No Mention of Probation?

From a contributor:-

"It's far greater & more complex than untrained coppers making a bad call:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8jnrk4xlvdo
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c70g18vpwxvo

• Scotland Yard downgraded Levy's risk to women upon his release in 2024
• The Met took three years to investigate and charge Levy with the sexual assault of the prison officer
• British Transport Police's (BTP) investigation into Levy's sexual assaults meant he was not charged for more than six months, despite being filmed carrying out an attack
• The Met and BTP both gave Levy back a stolen travelcard which let him travel without paying and commit crimes, including the first murder
• The CPS has apologised for "shortcomings" in its attempts to have Levy remanded in custody.

I do sometimes feel a chill inside when I read tabloid-worthy, set-in-concrete statements from what I always thought was a non-judgemental profession:

"they down graded the high risker... a po would not have downgraded him."

Everything's a mess. The entirety of the justice system (police, courts, probation, prisons, victim work) has been severely maltreated for decades, eroded & corroded by financial & moral starvation, ridiculed by the political class, mismanaged by Whitehall & hung out to dry by the media. The culture & nature of justice has been distorted.

We now seem to have a model that, with the rapid expansion of social media, means victims & their advocates have direct access & influence over government policy. That might not be a bad thing in & of itself, of course, but it has meant that the new government has been doing embarassingly poor public cartwheels over the Sentencing Act.

Sadly the last twenty or so years have seen some of the most contentious & damaging changes imposed upon the justice system, with frontline staff in all departments having little to no say; indeed, saying "it's shit & won't work" but being ignored, only to be proved right some time later, time & time again.

Even more sadly, those who sat in remote offices in Whitehall doing the sums, drafting the spreadsheets & writing the glossy reports promoting pointless change have never & will never been held to account for their wilful vandalism to public services & the massive holes they made in public finances. £Billions have been wasted on any number of vanity projects.

But hold up a sign saying "Plastacine Action", sit in a road blocking weapons destined for a genocidal state or daub paint on a statue & you'll be remanded into custody for months on terrorism charges."

I Despair

Listening to Radio 4 last night, I became aware of yet another story I'd missed, namely that concerning the Safer Living Foundation based in Nottingham:-

File on Four Sex Offenders: The Long Way Back

Alison Holt, BBC social affairs editor, has been given exceptional access to the clients of a Nottingham charity that works to reintegrate men who have been convicted of sexual offences. 

'John, Matt, Dan and Liam', not their real names, are determined to turn their lives around after prison sentences. We hear how they work towards this with the help of the staff and volunteers at the Safer Living Foundation, the only charity of its sort in the country. Always mindful of the victims of sexual crime, the principal aim is to prevent further offending and the creation of further harm.

There are hurdles to overcome - public abhorrence, plus grave difficulties with accommodation and work among them. The Foundation also runs Aurora, an online advice scheme for people who have not offended but who are worried about their sexual thoughts.

This would be a 'good news' story of course, were it not for the fact it's now closed! As we continue to hear news of yet more punitive policies towards offenders - tag everyone leaving prison -  why on earth can't we find the wherewithal to fund enlightened projects like this? It makes me despair at the utterly misguided direction of travel our politicians are taking us on. Those with long memories will no doubt recall the disgraceful decision to remove funding for Circles of Support and Accountability in 2018. 

This posted on Linkedin:-  

It’s with great sadness that after more than 11 years the Safer Living Foundation, an organisation that I helped co-found, has today closed. The SLF was an award-winning organisation that existed to reduce sexual offending and re-offending through preventative and rehabilitative initiatives. 

It’s been an incredibly difficult decision to make for all involved, especially because of its impact on our service-users. It’s difficult to put into words what the SLF means to those involved with it and it’s very hard to say goodbye. At the end of March our centre in Nottingham closed, but our last day was one of celebration, hope (tears), tea and reflection on all the things we have done together in over a decade in existence.

• First organisation (certainly in Europe) to run Prison Circles of Support and Accountability. 
• First community reintegration and rehabilitation centre for people with sexual convictions (world-wide) 
• First compassion-focused prevention intervention 
• Third Sector Charity of the year 2019, 
• We worked with well over 300 individuals with sexual convictions or individuals that were concerned they may offend during. 
• Robust evidence to show that our service-users developed and strengthened meaningful protective factors, reduced risk and we had a 5 year recidivism rate of <2%
• Over 6000 volunteer hours committed to projects 

We’ve worked with many great individuals, and have been supported by many funders and partner organisations, including Nottingham Trent University who have supported us since our first day, Notts PCC, Notts Police and Probation, Lloyds Bank Foundation, and University of Derby. We’ve had amazing staff and volunteers that have worked for us throughout the years, but a massive thanks to our centre manager Dave who was with us 9 years and he made the centre the success that it is/was. It’s been an absolute pleasure working with our men and working with the other trustees Lynn Saunders OBE Dr. Kerensa Hocken Kirsty Teague Claire Hampson Luke Vinter Professor (Hon). Dr. Geraldine AkermanLuke Vinter and Jordan Clayton all of whom are wonderful, compassionate and dedicated individuals. Our Chair of Trustees, Lynn, has been the moral compass of the SLF, and you have steered us through the beginning and the end. It’s been an honour to be part of the SLF with you all. 

There has been highs and lows, but what we achieved and built is something we all should be proud of and I’m grateful to have been a part of it. We gave it our all and we had an amazing run, but sadly all good things...

Nicholas Blagden

Prof. Criminological Psychology, Trustee/Co-Founder Safer Living Foundation, Member (accredited) National Register of Psychotherapists and Counsellors

--oo00oo--

Postscript

Thanks go to the reader for directing us to the following:-

A scheme helped prevent sex offenders committing more crimes - then it closed. Why?

It took me some time to find the front door of the Safer Living Foundation. There was no nameplate, and the building was one of many anonymous red-brick Victorian terraced houses in Nottingham. It was January 2025, and I was wrapped up against the cold as I walked up and down the street trying to find the right address.

There was a very good reason for this anonymity. The foundation works with people convicted and imprisoned for sexual offences after they have been released back into the community. The men may have been found guilty of anything from indecent exposure to viewing abusive images online to contact offences involving children.

And people who have committed sex crimes can be among the most reviled in society. At times they are the subject of vigilante action.

In May 2025, the government announced it was considering the roll-out of voluntary chemical castration for sex offenders and also looking at whether this could be made mandatory.

But while this sort of tough rhetoric grabs headlines, the Safer Living Foundation claims the work it does providing a safe space for people with sexual convictions to find support with reintegrating into society has had positive results.

And there is evidence to suggest they may be correct. Just 2% of the men who spent time at the foundation reoffended, according to its own figures. That compares to an average of 15.1% for those convicted of sexual crimes in England and Wales. The Foundation says it only takes people who say they are committed to change.

I was there to see for myself how the centre in Nottingham - the only project of its kind in the UK - operated. Over five months the BBC was given a unique insight into its work.

What none of us knew that cold winter morning was that these would prove to be its final months. In May 2025, the centre was forced to close. Persuading organisations to fund sex offender treatment had never been easy and in the tough financial climate, it had become impossible to secure the money they needed to keep going.

It's an outcome that casts light on the UK's attitude towards preventing those guilty of sex crimes from reoffending. It forces us to confront difficult questions, including whether spending public or charity money on attempting to rehabilitate sex offenders should be recognised as an effective way of preventing harm and in doing so protecting potential victims.

'I'll do whatever works'

When I eventually found the right door, it was opened by Dave Potter. He had run the service since it was set up 11 years ago.

Here, he told me, offenders meet people who have insight into their experience of having been convicted for sex crimes - both others who have been found guilty of these offences as well as counsellors - "because who else can you talk to?".

Inside, in a busy kitchen, lunch was being prepared. A handful of men of all ages, sitting and standing, quietly chatted about the day's news, football and food. In another room, a games club was taking place and elsewhere, counselling sessions were under way.

Often their partners and families wanted nothing more to do with them after their convictions, according to Dave.

Dave accepted that there would be those who wondered how he could bring himself to offer support to sex offenders. But he believed the bigger picture is what's important. "Everything we do underpins (the idea of) no more victims," he said. "I'll do whatever works to prevent further offending."

Certainly, the official statistics around sexual offending suggest that much more needs to be done to bring the numbers down. On average the police record more than 194,000 sexual offences each year in England and Wales. Of these, 40% are against children.

One child in every 10 experiences some form of sexual abuse before the age of 16 in England and Wales, according to "conservative estimates" by the Centre of Expertise on Child Sexual Abuse. Many victims, both adults and children, will never feel able to speak about what has happened.

The harm caused by these offences cannot be underestimated, and that was acknowledged in most of the conversations I had at the centre with offenders, staff and volunteers alike. At the time I visited about 60 men were enrolled as service users, but over the last decade hundreds of men and two women have been supported by staff here.

'The life I knew has completely ended'

The service users I spoke to wanted to remain anonymous. They described feeling lonely and even suicidal, and said they realised what they had done was wrong. They said they recognised the impact it had on their victims. They also talked about how the centre had helped them.

"I was petrified about leaving prison with a stigma attached," said Matt (the names of all ex-offenders have been changed). As a result of his conviction, he had lost his family, his job and everything he knew before. "The life I knew has completely ended." Without the centre he would be struggling even more, he said.

Another man, Liam, described being assaulted after he was released from prison.

"One of my neighbours found out who I was and then one night decided to come round and attack me," he said. "Physical violence, swearing at me and basically, telling everybody around there what I was," he said. He had to move.

Finding work can be a major challenge for the men, too. Some 95% of the service users here were on the Sex Offenders Register and were required to tell potential employers this. In my conversations with them, the same words came up time and again – anxiety, low self-esteem, fear and, in particular, isolation.

While to some these risk factors could sound like an excuse for what they have done, the centre's approach is based on the idea that addressing these issues will make these men less likely to offend. And so it tries to help them rebuild their lives in a way that protects them and others.

"By treating people with decency, by looking at the whole person and not just the crime, by finding ways to manage their social isolation, their shame and their guilt, that reduces further offending down the line," Dave said.

He accepted that some might think that what the centre was doing was naïve. Before he did his job, he says, he might have agreed with the suggestion that sex offenders simply need to be punished. But now, he said, "I know what we do works. It is about understanding the harm that acting on those impulses causes. It is about understanding what they've put victims through."

Distractions from inappropriate thoughts

There is group therapy as well as weekly one-to-one counselling sessions. In one of the discussions with Dave, a man called John, who has been jailed twice for his offending, talked about how he now distracted himself if he began to have any fleeting, inappropriate sexual thoughts. He played football video games and generally kept busy.

He also described how difficult the last few months have been. A homeless man, who John had offered to help, moved into his flat and became increasingly manipulative and violent. Eventually, he threatened to tell others about John's conviction.

With support from the Foundation, John called the police and the man was removed.

"If an alcoholic has no help and support, its unlikely they'll give up booze," said Dave. He believes it can be the same with sex offenders, so the centre provided controlled support that helps them cope, even under stress.

There is support for this approach, too, among groups that work with victims.

"This project further underpins the fact that we can't make a dent in the alarming figures of a quarter of the population experiencing sexual violence by simply pledging to change things," says Lucy Duckworth, policy lead at The Survivors Trust. "We need action and funding and to have difficult conversations with those who commit this crime, to enable us to intervene earlier."

A failing in the system

The main place where sex offenders currently get treatment is in prison – but even there it is limited. In the year ending March 2024, there were about 87,000 people in prison in England and Wales. More than 18,000 (21%) had been convicted of sex offences. Some 1,115 prisoners did start accredited treatment in prison and 1,094 people completed those courses.

The length of time the courses take means they may not be an option for offenders in jail for a short period. Matt, who had earlier told me how worried he had been about leaving prison, took two 30-hour programmes while an inmate at HMP Whatton in Nottinghamshire, which is, according to the Howard League for Penal Reform, the largest prison for adult sex offenders in Europe. Matt said these were hugely useful to him.

"You ripped yourself right open," he said. "Laid everything on the table. Looked at how and why you got there, and how are you going to rebuild yourself? How are you going to make sure it doesn't happen again?"

But once inmates are released, accessing this kind of treatment becomes even more difficult, experts say. "That's a failing of where we're at in the system," says Nick Blagden, professor of criminological psychology at the University of Derby and a co-founder and trustee of the Safer Living Foundation.

An alternative solution is to reach people before they end up in the criminal justice system - before they harm someone. There are UK projects that do good work offering services in the community, says Prof Blagden. But given the scale of the problem, the level of support is nowhere near as "wide-ranging" as is needed, he adds. He contrasts this with Germany, where he says there is a "much more sensible" approach to funding prevention projects that provide therapy to adults who feel they might commit sexual offences.

In addition to the Nottingham centre, the foundation also ran a programme called Aurora, which provided highly confidential support, online and in person, for people with concerning sexual thoughts, before they did something that put them in contact with the criminal justice system. It had 300 people on a 12-month waiting list.

"If we had unlimited funds and resources, we would be working with hundreds of people a month," says Prof Blagden.

'We've helped a lot of lives'

Getting all this right could not be more important. The National Crime Agency estimated in 2024 that between 710,000 and 840,000 UK adults posed varying degrees of sexual risks to children.

The questions for society are: as well as making it easier for victims of abuse to be heard and believed, are we ready to challenge the behaviour, thoughts and actions of those who have offended and are at risk of offending much sooner? And are we prepared to spend money on doing so?

For its part, the Ministry of Justice says: "We are determined to halve violence against women and girls in a decade and tackling sexual offenders' criminality is a vital part of this plan."

Ministers also point to their plan for a national roll-out of "medication to manage problematic sexual arousal in sex offenders", often known as chemical castration, which is delivered through drugs alongside psychiatric work, and say they are considering whether to make it mandatory. The department also says it recently announced a record £700m increase in overall probation funding by 2028.

For decades, the mantras of many politicians have focused on being tough on crime. The use and length of prison sentences have increased as a result. However, the current overcrowding in prisons is forcing a rethink.

In May 2025, an independent review of sentencing was published. It concluded that while punishment is important, there "has been insufficient focus on reducing crime". It called for more community-based sentences and support and more use of the third sector charities and organisations.

The government has since accepted most of the recommendations across all crimes. The Safer Living Foundation, with the guardrails it provided to support sex offenders in the community, seemed to be tailor-made for this strategy. But the same month the review was published, the Foundation learned that its application for a lottery grant - which it needed to keep running - had been turned down.

'Fairly hand-to-mouth'

"It has been fairly hand-to-mouth over the years we've been operating," says Lynn Saunders, another of the co-founders of the Safer Living Foundations as well as a former governor at Whatton and now professor of applied criminology at Derby University. "There seems to be a big reluctance because of the nature of the work, people find it difficult to be associated with it."

In May, the centre closed, while the Aurora Project was paused. On the final day, staff, volunteers and some of the men they have supported, packed into the small kitchen to say goodbye.

"I've decided to celebrate the fact we existed at all," said Dave. "We've helped a lot of lives and prevented a lot of victims."

A few hours later, when that anonymous front door was shut and locked, it marked the end of the project. There is no replacement and no prospect of re-opening.

Alison Holt

Social Affairs Editor

Crime and Punishment

There's going to be a lot of talk about criminal justice today and this from the Guardian sets the scene:-

Shabana Mahmood considers chemical castration for serious sex offenders

Shabana Mahmood, the lord chancellor, is considering mandatory chemical castration for the most serious sex offenders, according to government sources.

The minister’s department is planning to expand a pilot to 20 regions as part of a package of “radical” measures to free thousands of prisoners and ease prison overcrowding in England and Wales.

As well as releasing and tagging killers and rapists after they have served half of their sentence, she is considering the findings of an independent sentencing review that has also called for the government to build an evidence base on drugs that “suppress libido” or reduce “sexual thoughts”.

They are among 48 recommendations put forward by David Gauke, the chair of the review.

Mahmood is expected to address the Commons on Thursday to outline which measures she will accept in a major overhaul of criminal justice. Government sources said she is expected to accept the review’s key measures including that well-behaved prisoners should be released on tag after serving a third of their sentences.

She has also accepted that those who have committed serious sexual or violent crimes could be freed to serve their sentence in the community after they have served half of their sentence.

One of Gauke’s suggestions – that the most dangerous offenders should be allowed to apply for parole earlier if they earn “credits” – has been dismissed by sources close to the justice secretary.

The report has urged ministers to build a comprehensive evidence base around the use of chemical suppression for sex offenders and examine the findings of similar programmes in Germany, Denmark and Poland.

“Problematic sexual arousal and preoccupation can be reduced via chemical suppressants and other medications, which can be prescribed for individuals who have committed a sexual offence under certain circumstances,” the report notes.

It points out that a 2022 pilot programme at prisons in south-west England which uses libido-suppressing drugs is due to end next year and recommends “continued funding of services in this area”. The government plans to expand the pilot using these as a staging post to a full, nationwide rollout, a source close to Mahmood said.

The approach is delivered through two drugs. Selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors (SSRIs) limit invasive sexual thoughts. Anti-androgens reduce the production of testosterone and limit libido. The drugs are taken alongside psychiatric work that targets other causes of sexual offending, such as a desire for power and control.

Mahmood is exploring whether chemical castration could be made mandatory, instead of voluntary, for the most serious offenders, the source said. Sexual offences accounted for 21% of adults serving immediate custodial sentences at the end of March 2025. The report notes that participation in any such programme would be voluntary in England and Wales.

Among the main recommendations, Gauke, the former Conservative justice secretary, said the government should:

• Ensure custodial sentences under 12 months are only used in exceptional circumstances.
• Extend suspended sentences to up to three years and encourage greater use of deferred sentences for low-risk offenders.
• Give courts greater flexibility to use fines and ancillary orders like travel, driving and football bans.
• Allow probation officers to adjust the level of supervision based on risk and compliance with licence conditions.
• Expand specialist domestic abuse courts to improve support for victims.
• Expand tagging for all perpetrators of violence against women and girls.
• Improve training for practitioners and the judiciary on violence against women and girls.
• Change the statutory purposes of sentencing so judges and magistrates must consider protecting victims as much as they consider punishment and rehabilitation when passing sentences.

Gauke has called for the need to increase funding and resources for the probation service, including expanding the availability of electronic monitoring equipment like tags, and warned that there will be a “public backlash” if money is not found.

“If probation are left without additional resources then the risk is that we won’t make progress on rehabilitation and there will be a public backlash,” he said.

The National Police Chiefs’ Council echoed Gauke’s calls for more resources.

Chief constable Sacha Hatchett, national policing lead for criminal justice, said: “Out of prison should not mean out of control. If we are going to have fewer people in prison, we need to ensure that we collectively have the resources and powers to manage the risk offenders pose outside prison.

“Adequate funding to support these measures must be reflected in the upcoming spending review, as well as investment in probation services and technology, including electronic monitoring.”

Penal reform group the Howard League welcomed the recommendations.

Andrea Coomber, the chief executive, said: “The ball is now in the government’s court. Solving the prison capacity crisis will require major intervention and, as the review recognises, this will only succeed if reform and investment deliver an effective and responsive probation service that works to cut crime in the community.”

The Conservatives have condemned Gauke’s review. Robert Jenrick, the shadow justice secretary, said: “By scrapping short prison sentences Starmer is effectively decriminalising crimes like burglary, theft and assault. This is a gift to criminals who will be free to offend with impunity.”

End of An Era

We need to get probation out of HMPPS and the civil service. Napo mailing yesterday:-

Today is a day for reflection, particularly for our members who were working in the Divisional Sex Offender Units, as today, technically these units no longer exist. It is an end of an era for the Probation Service, which has historically prided itself on being an evidence based and research driven organisation, and these teams were held in high regard by sentencers, police, social services and by sentence management colleagues for the knowledge and insight they bought in working with people who have committed sexual offences. 

No reason has been given for the removal of these experienced teams, other than "career progression" for those without a probation qualification and who will now be expected to deliver Horizon and New Me Strengths (for those with intellectual disabilities), in the main without the experience and same level of training as those gone before and without an increase in pay, whilst moving into the rollout of Building Choices, which will be one programme whatever the offence may be.

Napo and our sister unions, along with our members (THANK YOU), have worked hard over the last 4 years to raise the concerns for public safety by removing the divisional sex offender units, but sadly the wider HMPPS has refused to hear these. Be assured though, we are still continuing to challenge this in every way we can.

Napo wish to acknowledge our members in those lost units and their commitment to the work to give those convicted of sexual offences an opportunity to address their reasons for making those choices to ensure no more victims going forward, their commitment to ending violence against women and children, their commitment to supporting colleagues in sentence management and overall their commitment to keeping the public safe.

Thank you for your service, we value and respect you.

A Very Bad Idea

Regular readers will recall that one unfortunate casualty of Rishi Sunak having a hissy fit and calling a very unexpected general election was the last minute cancellation of a BBC Newsnight investigation into the mess HMPPS was making of sex offender programmes.

Sadly, but very conveniently for HMPPS, this film will never see the light of day due to the BBC culling all the investigative journalists from Newsnight and reducing the programme to 30 rather than 45 minutes. Fortunately, I see the subject gets a thorough airing in this piece published yesterday by ByLine Times:-

Ministry of Justice Downgrading of Sex Offender Rehabilitation Will Have ‘Catastrophic Effect’ on Public Safety, Union Warns

The salaries of specialist probation officers who manage sex offenders are being cut – and 77% say they plan to leave the job.

New plans to cut the salaries of specialist probation officers who manage the risk of sex offenders could have a “catastrophic” effect on public safety, unions warn.

Sex offenders in England and Wales are often required to take part in Horizon, a programme designed to reduce their risk of reoffending. Around 1 in 10 sex offenders go on to commit a similar crime.

The programme is facilitated by specialised officers, many of whom have decades of experience working with sex offenders, but the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has decided the role will drop from band 4 to band 3 for new recruits from 1 August 2024, which will result in a pay cut of up to £10,000.

Facilitators will no longer be required to be qualified probation officers, which comes with two years’ training, including risk management and risk assessment.

Around 93% of Horizon facilitators think the public will be at increased risk following these changes, according to an internal survey of members of the union Napo seen by Byline Times.

These changes are like “putting the teaching assistants in charge of the school,” says Laura, a specialist probation officer with experience facilitating and managing these programmes. Laura, (not her real name) added that it takes a lot of experience to be able to idenitfy the signs that someone may reoffend.

“People with 10 to 20 years’ experience are really good at picking up on the signs when someone is becoming risky,” the specialist probation officer says. “And we have a degree-level qualification in managing risk."

“My concern is that we’ll lose these experienced staff who are good at identifying risk, and I can think of a number of situations where staff running these programmes have identified risk that has led to us finding out that men have been having contact with children they shouldn’t have been, which has led to them being recalled to prison.”

Facilitators who are currently at band 4 will have their pay frozen for three years, then it will drop to band 3, and their job roles will encompass a broader range of programmes.

The decision has caused a “serious loss of trust” among facilitators, says Max (not his real name), a probation officer with over a decade’s experience of facilitating sex offender programmes. “A lot of people around me, with a lot of experience, are thinking about leaving the service,” he says.

According to NAPO’s survey, 77% of specialist probation officers say they will leave their team. This will leave inexperienced staff to do the work, says Napo’s Tania Bassett. 

“Inexperienced staff will need to be trained in Horizon, which will take time, and in some cases there is no training provision,” she told Byline Times. "As a result, we expect large parts of the country to be left unable to deliver any sex offender work for quite a few months."

“Existing groups are likely to be withdrawn as there won’t be any staff left to complete them. Evidence shows that, where a programme is only partially completed, risk of offenders increases.”

Probation officers that manage people on probation are supported by divisional sex offender units, which consist of specialist probation staff that deliver Horizon. They’re trained to conduct thorough risk assessments and sentence management plans for sex offenders, and provide tailored interventions.

“A lot of probation officers with caseloads lack the confidence of how to work with people with sexual convictions, and look to us for advice,” says Max. 

The new plans will eliminate this oversight across the country, says Rebecca (not her real name), a senior probation officer, who declined to provide her name. “There will be a two-tier workforce that will be watered down over time because experienced staff have left and continue to do so. They don’t want to go back into the field doing case management and overseeing an extremely high caseload, which holds a significant level of accountability. We’re walking into a furnace.”

This move could have a “catastrophic” effect on public safety, says Unison, one of the UK’s largest trade unions.

“With the probation service suffering from an acute workload and staffing crisis, it’s all the more important to hold on to experienced employees to supervise complex cases effectively,” says Ben Priestley, the union’s national officer for police and probation. "Doing away with specialist units with expertise in dealing with sex offenders will lead to a significant loss of skilled staff with the necessary experience. Communities will be left without the protection they deserve and require."

The agenda around punishing sex offenders seems to focus on increasing sentences, rather than protecting those at risk of being targeted by sex offenders, says Harriet Wistrich, founder and director of the Centre for Women’s Justice.

Wistrich, a solicitor who acted for some of the victims of John Worboys, known as the ‘black cab rapist’, told Byline Times: “Unless you lock everyone up forever, people will come up of prison, usually on license, and this is a critical time. If they’re regarded low enough in risk, that risk should be very carefully monitored by probation, which requires particular skills and experience.

“Sex offending is a specific type offending. It’s quite different from a lot of other offending because it seems many sex offenders are quite able to present themselves in ways that won’t necessarily make them appear to be a risk to those who aren’t very skilled at identifying and understanding that risk and manipulation,” she says.

There are also plans to replace Horizon, which is designed specifically for those with sexual convictions, with a ‘one-size-fits-all’ course, Next Generation of Accredited Programmes.

Simon (not his real name) completed Horizon while on probation after serving time for a sexual offence and credits it with changing his life. “Getting caught helped me see there were things I needed to address to understand why I did what I did, and I’m a better person now,” he says. “Horizon provides an understanding that we’re all built differently, and it takes a trigger to send you over the edge.”

Simon praises the facilitators, saying they were “excellent” and know how to “treat people”. “If one of us stepped out of line, they were soon told,” he told Byline Times. “You could see their experience in how they spoke to you. Having that experience was vital.”

The move should be a concern to the public, says George Georgiou, GMB’s national officer.

“The work undertaken with people who have committed sexual offences is – and has been for decades – specialised,” he says. “The way people offend and the theories and approaches to addressing this behaviour varies by offence type. “Evidence shows the effective treatment of people who have committed offences of a sexual nature does reduce the risk of their reoffending. GMB is concerned removing specialist workers leaves the public at risk of increased reoffending.”

Daniel, (not his real name) was sexually abused by a teacher when he was 13.

The 55-year-old says he’s struggled with feelings of guilt for not going to the police about his abuser, who went on to sexually abuse other children. “It’s so vital that the right infrastructure is in place to support and rehabilitate people so they don’t reoffend,” he says.

A Probation Service spokesperson told Byline Times that sex offenders are “supervised by qualified probation officers and the Horizon behaviour change programme they undertake will continue to be delivered by appropriately trained staff. These changes will ensure these programmes are delivered consistently across the country to reduce the risk of reoffending.”

Jessica Bradley

Guest Blog 99

Future victims and a denial of cost cutting

Programmes is in a mess. Absolute turmoil, staff in meltdown, off sick or leaving in their droves nationally. Yet when we talk to our OM colleagues we are either met with a shrug, or indifference. Well, good luck, as shit rolls downwards.

Due to a job evaluation that has taken over two years the highly qualified band 4 officers who deliver sex offender programmes are being ‘re-banded’ to Band 3. Many have decades of experience with this cohort, imparting knowledge and risk assessments to OM colleagues and the courts.

Equally highly qualified Band 3 PSOs (many of whom are educated to Masters level) are taking on the sex offender group work. This is not the job they signed up for, and numerous have the attitude of ‘why should we, for ten grand less?’ Considering the Band 3 has such a low starting salary its now possible to be paid more in an admin level job in local authorities and councils. Now we value admin colleagues but lets face it the stress of dealing with DV perpetrators or those who offend sexually is markedly lower in admin than a PSO in programmes.

Recent VLO banding to Band 4 was of course welcome, but this is even more a kick in the teeth to PSO’s in Programmes who will often spend in excess of over 70 hours face to face with people on probation (BBR totals around 70 hours face to face work). The only PSOs who deal face to face with High Risk sexual and domestically violent offenders in the service are now wondering should they jump ship into Band 4 VLO positions, or head into a Domestic Abuse Safety Officer (DASO) role? But, hang on – they can’t because all band 4 roles are ringfenced for the Band 4 programmes officers being transferred in. Band 3 PSOs are facing a future as Intervention Facilitators, unable to access any other PSO roles in courts, or sentence mangers as they will be second class employees. They will be seen as external candidates for the PQiP route, closing every door internally. All TM roles are being allocated to the Band 4 probation officers being thrown out of the sex offender programmes. Therefore the TM training pathway and interview process for BBR and TSP is being watered down, resulting in the TM’s of the future never having delivered these programmes before telling those highly experienced BBR facilitators how to do their job.

The JES appeal is being appealed by NAPO as it was widely inaccurate and yet radio silence from the Unions to the wider probation service.

Many suspect the handling of this process is reminiscent of a nicely packaged up Interventions service heading for the private sector. Sold off twice – charming. Wonder how the public would react if they knew that highly specialist teams dealing with this cohort are being disbanded ready for another Grayling moment?

In the meantime in many regions of England and Wales there are no programmes being run for sex offenders, Band 3 teams cut in half, hampered in their attempts to offer domestic violence rehabilitation work, long waiting lists building up. What a shambles, again.

Anon

An Appeal

A freelance journalist is working on a story about the MoJ's plans to disband SPOs working in specialist sex offender units, and replace Horizon and iHorizon with the one-size-fits-all Next Generation Accredited Programmes. She has assurance from experts outside the MoJ that the plans are definitely going ahead, but the official MoJ line is that there are no definite plans in the immediate future. If anyone can come forward to help, with the assurance of full anonymity if needed, you can reach her at hijessicaebradley@gmail.com

Addendum

Also - if anyone has any documentation showing that HMPPS forbids contracted researchers from talking to the media or being critical of HMPPS - she'd be very keen to hear from you.

--oo00oo--

Postscript

Can Probation Keep Us Safe?

BBC 1 Panorama May 23rd 9.00pm

When dangerous criminals leave prison, the Probation Service should monitor them and keep the public safe. But is it up to the job? As convicted criminals across England and Wales are released from prison early to tackle chronic overcrowding, Panorama investigates the Probation Service and asks if it's doing enough to manage high-risk prisoners. Serving probation officers warn that their caseloads are putting public safety at risk, and families whose loved ones have been murdered by convicted criminals on probation ask why the system failed them.

Lets Look At Napo

It's been some time since I've said much about Napo and that's for a variety of reasons. I didn't attend the AGM and conference and somewhat unusually, I didn't have a lot to say about the motions up for debate because to me the absolutely key issue was a campaign to get probation out of the clutches of HMPPS command and control and the dead hand of the civil service. So where did that feature on the list of motions? Nowhere, apart from Wales where Napo Cymru got their act together as I outlined here. 

Lets remind ourselves of what the 2022 AGM produced for the current years Operational Plan:-

National Executive 

• Fight for our professional integrity and our professional status by working with other Criminal Justice partners and unions to maintain our professional standards in Courts; fight the changes to the Parole process and fight to reinstate our ability to make recommendations; support staff involved in open parole hearings; continue to fight Offender Management in Custody (OMiC) especially the line management of probation staff by prisons; and campaign to take us out of the Civil Service in order to regain our independent professional status (Resolution 7)

• Napo will redouble our demands for Probation to be taken out of the civil service, and unshackled from the Prison Service. Napo members will write to their MPs making this position clear. The NEC will draft a suggested briefing note and letter, and Napo will engage in a press and communications exercise, responding to each of the inevitable future “poor” and “needs improvement” inspection report making this position clear (Resolution 9)

Pretty feisty stuff and clear cut. Fast forward to AGM 2023 and had it not been for Napo Cymru putting forward a spirited motion making the case for probation in Wales being fully devolved, the absolutely key issue of divorce from HMPPS wouldn't even have been discussed at all at Nottingham! 

Thank goodness for the the valiant efforts of Napo Cymru and their unstinting campaigning and assiduous political lobbying. I would venture to suggest that Napo England has much to learn from their efforts and should they bear fruit post the general election and a new UK Labour Administration, probation England is going to look pretty stupid as a totally isolated example of how not to do it. Sadly, Napo will look even more irrelevant than many feel it has already become. One can only speculate how the union is regarded by the MoJ and the HMPPS command and controllers! . 

So, this is what the new 2024 Operational Plan has to say:-

OBJECTIVE 3: CAMPAIGNING AND COMMUNICATING

Maintaining Napo’s high profile in successfully campaigning, promoting and communicating Napo’s policies and values. Organise the re-instatement of a national, amalgamated public Probation service and keep Cafcass as a public service, both with sufficient resources to guarantee jobs and service delivery. To work with unions, relevant organisations, MPs, Assembly Members, peers, parliamentary groups and others as appropriate in relation to wider public service campaigns.

• Actively, urgently and persistently campaign for the devolution of Probation in Wales, focussing these efforts on the Westminster Labour Party, demanding that the devolution of Wales Probation is included in the UK Labour manifesto for the next General Election (Resolution 19)

National Executive Committee 

• Raise awareness of the impact of staff shortages on serious further offences, highlighting this is increasingly through unsafe working practices and negotiate with the employer the circumstances in which Corporate Responsibility will be applied (Resolution 5).
• Call on the MOJ and government to put immediate measures in place to alleviate dangerously high workloads and address recruitment and retention with a decent pay rise (Resolution 6)
• Review recommendations in respect of possible industrial action when reports are received from Officers and Officials in respect of the formal One HMPPS dispute; the recent call from the outgoing HM Inspector of Probation for an independent enquiry into the state of Probation; the Lord Chancellor’s announcement of the early Release scheme and the removal of Divisional Sex Offender Units, which is detrimental to the public protection, the wellbeing of case managers and the communities we serve (Resolution 7)

Pretty feeble and mealy-mouthed I would venture to suggest. But the last reference provides a good example of why probation needs to be out of HMPPS completely. Lets look at what the position is regarding Divisional Sex Offender Units and indeed the MoJ/HMPPS track record on this important and key area of probation work. We've had the scrapping of the much maligned Sex Offender accredited programme; removal of funding for Circles UK; intended scrapping of the DSOU's; no sign of much encouragement of initiatives such as the Safer Living Centre in Nottingham, and then I spotted this from a notice of a forthcoming NOTA training event in Leeds:-

"This training is not available to staff of His Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service who use their own programmes and toolkits."

Now NOTA are an extremely well respected outfit that have been around a long time in the field of work with sex offenders:- 

NOTA’s Charitable Objectives are to advance education for the benefit of the public, amongst members of the profession or persons working with or providing services for people who have committed sexual abuse or others having a legitimate professional interest in the field, and to promote or assist in promoting research into the skills associated with the professions who work with or provide services for people who have committed sexual abuse and into the efficiency of existing skills and practices, and to disseminate the useful results of such research for the benefit of the public.

Why on earth are probation staff forbidden from attending? In the past we were encouraged to join NOTA and attend events. Methinks it's a perfect example of control freakery from HMPPS, an organisation that is rapidly demonstrating it is unfit for purpose.

Local v Central

In order to try and keep the discussion going, I think it helps to highlight reflective contributions, such as this from earlier this morning:-

Over the years I have seen officers struggle to communicate with those they supervise and take the upward route….once promoted they become (at least in their eyes) super officers who were promoted on the basis of their excellence and seek to disgorge their ‘experience’ to those they left behind, confident that their limited skill set is the way. This group have moved now into the higher echelons of probation and as such we have this disconnect between how they think we should work and the reality. 

The reality is that we work with a socially damaged group who seek to return to what they know and are comfortable with and breaking or even impeding that return is difficult and is only achieved incrementally and usually involves failure along the way. I’ve worked and mentored with some fantastic young recruits who have a natural compassion which I see eroded from them slowly but surely by the cold hand of central control.

Regional differences exist yet probations strength is local…not central and the constant launches and re launches are all centrally driven….OMIC [Offender Management in Custody] is an idea that has struggled from the start, One HMPpS will give control to exactly the wrong group…if we are looking at a redesign, local PDUs, loosely linked to other local areas with a local committee of volunteers providing a steer…..will it come to pass? Not a chance as it would take power and control from the top…..I once wrote a PSR on an RSO [Registered Sex Offender], supervised him throughout his sentence and managed him in the community for six years…….not reoffended to date and still sends me a Christmas card…..it worked for him and it was as local as it could have been………

Latest From Napo 232

Here we have selected quotes from the Napo mailout sent to all members yesterday:-

TRADE UNIONS OPPOSE REFORM OF PROGRAMMES DELIVERY

Our members will be aware that the joint Probation Service trade unions (TUs) have now been involved in negotiations about the future of offending behaviour programme delivery for almost a year. Despite our best efforts, we are no closer to agreement with the employer’s proposals.

We are aware that the employer has stated that there have been over 30 hours of consultation on the subject, although the TUs would question how meaningful this was. We have continued to emphasise our concerns over how the proposals will negatively impact the management of the risk of harm to the public, in addition to looking after the interests of our members. Below is an update on the issues the TUs have raised with the employer.

WHY A SINGLE FACILITATOR JOB DESCRIPTION WILL BE BAD NEWS

The aim of the employer is to replace all current facilitator job descriptions (JD) at band 3 and band 4 with one JD which may end up being evaluated at pay band 3. The TUs believe that the JD should differ between general offending behaviour programmes (GOBP) staff, such as those who deliver TSP, and those who deliver work with men who commit sexual offences (MCSO) and domestic abuse (DA).

Consultancy, delivery of non-accredited one-to-one work, guidance to sentence management and provision of Learning and Development support to Sentence Management staff will differ with risk levels and complexity. Those subject to conditions to complete a general Offender Behaviour Programme (OBP) are not likely to require significant consultancy, guidance or Learning and Development support

The TUs feel that the creation of two facilitator roles at Band 3 and Band 4 better represents the work of our members. Work with more complex and high-risk groups (DA and MCSO) justifies differing salary bands to other types of Offending Behaviour Programme (OBP) facilitator staff.

DAMAGING TO CAREER PROGRESSION

Under the current proposals, the only career development pathway for facilitators will be to leave facilitation. Our proposals for Band 3 and Band 4 facilitator roles would offer greater flexibility in terms of career progression that would support remaining in facilitation.

The TUs have continued to emphasise the need for the Probation Service to develop a career progression model whereby people new into the service deliver structured interventions and TSP, allowing time to develop their knowledge, experience and skill before they progress to deliver Building Better Relationships (BBR) and programmes for those convicted of sexual offences, if they choose to do so.

MORE INFORMATION NEEDED

The TUs continue to press the employer for further information about:

• The justification for a single facilitator job description
• The pay band at which a single facilitator role will be paid? If the outcome of the job evaluation process puts the role at Band 3, our pay band 4 members face losing up to £11,000 per annum, if they want to continue to deliver programmes. This includes some former CRC facilitators.
• The arrangements for Band 4 members currently working in Interventions to return to sentence management. These members may have been out of sentence management for many years. As a minimum, these members, would require a full package of training and a gradual acquisition of a full case load.
• Whether non-qualified Band 4 facilitators who choose to leave Interventions would be offered pay protection if they were to return to a Band 3 PSO role.
• The consequences for new staff of failing Core Skills or programme specific training

DEDICATED SEX OFFENDER UNITS (DSOU) TO BE DISBANDED

Under the current proposals the employer intends for all facilitators to deliver all accredited programmes and structured interventions. This will result in existing DSOUs being disbanded, resulting in the loss of the accumulated expertise and knowledge held by our members in these teams and placing the public at greater risk of serious harm.

The TUs have been clear that keeping these teams would not only mean keeping current expertise in work with men who commit sexual offences but also allow for the development of expertise and knowledge in work with men who commit DA offences and engage in sexually abusive behaviour.

This would provide an opportunity to enhance our work with this group to improve risk management and public safety. The TUs continue to be clear that DSOUs should be expanded to incorporate those most experienced facilitators in the delivery of domestic abuse programmes to provide the same level of consultancy and support to sentence management and stakeholders that members in existing DSOUs provide.

The TUs continue to press the employer for further information about:

• What will be asked of members, who, for whatever reason, don’t wish to work with those who commit domestic abuse offences or are convicted of sexual offences?
• What will be asked of members who deliver structured interventions and don’t wish to deliver accredited programmes?

TREATMENT MANAGERS & PROGRAMME MANAGERS

Under the employer’s proposals, the TUs believe it is unlikely that Treatment Managers will have the capacity to provide current levels of professional support and guidance to probation practitioners and relevant stakeholders. This would be an increased risk at a time when the Probation Service has a large and increasing number of inexperienced probation practitioners and managers. It is clear that there are currently no substantive plans in place to ensure that competent clinical advice or support to probation practitioners or stake holders is in place.

The TUs are concerned that Treatment Managers may be expected to oversee programmes of which they have no experience rather than delivering twice before taking up the role. The TUs have pointed out that this would clearly result in negative consequences for the standard of programme delivery and lead to a reduction in the quality of risk management, putting the public at increased risk of harm.

The TUs continue to press the employer for further information about:

• The employer’s lack of response to issues raised around the potential consequences of staff inexperience and its implication for risk management, in the face of recent SFO reports and HMIP inspections.

COST!

The plans for Interventions will result in significant cost, in addition to the costs of developing a new programme. The TUs believe this money could be better invested in increasing facilitator numbers for existing programmes.

A SINGLE ACCREDITED OFFENDING BEHAVIOUR PROGRAMME?

The employer’s current plans are to replace all current accredited programmes with a single programme for all offenders. The information so far provided by the employer does not, in the TUs’ opinion, justify the plans put forward and indicates no significant work on a new programme has yet taken place.

An evaluation of a single programme approach used in Canada which has been seen by the TUs did not yield positive results. The TUs continue to have significant concerns in relation to:

• The future of the Domestic Abuse Safety Officer role should BBR be replaced with a single programme
• How Programme Managers will ensure the safety of our members and people on probation if DA perpetrators and MCSO are included in the same group
• How Programme Managers will be able to ensure there are no victims of DA or sexual offences in groups
• How it will be possible to facilitate and ensure the engagement of group members in large groups
• How sexual deviance will be tackled as part of a single OBP, as this is one of the biggest risk indicators

WHAT NEXT?

The unions are opposed to the HMPPS proposals for Programmes because we believe that they will reduce public protection at a time when tackling violence against women and girls is finally getting the attention and resources it deserves in other government departments. HMPPS is trying to force generic job descriptions onto complex work areas in order to save money in much the same way as the NPS did at the time of E3. It did not work then, and it will not work now.

So, we will continue to campaign against these dangerous changes both within and outside HMPPS.

--oo00oo--

Excerpts from Napo's formal response to Parole changes

The following are excerpts from Napo’s formal initial response as a trade union, dated the 14th of July, to the information we were provided with at that time by HMPPS on the changes made by the Secretary of State for Justice to the parole process.

“It’s outrageous that this fundamental change was introduced without any meaningful consultation or notice in advance of the Statutory Instrument…

…It’s clear that no current practitioners or relevant stakeholders have been consulted in advance on what is in effect a dangerously inept political ‘power grab’. This demonstrates a complete failure to comprehend the severe consequences of the huge mistake being made by doing so…

…Our concern is that this is a decision which is wholly politically motivated, made in response to a tiny proportion of individual cases which have received significant national publicity. Unfortunately, experience tells us that this never makes for considered or effective decision making in the criminal justice system…

…In thousands of instances every year no recommendation of any sort will be made to the Parole Board, with experienced, trusted experts such as Probation staff being actively prohibited from doing so by the Secretary of State. This significantly increases the risk to the public, and will damage their confidence in the criminal justice system…

…So far there has been no consultation with the recognised experts in this area of practice – the staff currently writing these reports and attending Oral Hearings. In fact, the Secretary of State has – potentially deliberately – avoided any such process of engagement. How can the recognised trade unions and their members have any confidence that this guidance will be fit for purpose, especially given the mass of contradictions and flaws inherent in this plan and the extremely limited time available for its production?...”

We’ve taken the unusual step of including these excerpts in this communication following this week’s judgement of the High Court on cases related to the changes imposed by the Secretary of State for Justice in July 2022 – www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Bailey-and-Morris-judgment.pdf

To be in the position of having received such a damning indictment on their behaviour and judgement, has resulted in HMPPS carrying out the Minister’s stated aims in a manner that was described in the judgement as “unlawful” in multiple respects.

While we are aware of the possibility the Secretary of State may appeal this judgement – and given lack of any apparent judgement and sense of decency this remains entirely likely – it is difficult to see how they can recover from abject defeat in Court.

As detailed in previous communications over the months since these changes were announced Napo has consistently taken the fight to HMPPS on behalf of its members on this matter at every opportunity possible in the months since these changes were announced. We have made repeated representations about the dire effects that these changes would clearly cause, both for our members and the wider criminal justice system, then unceasingly brought these to the employer’s attention as often as we were able to after their implementation. In addition to this we have worked with others interested parties – such as in the Houses of Parliament, charitable organisations involved or the legal representatives of the individuals party to the Court case above – to attempt to overturn these changes at the earliest opportunity. In doing this we are grateful to the members who have shared their experiences and concerns with us to enable Napo to better represent all our members and to defend the importance of our professional judgement.

Napo believe this stands as the most recent example to be added to the increasingly long list of instances when HMPPS should have listened to its workers, and their trade union representatives, to avoid making disastrous decisions. Members can be assured we will cite this in the future in our contacts with HMPPS in relation to our reasoned, critical opposition to, for example, the proposed changes to programmes as well as ‘One HMPPS’.

A Good Thing

I'm going to stick my neck out here and state that some things in life fall clearly into a category that most informed people would be content to label 'a good thing'. Probation used to be one of them, but sadly no longer as it approaches full command and control of HMPPS next month. On the other hand 'Circles' clearly does and I notice they've just published a final report. Readers will recall that HMPPS disgracefully pulled the funding of this imaginative and innovative way of working in 2018. (Charts and diagrams omitted here).      

Celebrating the Completing the Circle Project: widening access to Circles for people convicted of sexual offences 

Circles UK recently hosted an on-line seminar to celebrate the successes of the ‘Completing the Circle’ project and the lessons arising from it. The ‘Completing the Circle’ project was an ambitious four-year programme which sought to end the ‘postcode lottery’ of access to the community safety and rehabilitative benefits of Circles. 

What are Circles (‘Circles of Support and Accountability’)? 

Circles UK’s vision is of ‘no more victims’. Its mission is to enhance public safety by working with individuals who have sexually abused others, and are at risk of doing so again, to self-manage inappropriate thoughts and behaviours, reintegrate safely into society, and lead responsible lives. 

The Circles model (also known as Circles of Support and Accountability) is a complementary approach which harnesses the strengths and resources of local people to augment the statutory risk management of sexual harm causers in the community. In the Circles model the abuser becomes the ‘Core Member’ of an ‘inner Circle’ made up of 4-6 professionally trained and supervised Volunteers. The Circle seeks to prevent further sexual abuse by reducing stigma and social isolation; factors known to be strongly associated with sexual recidivism. The Circle focuses on a person’s ‘positives’ and ‘strengths’ and seeks to support him/her to access safe social outlets and opportunities, avoid dangerous and enabling situations and behaviours and manage day to day challenges. In so doing the Circle serves to reduce the risk of reoffending associated with alienation and the attendant risk of harm to existing and potential victims. 

Circles UK was established in 2008 to set up and oversee organisations to deliver Circles in England and Wales. Organisations which run Circles must become members of Circles UK and operate within the requirements of a Code of Practice. These Circles ‘Providers’, as they are known, are also subject to biennial audits by Circles UK to ensure that quality and safety standards are maintained. There are currently nine Circles Providers working across England and Wales. 

Since 2008 over 900 Circles have run successfully with a known reoffending rate of less than 7%. 

What was the Completing the Circle Project? 

In 2015, the National Lottery Community Fund awarded over £2million to a consortium of Circle Providers, led by Circles UK. This consortium was given just 4 years to set up and run 188 new Circles in parts of England and Wales where they had not existed before. As the intention of the project was to ensure that communities in every part of the country would have access to Circles, the project was called ‘Completing the Circle, or ‘CtC’ for short. Circles delivery was expanded to five previously un-served parts of the country - Merseyside, Lancashire, Lincolnshire, Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire, Northamptonshire, and London.

What were the main successes?

• All 188 Circles were established and completed in the parts of the country where no such service has been available before.

• 778 Volunteers were recruited, trained, and closely supervised to provide the 188 new Circles.

• In addition to many hours of mandatory core training, 291 Volunteers received additional supplemental training.

• 103 Volunteers were supported to achieve National Open College Network accredited certification.

• These Volunteers gave 35,976 hours of their time to help reduce sexual harm within their communities and roughly the same amount of time travelling to and from Circle meetings and activities.

• The goal of helping sexual harm causers (Core Members in a Circle) to safely reintegrate into their communities was achieved. An independent evaluation showed that dynamic risk factors reduced and ‘protective’ factors across a range of variables, including employment, purposeful activities and hobbies, stable emotional relationships, and emotional wellbeing, improved.

Areas in England and Wales where Circles were successfully established due to the Completing the Circle project:

Lancashire 13 Circles

Notts/Derby 24 Circles

Merseyside 25 Circles

Lincolnshire 13 Circles

Northants 19 Circles

London 94 Circles

Volunteer hours 35,976

How were these results achieved – a case study 

To illustrate some of the issues that had to be overcome to make the project such a success, the London roll out will be used as a case study. London was the largest of the geographical areas involved in the project. There are more registered sex offenders (RSOs) living in the capital city than in any other area of England and Wales, with recent Ministry of Justice (MoJ) figures reporting 6,581 Registered Sex Offenders being managed under Multi Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA). Even though the benefits of adding Circles to the existing range of public protection measures in London were self-evident from the start and the project was welcomed by statutory and other-sector partners, establishing 94 new Circles from scratch without pre-existing infrastructures, partnership relationships or a volunteer recruitment strategy in place presented significant challenges. 

What were the main challenges and how were they overcome?

Establishing effective multi-agency collaboration and information sharing protocols across the entire London area was a complex task requiring the Circle Provider in London to engage with multiple agencies and service providers within each of the London boroughs. It was achieved through the creation of a multi-agency steering group which developed and agreed protocols and agreed a Memorandum of Understanding. This took time to negotiate but was eventually signed off by all the key partners.

Once the project was operational, attention turned to promotion and referrals. Partnership agencies wanted delivery to be rolled out ‘clockwise’ beginning in the south west boroughs, so Circle Coordinators attended regional Senior Management Board and Cluster Management Meetings and delivered presentations at individual Offender Management Units throughout this area. Referral enquiries were slow to materialise, however, and to keep the project on target the roll out strategy had to be re-negotiated, with the outcome that agreement was secured to allow referrals to come in city-wide.

Understandably, some of the Volunteers who had already been recruited and trained to work in the south west of London chose not to continue at this point. In response, a pan-London recruitment initiative was developed, urgently targeting universities, volunteer bureaus, retirement, and religious/belief groups etc. across all boroughs to find citizens willing and able to volunteer in the areas where referrals existed.

This solution, though productive, threw up a new set of demands. Matching Service Users, Volunteers and restricted staff resources across a larger area was exacting. Multiple Volunteer training events had to be organised and the travel and time demands upon both Volunteers and Coordinators grew. Staff workloads, which had originally been calculated based on a restricted geographical patch, also increased. Indeed, the decision to promote the project and recruit Volunteers from across the entire London area, though constructive, stretched the staff group significantly. Hard work and tenacity on their part carried things through. In addition, where funding allowed, extra staff were recruited.

As the project moved on it became evident that a high proportion of referrals were for individuals resettled in London from other areas of the country. Many of these people were unfamiliar with local services. Often, they struggled to meet expensive travel costs as well. Similar issues emerged for some of the London based students who chose to volunteer. Higher than anticipated levels of staff turnover among the referring agencies also occurred, which was found to impact on communication and pace. To address these issues a lot of additional time was given over to supporting and enabling participation and engagement. It was also spent nurturing and maintaining relationships with partnership colleagues.

A concerted recruitment drive and tenacious programme of awareness raising took place alongside these efforts. Circle Coordinators visited individual Probation offices, attended MOSOVO meetings and spoke at partnership meetings. They ran stalls at Volunteer recruitment fairs, gave presentations at universities and set up a scheme to encourage established Volunteers to recruit their friends. As a result of these efforts, by early 2018 target ‘catch up’ had largely been achieved and the project was on course to complete in full and on time.

Then, in March 2018, her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) announced that all probation funding for Circles would end in September 2018. This decision was unexpected. In the preceding 15 months Circles UK had engaged in detailed discussions with HMPPS officials to introduce a nationally commissioned contract, a process which built upon a longstanding relationship between the Circles network and the Ministry of Justice/Probation Service. Even though funding for the London Circles came from the National Lottery Fund (and required no direct funding from probation or other statutory agencies), confusion and uncertainty resulted among Probation senior managers and staff. The result was that many referrals were withdrawn or suspended on the mistaken premise that all Circles delivery had ceased with immediate effect. Crisis discussions were entered at the highest level with the Ministry of Justice and senior probation officials. As a result, referrals for Circles in London were reinstated and the project was able to continue. Significant delays had, however, been caused.

Despite the challenges faced, by October 2019 the goal of establishing 94 Circles in London had been achieved. Multi Agency relationships have remained robust ever since. The pay-off delivered by the project in London is such that the National Probation Service has since provided ongoing funding. Financial support has also been given by the City Bridge Trust. That the people of London still benefit from the improvements in public protection afforded by Circles is testament to the creative ‘can-do’ attitude of Circle Volunteers and staff. Their example is repeated across the country.

Results by Borough

Circles were provided in 30 of the 32 boroughs – an outstanding achievement for a small staff team, particularly given the challenges and setbacks they encountered.

Conclusion 

This article/blog has outlined the successes, challenges and learning of the operational delivery of the Completing the Circle project. It does not include the results of an independent evaluation of the project. This can be found in a separate article/blog which can be accessed here. 

Circles UK would like to express its sincere appreciation to the National Lottery for funding the project, the Sexual Offences, Crime and Misconduct Research Unit (SOCMRU), Nottingham Trent University and the Circles Providers who participated as delivery partners. These were: 

• Circles South East https://circlessoutheast.org.uk/ 

• The Safer Living Foundation https://www.saferlivingfoundation.org/ 

• Change, Grow, Live https://www.changegrowlive.org/ 

• re;shape (no longer operational) 

• CROPT (no longer operational)

MoJ Proved Wrong

We've covered the astonishing decision by the MoJ to defund Circles of Support and Accountability before and this evaluation report serves to confirm just how bad decision-making is at Marsham Street:-

An Evaluation of the ‘Completing the Circle’ Project 

On 25th November 2020 Circles UK hosted a seminar to launch the results of an in-depth, independent evaluation study undertaken by a research team at the Sexual Offences, Crime and Misconduct Research Unit (SOCMRU), Nottingham Trent University. The evaluation study captured the findings of a four-year project entitled ‘Completing the Circle: A Community Approach to Reducing Sexual Abuse.’ Over 100 participants attended the event, representing agencies and organisations from countries as far afield as Sweden, Canada, and New Zealand. 

What was the Completing the Circle Project? 

Loneliness, isolation, and alienation are known high risk factors for sexual recidivism. Circles are a unique programme for reducing these risks. Circles work with high-risk sexual harm causers to augment stretched statutory provision for this group of offenders and so help prevent further sexual abuse. 

In a Circle, 4-6 local Volunteers work with an individual who has been assessed as a high risk. The ‘Circle’ meets for at least 12 months. The person who has committed a sexual offence/s – known as the Core Member – is supported by the Volunteers to reintegrate safely into the community. The Volunteers also hold him/her/they accountable for their past and future behaviours. 

In 2015 the National Lottery Community Fund awarded a grant of £2,040,394 to a consortium of Circle Providers brought together and led by Circles UK. The Consortium was tasked to establish delivery in parts of the country where Circles did not exist. These areas were Merseyside, London, Lincolnshire, Lancashire, Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire, and Northamptonshire. 

Outcomes 

Results were impressive. In just over four years, Circles Providers were set up in all previously ‘un-served’ areas, 188 Circles were delivered and almost 800 Volunteers were recruited, trained, and supervised. Together these Volunteers spent nearly 40,000 hours engaged in Circle activities. Qualitative results, drawing from a thematic analysis of reports compiled at the end of each Circle, along with interviews with a sample of key participants, produced evidence which markedly illustrated the complexities surrounding the Core Member client group, the individualised and distinctly ‘person centred’ character of the Circles model and the skill and tenacity demonstrated by Volunteers.

A number of statistically significant findings were also identified: 

• Risk Reduced 

The risk of sexual reoffending presented by Core Members declined. Shifts in dynamic risk factors were measured using an established tool called the Dynamic Risk Review (DRR). Analysis revealed that the risk associated with ‘dynamic’, changeable variables reduced after three months involvement with a Circle, with further dynamic risk reductions over time. Impressively, Core Members in the study demonstrated an 18% reduction in dynamic risk scores over the course of their Circle.

These incremental reductions in dynamic risk over time reinforce a long-established understanding that effecting change among the serious sexual harm causers targeted by Circles requires time, commitment, and persistence. There is no ‘short fix’ when it comes to supporting Core Members to alter damaging and often deeply entrenched behaviours. However, relationships developed over a prolonged period have a demonstrable and positive effect. 

• Reintegration Improved 

Protective factors known to inhibit the risk of sexual recidivism also showed significant improvement across a range of variables, including accommodation, the number of stable, emotional relationships, employment and purposeful activities and hobbies. 

After only 3 months on a Circle: 

• 96% of Core Members were in stable and suitable accommodation; this increased to 100% at 9 months. 

• 26% of Core Members were in paid or voluntary employment; this increased to 42% at 9 months.

• Wellbeing Increased 

Emotional wellbeing is an important protective factor which research has shown contributes to desistance from sexual offending. The study results demonstrated that Circles significantly improve the emotional wellbeing of Core Members. At the start of their Circle, each Core Member had significantly poorer emotional wellbeing than the average person. Their emotional wellbeing improved significantly, however, throughout the duration of their Circle. The data demonstrate an 18% increase in wellbeing scores, with 67% of the Core Members demonstrating significant improvements in wellbeing by the time their Circle came to an end.

The Wider Benefits 

There was also a pay-off for local citizens and communities. As well as the improved community safety afforded by Circles, the evaluation highlighted the reciprocal nature of volunteering in a Circle. Findings taken from comparisons of pre- and post-training questionnaires revealed that the training delivered to Circles Volunteers was informative and impactful. Furthermore, over time, the confidence levels of Volunteers increased, and they acquired transferable skills which sometimes improved their employability, as this quote demonstrates.

Conclusion 

‘Completing the Circle’ was an ambitious four-year project which set out to end the ‘postcode lottery’ of access to Circles. It achieved this objective and generated fresh evidence of the far-reaching community safety and rehabilitative benefits of Circles. 

Circles UK wishes to express its sincere appreciation to the National Lottery for funding the project and the research team at the Sexual Offences, Crime and Misconduct Research Unit (SOCMRU), Nottingham Trent University. We also wish to pay tribute to the Circles Providers that participated as delivery partners and whose commitment and expertise were instrumental to the project’s success. These were: 

Circles South East https://circlessoutheast.org.uk/
The Safer Living Foundation https://www.saferlivingfoundation.org/
Change, Grow, Live https://www.changegrowlive.org/
Re:shape (organisation has ceased operation)
CROPT (organisation has ceased operation)

Leah Warwick
National Development Manager Circles UK

30th March 2021