btw I've been in Probation since 1992."

    ReplyDelete
  11. I’ve been away from this blog for a short time. I am heartened by the steps that have been outlined above, and disheartened by some of the comments about different grades of staff who are being perceived as part of the problem. The problem rests with the Organisation. SPOs are as trapped in this process as are POs and PSOs. The petition is a good idea as it draws some media attention. But solidarity is everything and squabbling is unproductive. Alongside this campaign NAPO really need to take some action. Oddly enough I think strike action won’t really do the level of damage that is required. A work to rule and an overtime ban will squeeze the service far more effectively.

    ReplyDelete
  12. From Twitter:-

    "Yep probation is a disaster, its senior leadership is focused on covering their a@@@ at all costs, it has no interest in the wellbeing or safety of its front line staff or working positively with offenders. Its all about them. They couldn't organise a p@@@ up in brewery."

    ReplyDelete
  13. From a Prison SPO on Twitter:-

    "Had an interview with a researcher from Downing Street yesterday about my views on PSS & if I thought short custody sentences should be scrapped. On the latter, I believe it's a great idea in principle - my big concern is staffing within our community teams.

    My concern with PSS has remained the same for many years... If Joe Bloggs breaches - maximum punishment he would receive is X2 weeks in custody = could lose his house/job... Is it worth it? In some cases yes - in others, community practitioners are pulling their hair out.

    Interestingly, the Researcher confirmed that from the interviews she had completed - my views on PSS and the scrapping of short custodial sentences were consistent from Newcastle down to Southampton. The latter can work - we just need to be prepared & given enough resource.

    Finally, if some short custodial sentences are scrapped - what does that do to the OMiC model? My first thought would be that prisons would be overstaffed. I hope that the probation service has enough time to come up with an effective plan if this legislation is given the thumbs up."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The OMiC model should be scrapped. It was put in place to maximise resources so community probation staff could be allocated more work. It doesn’t work.

      Delete
  14. There are many benefits of PSS and licence supervision for short term sentences. It concerns me that probation is constantly bashing Post Sentence Supervision instead of trying to make it work. It is a good thing that short term prisoners are eligible for a reasonable period of supervision. The problem is that not all sentenced need up to a years PSS. PSS would be much better applied if sentencers had the authority to decide in each case if PSS would apply or not. A person with limited needs receiving 2 weeks in custody for identification fraud may not require PSS. They would serve 1 week in prison and 1 week on licence. A person receiving the same sentence with problems of drugs, housing or repeat offending would need PSS because 1 week on licence would not be enough. It’s as easy as that and Probation could assist sentencing with a short tick box report. This alone would take alot of pressure off probation staff.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Of course it used to be called voluntary after-care.

      Delete
  15. From Twitter:-

    "If we were fully staffed, it didn't take a punitive-angle, wasn't driven solely by the probation service, PoPs could opt in/out... Then yes fine."

    "A bit like voluntary after-care of old?"

    "Exactly that! Clues in the name I guess - POST sentence supervision. Sentences carry punitive elements - PSS in my opinion shouldn't have one."

    ReplyDelete
  16. A prison SPO who suggests the PSS is a good thing !

    ReplyDelete
  17. Ditch PSS, ditch OMIC

    ReplyDelete
  18. From Twitter:-

    "Apparently, a discussion was had on how to refer to 'Probation Practitioners' aka PPs. We were supposed to use the term 'Peeps' for Probationers, and 'PoPs' for People on Probation. Imagine serious conversations interspersed with Peeps and PoPs..."

    ReplyDelete
  19. If you're not working in the community in Probation then you'll probably think P.S.S is a good thing, as you don't have to actually deal with it. It isn't a good thing- it clogs up the system and is basically considered 'probation top-up' and has few sanctions or abilities for monitoring and control. We do try and make it work, but it just feels burdensome. A licence would be much more effective and then it ends. The COM seems to be the more overworked in the probation system and the handovers from POM to COM favour the POM as does the belief that prisons are holding the COM by the leash and expecting them to do much more than should be equally delegated. Containment without sentence planning- core risk reduction work- and leaving it to the COM once out is supreme folly, as is a resettlement team that doesn't really resettle and the offender has time on their hands. It's much harder to supervise POPs in the community and the prisons could actually be more understanding of this. Whilst prisons may not be in the locality of where the offender ends up, they have the internet; they have other means to do their resettlement work. Also, just like COMs supervision of an offender is dictated to by address- so for it should be in prisons. Until they are released they remain the responsibility of the prison. Prisons shouldn't be recommending things that they have no control over, such as PSS, when clearly a well-thought out licence would be more effective. It's even more wasteful if the offender is high risk- then he or she is likely to engage in a merry dance of not giving a toss and they may get a slapped wrist-after we write out yet another breach report- and so it goes on. Meanwhile 40-50 other plates (cases) keep spinning.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. PSS is a good thing it just wasn’t legislated properly. I work in the community and I agree with Anonymous 11 November 2023 at 08:55. Others have said we used to have after care like this in the past and that worked too. Probation was always an aftercare service so PSS falls under this. If they didn’t get PSS and were given community orders instead it’d be the same burden on probation. Better staff Probation. Fix the holes in the ORA legislation. PSS is not the problem.

      Delete
    2. “if the offender is high risk- then he or she is likely to engage in a merry dance of not giving a toss”

      Really that’s the kind of attitude I despise in probation officers.

      Delete
    3. If they don't have sufficient monitoring and control which is what PSS doesn't offer then they are likely not to engage and realise they can circumvent or be challenging knowing that PSS is fairly toothless, was my point. Which is why high risk POPS should be released on licence if they've served part of their sentence in custody. It, ironically, also reduces recidivism and gives the high risk offender a better chance of staying out of prison. Also, many POPs don't know the rubric of PSS nor what it means nor why they should be subjected to it. Despite explanation. Of course, I wouldn't expect a prison to explain that whilst the offender is in custody, even though it's often written on the licence, which they write up.

      Delete
    4. Difference is between a community order and P.S.S stemming from a licence is that the offence isn't as serious, so they are less likely to require monitoring and control. We're not a warranty for faulty goods- which is what P.S.S is and we're not aftercare either- we don't have the time or resources to do this. The offender/POP's supervision should end when the licence ends based on their having committed a more serious offence. P.S.S for someone who is high risk or has committed a more serious offence is ineffectual. I'm all for supporting my POPS and always go the extra mile, but it's draining when you have case after case. Heavy workloads are made heavier with P.S.S- it should be gotten rid of. If you haven't got time for intervention work on a high caseload already, P.S.S cases aren't going to be more supportive of the POP, in terms of tangible measurements that show progress, so what's the point? The POP isn't being given safeguards; most couldn't pay the fine if breached; judges and magistrates are now prison adverse unless it's very serious; you can't recall on P.S.S; the POPs are usually high risk for good reason; and 'having an order continue' is just saying thanks for all the paperwork, but get your POP to behave. If you can. P.S.S could help for a 14-day reflective period in custody, if that's warranted, but that's usually to get the POP housing that you've been pinballed back and forth trying to get them in the first place. Reflecting on the seriousness of the breach- that might be successful if they've done any consequential thinking in custody, otherwise it's 2 weeks containment and far less likely to be the option nowadays.

      Delete
  20. PSS is ...was...an outrageous bit of marketisation by its author Grayling. Subjecting citizens to sanctions after their sentence is done is just morally wrong, and practically uneconomic. The injustice and cruelty of this is overshadowed by the travesty of decency and justice that is IPP, but its in the same category.
    We shouldn't waste breath on trying to make it work, it should be ditchef

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes,PSS is the problem and vastly different from aftercare in terms of it being imposed, regardless of circumstances and not required in many cases….

      Delete
    2. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/ministry-of-justice-mps-england-british-wales-b2445566.html

      Delete
    3. A report has branded it “disappointing” that the prison and probation service has not worked harder to understand why black prison leavers and women are less likely to find a job in the months after their release.

      Overall, around half of the work aimed at resettling prison leavers is not being routinely carried out, a committee of MPs looking into the issue across England and Wales found.

      The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) said just 8% of female prison leavers were employed after six months compared with 18% of male prison leavers in 2021-22, while only 11% of black or black British prison leavers were employed in that period compared with 18% of white prison leavers.

      The PAC said His Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) had not analysed why these differences are happening and demanded it set out an action plan within six months on how support for prison leavers will be improved.

      The report stated: “It is disappointing that HM Prison & Probation Service (HMPPS) has not done more to understand why some prison leavers have better outcomes than others, such as for what reasons black prison leavers are less likely than white prison leavers to secure a job post release.”

      The MPs said prisons and probation services have a key function to rehabilitate people in their care “to help them lead law-abiding and useful lives”, as they warned of the “significant costs” reoffending has to society.

      The Ministry of Justice has previously estimated that reoffending across all adult offenders identified in 2016 cost society £16.7 billion.

      The report warned of “unprecedented pressures on the prison estate” which it said threaten the quality of resettlement services now and in the future. At the end of March 2023, the prison population was at 99% of what is considered safe capacity.

      "Shockingly, our report finds that around half of the work aimed at resettling prison leavers is not being routinely carried out. This makes even more critical the need for a long-term strategy to manage increased demand for resettlement services as the prison population continues to rise."

      Dame Meg Hiller, PAC chair

      Delete
    4. The PAC said that a growing prison population “will inevitably add pressure to already strained resettlement services within prisons and the community” and noted that HMPPS “does not currently have a long-term strategy to manage the anticipated increase in demand for resettlement services”.

      The report, published on Saturday, said prisoners are “still not consistently receiving the support they need to resettle into the community”, saying that in 2022–23 HMPPS identified that “about half of key resettlement activities were still not routinely happening”.

      The PAC said essential handover meetings between prison and probation staff did not happen as intended in 50% of cases between April 2022 and January 2023.

      The prisons inspectorate had also concluded that there has been a decline in outcomes for prisoners in recent years, the PAC said.

      MPs also said the Government is not doing enough to support prisoners with substance misuse needs before their release, adding that HMPPS and NHS England “have been slow to improve the collection and sharing of prison leavers’ data, limiting their ability to provide appropriate support and monitor outcomes”.

      The PAC said the lack of progress “puts the successful resettlement of offenders with substance misuse needs at risk”.

      Staff shortages and high caseloads are also negatively affecting resettlement support for prison leavers, the report said, as it insisted HMPPS must set out what steps it will take to “retain and incentivise” experienced probation staff in the next 12 to 18 months.

      Dame Meg Hillier, committee chair, said: “By serving their time, prison leavers are judged to have paid their debt to society, but if released without support are likely to reoffend.

      “This undermines public safety and any hope of rehabilitation through the justice system, while costing the taxpayer billions of pounds. Shockingly, our report finds that around half of the work aimed at resettling prison leavers is not being routinely carried out.

      “This makes even more critical the need for a long-term strategy to manage increased demand for resettlement services as the prison population continues to rise.

      “The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) told our inquiry that its drive to save 7.5% across its budget means it faces difficult choices, and that the easiest place for cuts to fall is in discretionary programmes, such as reducing reoffending.

      “But it is these very areas that are likely to reap dividends long term if protected.

      “We hope in this challenging area that the recommendations in our report help guide the Government to take decisions based on that which works best, rather than what is easiest.”

      Delete
  21. From Twitter:-

    "Please don’t generalise all trainees as inexperienced. Some of us are PSO’s taking advantage of the new PSO progression route & have 15/20 years experience behind us, including working alongside some incredible PO’s in days gone by."

    ReplyDelete
  22. Now here's thing:- the following has just been posted on a blog post from October 2010:-

    "I have been a PSO for many years. The new allocation model since we have merged with NPS is that we are now being allocated all types of offenders. My issue is that I do not feel comfortable managing high risk orders and lifers. POs have received substantial amount of training to manage such orders and are being paid accordingly. Why are PSOs expected to work with such offenders for less money. Surely there should be a cap on cases held by PSOs (70+) who have not had the intense training. Given the amount of SFOs who by the way are mainly managed by PSOs."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't start this again all the pos will bemoan how specially talented they are for delivering the same job. For more money without there being any difference in role today. However they will get on here and claim a load of rubbish about cqsw or pqrap and I trained for 8 months to think I am special all power conquering po. Get real more money same work one grade. Probation workers .

      Delete
    2. 19:41 and yet you raise this…….I suggest you talk to PSO colleagues who have not been successful in gaining the PO qualification and yes there are those. There is a difference in training and having the qualification to be a PO, fact. What is an issue is both grades are treated poorly by the employer, both grades are over allocated and demanded to deliver what is simply not possible. Now, if I were to suggest one way to dilute the really good work being done by this blog currently was to post in the way you are…….let’s keep the focus on the simple truth that Probation, victims, staff, those we supervise, the public are being failed and yes those excellent leaders who seek to distance themselves from any acknowledgment of this are responsible.

      Delete
    3. From Twitter:-

      "Having done a PSO role for 17 years this was exactly what I thought, however, after doing the fast track PO training I was wrong. There IS much more to being a PO."

      Delete
    4. Anon 1941 You've had your say and continue to make the same tired and deliberately provocative statements about POs and PSOs. You clearly have an axe to grind but I'm not allowing us to get side-tracked with this cliched and divisive crap - "This blog only print po support anyway". No it doesn't but I will keep deleting anything that isn't reasoned, sensible and respectful.

      Delete
    5. As a pso frontline currently 85 community cases all risks and I also cover my colleagues in box on absence we don't see any difference in the work except occasionally I ask for an opinion. The rest is monitoring and fingers crossed. In our team discussions the 3 pos on our office floor could not point out what their professional status was and the 1 p quip said she just took more money now that's what made her professional.

      Delete
    6. 19:41 If there was no difference in grades there wouldn’t need to be extra training to manage high and very high risk cases. The training is different. It’s more involved. It takes longer for a reason. POs hold almost nothing but high risk. PSOs manage unpleasant cases on burglaries, drugs and assaults etc. POs manage cases on people who have horrifically tortured, dismembered and then spread their victims out all over their house. Then we have to work with them. I am so fed up with hearing PSOs telling POs they have the same qualification as POs, and there’s no difference in roles. A high or very high risk case that suddenly changes with no warning can eat your whole week up, and somehow you still have to manage all your other high risk cases as well. God help you if two or more kick off in the same week. You can kiss goodbye to your diary at that point.

      A single high risk case gone wrong can lead to having to get three different police forces involved, your case ending up on a ‘most wanted’ list until they’re found, and then discovering they’ve committed another high risk offence while they were AWOL. Then all the work that comes with all of that. Either do the training and upgrade, or be quiet. I know of PSOs who failed the PO training and others who were refused it. We are not all doing the same work.

      POs don’t think we are all conquering. We are exhausted mentally and emotionally and constantly on high alert, waiting for something else to go terribly, terribly wrong. Then we have PSOs griping and insisting that we all do the same job.

      PSOs do have too many cases, which everyone accepts. But the two roles are most definitely not the same. If there was no difference, then there would only be PSO roles and the service would save oodles of money.

      Delete
    7. 11:32 can you just confirm that as a PSO you are managing all risks? So are you managing High RoSH and Very High RoSH cases?

      Delete
  23. I'm managing a double murderer who was passed to me 18mths post release and when I asked it was because he was medium risk. Thing is, lifers are reviewed by ACOs and its like having a hmip inspection interview which I never voted for.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 19:41 what a deluded comment. This sort of attitude splits staff between grades. Everyone is overworked. POs are specifically trained to manage complex risk cases and should have a lower caseload than a PSO, due to the complexity of tasks/safeguarding work. I agree PSO caseloads are too high and should be capped below 45/50. Please don’t moan about managing medium risk cases, that’s literally a PSO job…

      Delete
    2. “POs are specifically trained to manage complex risk cases”

      And what is that exactly? HMIP reports disagree!

      Delete
    3. From Twitter:-

      "You're in a pressure cooker as a PO waiting for an SFO but the PQIP doesn't prepare you at all for the jump. 9 months in and I'm yet to work anything new after being a PSO for years prior. Reduced caseload so extra hands to complete admin work for people off with stress."

      "We now have 4 full time PO's in our office following 3 more experienced staff leaving. All of a sudden PSO's/new PQIPs are now deemed experienced enough - since the office needs a helping hand. I wonder who will be scapegoated if there is an SFO?"

      Delete
    4. I retired 2017 spo 15 years . The work has dramatically shifted when cluster working opened the door to triage case managing. Have to honest after a year or so I was allocating based on number not risks. The clusters of 3 were psos as the po structure was lost into programmes. Actually there was no forethought and the distinction was lost before I went.

      Delete
    5. Some strong evidence for 19:41 not being deluded at all. The real issue is the movement to the centre from the conservatives. Braverman out and cleverly for Cameron. The Tory machine may well help us now as the middle ground for election is fought.

      Delete
  24. From Twitter:-

    "In my PDU in the north west we have very few experienced PSO/PO left some of whom has over 20yrs experience with over 10yrs till retirement - gone to other employers. People not just leaving cos of workload but also unfair management decisions re: allocations etc."

    ReplyDelete
  25. If probation can't identify it's own purpose, it's impossible to identify the professional qualification and standards required to meet a defined purpose.
    Probation has become a coop of headless chickens with too many assuming "the job" affords them a status that IMHO is undeserved.

    'Getafix



    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/probation-safety-prisons-overcrowding-union-b2440550.html

      'Getafix

      Delete
    2. I respect gtx not all in agreement with all he says however this point makes it clear. Just to add it is the employer that has downgraded the job with a faux 8 month trading called fast track. They only have to pretend their is a special level in reality there is nothing to distinguish the grades today but pay levels.

      Delete
    3. Well done 'Getafix - Criminals released from prison ‘left free to kill’ as overstretched probation service in crisis
      Exclusive: 59 offenders being monitored after leaving prison went on to be convicted of murder in just one year – with at least five cases blamed on failings in an overstretched probation service.

      Will post complete article shortly.

      Delete
    4. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/probation-staff-quitting-burnout-prisons-b2441117.html

      'Getafix

      Delete
    5. I joined the probation service as a job for life. But after five years, I’ve had enough

      ‘I never wanted it to come to this’: A probation worker tells Andy Gregory of the daily realities leaving her ‘completely overwhelmed’ as thousands leave the crisis-stricken service

      Complete text as comment on next blog post.

      Delete