|
1
|
We welcome the decision to unify the Probation Service
once more. We warn, however, that, after the disruption
of the past seven years, changes proposed and begun to
the probation system must be fully thought through,
properly funded and expected to remain in place for a
period of decades rather than months or a few years. We
seek an assurance from the Ministry of Justice that the
new reforms will do so. (Paragraph 33)
|
Agreed
|
The government welcomes the Committee’s support for a
unified probation service. In designing the new unified
model, we have sought to learn lessons from Transforming
Rehabilitation and have drawn on the insight from reports
by the Committee and other scrutiny bodies. In
particular, we have been mindful of the Committee’s
previous conclusions on the current model, for example on
third sector involvement, the quality of services such as
Through the Gate, how offenders’ risk is managed, and on
funding and payment mechanisms.
The ambitions set out in the Target Operating Model are
long-term and will take a number of years to realise. The
structural changes that come into effect on 26 June 2021
are the starting point for reforms. We recognise that
structural stability from that point onwards is necessary
to give probation leaders and staff a strong foundation
to build on and implement the new Operating Model. We
believe the new structures provide the right balance
between local, regional and national to give flexibility
to respond to future challenges and have no current plans
to change them further.
We also recognise the need for long-term investment in
probation to bring caseloads down, improve the quality of
frontline services, and transform key supporting
infrastructure such as estates, IT equipment and digital
services. HM Treasury has agreed an extra £155m of
resource and £75m of capital to invest in the reforms in
2021/22. We have worked closely with HM Treasury on the
business case for the reforms and will continue to do so
as part of the upcoming 2021 Spending Review.
|
|
2
|
We recommend that the Lord Chancellor and Secretary of
State for Justice make it clear whether his cancellation
of the Probation Delivery Partner programme was a
pragmatic decision as a result of the additional
pressures raised by the covid-19 outbreak or a decision
on principle to bring unpaid work and behavioural change
programmes back within a unified national probation
service for the long term. In particular, we invite him
to confirm whether the Ministry plans to reconsider or
revive a Probation Delivery Partner programme once the
covid-19 pandemic has been contained. (Paragraph 35)
|
Agreed
|
The decision to cancel the Probation Delivery Partner
procurement was taken as a result of reviewing the
impacts of the pandemic on our ability to deliver a
smooth and successful transition. We are now implementing
that strategic decision and have no current plans to
reconsider the outsourcing of the delivery of Unpaid Work
and Accredited Programmes.
We are in the final stages of transferring a large number
of CRC staff delivering these interventions into the
Civil Service and want to ensure that this group of staff
have clarity about their employer and terms and
conditions for the future. We are confident that the
Target Operating Model we are implementing is the right
way to deliver probation services in the longer-term.
|
|
3
|
We recommend that the Ministry review its decision to
seek partners while the new model was still being
developed and to report to us on whether future
procurement processes will prevent the cancellation of
proposed new contacts at such a late stage in a process
and after potential bidders have put considerable time
and effort into nugatory bids. (Paragraph 36)
|
Partly Agreed
|
This recommendation has been partly agreed as the
decision to discontinue to Probation Delivery Partner
competitions was taken following a review process.
We never enter into a procurement with the intention of
cancelling it; unfortunately, changes in circumstances
sometimes require a change of approach, and all
organisations participating in a procurement recognise
this risk. This was the case with the cancellation of the
Probation Delivery Partner competition, as a result of
reviewing the impacts of the pandemic on our ability to
deliver a smooth and successful transition. We made that
decision as promptly as we could and paused the
competition as soon as it was under review to avoid
further investment of resources by bidders.
|
|
3—continued
|
|
|
We made clear in the procurement documentation, as well
as during market engagement, that costs associated with
participating in any stages of the procurement process
would solely be borne by the bidders. This is standard
practice in procurements except in some rare
circumstances.
|
|
4
|
We recommend that the Ministry of Justice sets out how it
will assess whether the new probation delivery model
improves sentencer confidence, what criteria will be used
to make that judgment, and what research will be
undertaken, and data gathered. (Paragraph 44)
|
Agreed
|
We have developed a comprehensive evaluation strategy for
the new probation delivery model, and sentencer
confidence will be one of the measures we assess the
reforms against. We have developed an annual judicial
survey and administered it alongside extensive publicity
between March and April 2021 as the basis for a new
performance measure. A score on judicial satisfaction
will be generated from a number of questions (helpfulness
of sentencing advice, satisfaction with quality of breach
reports, information about probation delivery, and
satisfaction with the service provided by local Probation
Service), for which a baseline will be derived from the
2021 survey. Targets have been set for the number of
responses received to produce statistically valid results
both nationally and regionally.
The survey supports local and national judicial liaison
arrangements enabling the targeting of activities based
on judicial feedback. All regional and local judicial
engagement activity is now tracked locally and monitored
by the probation service’s Central Court Team, and this
is reported back to the HMPPS Judicial Forum and Regional
Probation Directors.
|
|
5
|
We recommend that the MOJ sets out what other action is
being taken to improve judicial and public confidence in
sentencing, particularly for the delivery of community
sentencing.
|
Agreed
|
In the white paper ‘A
Smarter Approach to Sentencing’ we have set out our
plans to improve public protection while also tackling
the cycle of reoffending.
To achieve those goals, the changes to legislation and
use of new technology set out in the White Paper need to
sit alongside improvements in operational delivery. The
key community reforms proposed in the White Paper
include:
- Strengthening use of
pre-sentence reports
- Piloting problem-solving
courts
- Extending the scope for
electronic monitoring
- Expanding use of community
sentence treatment requirements
Court work:We
are supporting improvements in the quality of PSRs
through a range of measures. The Effective Proposal
Framework (EPF) digital tool supports probation staff to
present sentence proposals consistently in line with
policy informed by evidence and sentencing guidelines.
Using the EPF tool, the assessing officer can offer the
court the most effective intervention(s) to protect the
public, to rehabilitate and to punish the person subject
to court proceedings. The proposal will be proportionate
to the seriousness of the offence and based on individual
risk and needs identified in the assessment. Where there
are particular circumstances in a case that have not been
factored into the tool, the assessing officer can apply a
professional override and choose proposal options that
are more suited.
|
|
5—continued
|
|
|
Moreover, we are rolling out a new Prepare a Case for
Sentence tool to support the early identification of
individuals who would benefit from a PSR.
We are also piloting an alternative delivery model for
PSRs in 15 pilot magistrate courts. The pilot is testing
the hypothesis that the increased delivery of quality and
timely PSRs to assist sentencing determinations for
certain offenders in magistrates’ courts will improve
offender outcomes, sentencers’ confidence and the
administration efficiency in justice. The alternative
delivery model includes i) the pre plea protocol,
intended to increase the effectiveness of the first
hearing by having all information available to assist
with sentencing; ii) maximising the capability of
probation to deliver higher quality reports on the day,
and iii) encouraging the delivery of short format written
reports for individuals recognised as commonly presenting
with higher needs, namely females, young adults and those
at risk of custody. The pilot will be evaluated and
inform the roll out of these practices across all courts
in England and Wales and our long-term ambition for
probation’s role at court is to increase the proportion
of cases sentenced with a pre-sentence report (PSR) to 75
per cent.
All of the above delivery changes will be underpinned by
comprehensive engagement with sentencers and other
partners. Sentencers will be provided with continual
evidence relating to interventions, their effectiveness
and the outcomes of sentence management, and clear
information on local availability of interventions
delivered by the Probation Service and through
Commissioned Rehabilitation Services.
|
|
5—continued
|
|
|
Community Sentence
Treatment Requirements:This year, local
authorities have received an £80m boost to funding for
drug treatment for offenders, including those on drug
rehabilitation requirements (DRRs) and alcohol treatment
requirements (ATRs), and we are working with local
Directors of Public Health to make sure pathways are in
place so that we can increase the numbers of DRRs and
ATRs handed down by the courts. We are also working with
NHS England to expand the use of mental health treatment
requirements (IMHTRs) to 50% of the country by 2023. We
will be encouraging the use of combined orders across
DRRs, ATRs and MHTRs where offenders have multiple needs
to provide a more cost-effective therapeutic alternative
to short prison sentences.
Problem Solving
Courts:The aim of the Problem Solving Courts
(PSC) approach is to provide an intense but alternative
sentence to custody through treatment interventions and
links to wider support services, with judicial oversight
through regular court reviews, more intense probation
supervision, and a system of incentives and sanctions to
encourage compliance.
We intend to pilot PSCs in up to five courts for
offenders with complex needs, substance misuse issues,
female offenders and domestic abuse perpetrators. One of
the avenues for this to be achieved, includes a
multi-agency approach with links to wider support
services.
The PSC measures will provide a range of tools to tailor
a sentence to an offender and to support them to complete
their sentence and any community requirements attached to
it.
|
|
5—continued
|
|
|
Electronic
Monitoring:In March we completed the roll out of
Alcohol Monitoring Tags and now all courts in England and
Wales are able to impose the Alcohol Abstinence and
Monitoring Requirement. The England launch follows the
successful introduction to courts in Wales last October
and, as in Wales, we are already seeing judges and
magistrates use this new requirement to help tackle
alcohol-related offending.
The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill will
deliver on our White Paper commitment to make community
sentences more robust and responsive by legislating to
increase the length and flexibility of a curfew.
|
|
6
|
We recommend that the MOJ sets out what criteria it uses
to measure the effectiveness of community sentencing,
including the effect on reoffending. (Paragraph 46)
|
Agreed
|
The existing evidence base on community sentences
demonstrates they can be effective in reducing
reoffending. For example, the Ministry of Justice
published research in 2019 which showed that sentencing
offenders to community sentences rather than short-term
custody was associated with lower proven reoffending
(The impact of short
custodial sentences, community orders and suspended
sentence orders on reoffending).
We will continue to measure the effectiveness of
community sentences using a range of measures such as
completion rates, as well as accommodation and employment
outcomes. Proven reoffending statistics broken down by
sentence type will also continue to be published, where
for the unified probation model we can expect the first
cohorts of data to be available in 2023 given the
necessary time lag required to measure reoffending
reliably.
|
|
6—continued
|
|
|
Further research is also planned on community sentence
options including community sentence treatment
requirements and electronic monitoring.
|
|
7
|
We recommend that the Ministry of Justice set out how
they intend to increase NPS capacity to prepare
pre-sentence reports. The MOJ should also set out what
work is being done besides this to improve the quality of
pre-sentence reports, ensuring that those completing them
understand and convey to sentencers what the needs of the
offender are, and what is available in the local
community where a community sentence may be appropriate.
(Paragraph 56)
|
Agreed
|
Our long-term ambition for probation’s role at court is
to increase the proportion of cases sentenced with a
pre-sentence report (PSR) to 75 per cent. The emphasis
will be on providing more detailed reports targeting
increases, in particular for women, people from ethnic
minority backgrounds and those at risk of a short
custodial sentence, to inform safe sentencing and support
long-term desistence.
To support this, we aim to increase in staff numbers for
probation court teams and consequently we have committed
to increasing our recruitment of trainee probation
officers. Historically we have recruited circa 600
trainees each year, but in 2020/21 we were successful in
on-boarding over 1,000 trainees and for this year
(2021/22) our target is to recruit 1,500.
We will also introduce improved digital systems to
support more effective and efficient assessments. Our aim
is that these will bring together actuarial and dynamic
risk assessments, previous conviction status and any
existing probation management of the individual,
simplifying the current setup which involves overlapping
assessments carried out with a range of digital
applications.
In the shorter-term, we are supporting improvements in
the quality of PSRs through a range of measures. The
Effective Proposal Framework (EPF) digital tool is in
|
|
7—continued
|
|
|
place and supports probation staff to present sentence
proposals consistently in line with policy informed by
evidence and sentencing guidelines. Using the EPF tool,
the assessing officer can offer the court the most
effective intervention(s) to protect the public, to
rehabilitate and to punish the person subject to court
proceedings. The proposal will be proportionate to the
seriousness of the offence and based on individual risk
and needs identified in the assessment. Where there are
particular circumstances in a case that have not been
factored into the tool, the assessing officer can apply a
professional override and choose proposal options that
are more suited. We are also rolling out a new Prepare a
Case for Sentence tool to support the early
identification of individuals who would benefit from a
PSR.
We are also piloting an alternative delivery model for
PSRs in 15 pilot magistrate courts. The pilot is testing
the hypothesis that the increased delivery of quality and
timely PSRs to assist sentencing determinations for
certain offenders in magistrates’ courts will improve
offender outcomes, sentencers’ confidence and the
administration efficiency in justice. The alternative
delivery model includes i) the pre plea protocol,
intended to increase the effectiveness of the first
hearing by having all information available to assist
with sentencing; ii) maximising the capability of
probation to deliver higher quality reports on the day,
and iii) encouraging the delivery of short format written
reports for individuals recognises as commonly presenting
with higher needs, namely females, young adults and those
at risk of custody. The pilot will be evaluated inform
the roll out of these practices across all courts in
England and Wales.
|
|
7—continued
|
|
|
All of the above delivery changes will be underpinned by
comprehensive engagement with sentencers and other
partners. Sentencers will be provided with continual
evidence relating to interventions, their effectiveness
and the outcomes of sentence management, and clear
information on local availability of interventions
delivered by the Probation Service and through
Commissioned Rehabilitation Services.
|
|
8
|
We welcome the analysis the Department is undertaking on
who is bidding under the Dynamic Framework and the issues
arising from the bidding process, and we recommend that
the Ministry of Justice publish this analysis, alongside
a plan of what measures will be taken to address any
issues identified. (Paragraph 74)
|
Agreed
|
We have had extensive engagement with Clinks throughout
design and development of the Dynamic Framework (DF) and
service specifications for Commissioned Rehabilitative
Services. We have shared information and plans to help
meaningful consultation with the voluntary sector. In its
role as a representative of the voluntary sector, Clinks
has shared views, input and challenges from its members,
which we have sought to address in design decisions where
possible.
We will publish the findings of the independent review
commissioned by Minister Frazer, as well as the actions
we are taking to continue to improve ease of access to
the bidding process under the Dynamic Framework (DF). We
will begin publication of data on suppliers and their
supply chains to aid collaboration within the market, as
well as statistics on SME/VCSE involvement in the DF. We
expect the findings of the independent review to be
published in June; we expect our first publication of
more detailed data on suppliers and their supply chains
to be in the procurement portal (which is open to any
party that requests access) by 21 May 2021. We will then
work on how we can ensure this is disseminated further
via the MoJ internet pages.
|
|
9
|
We welcome the work the Ministry is doing to feed into
the Cabinet Office review of procurement and recommend
that the MOJ update the Committee on the outcome of this
review. (Paragraph 75)
|
Agreed
|
The formal Consultation on the Green paper on
Transforming Public Procurement closed on 10 March. As a
part of that Consultation the MoJ engaged with Cabinet
Office to reflect on key lessons from major Programmes,
drawing particularly on the current Probation contracts
and the newly developed Dynamic Framework. Cabinet Office
are currently working through the outputs from the
Consultation.
|
|
10
|
The potential for contracts to be underfunded is of
significant concern to the Committee and we recommend
that the Ministry of Justice set out how they are
modelling projected volumes and contract values, and also
what is being done to ensure that contracts are
sufficiently resourced and deliverable according to the
funding that is available. (Paragraph 81)
|
Agreed
|
We have awarded fixed price contracts for rehabilitative
services commissioned through the Dynamic Framework, with
a volume cap (with volume bands applying only in larger
contracts) to mitigate financial risk to suppliers as a
result of volume movement.
The caseload volumes were calculated using historical
caseload data, estimating cases that meet the eligibility
criteria for services under the Framework, and then
projecting those volumes forward based on future caseload
forecasts, to give volumes for each year of the contract.
These projections also take account of the additional
increase in caseload estimated from increasing numbers of
police officers.
For the larger competitions, a volume band approach was
used with four different scenarios applied to the
projected caseload volumes described above. This resulted
in a high and low caseload estimate for each of the four
different scenarios or bands, each with an associated
contract value. These volume bands allow for a guaranteed
minimum income for suppliers if actual caseloads during
the contract are lower than our estimates and allow for
economies of scale where volumes are in line with or
greater than estimates.
|
|
10—continued
|
|
|
Contract values were calculated by taking the volume
estimates and multiplying by the unit costs of each
service under the Framework, taking account of intensity
(low, medium or high) for expected cases, and adjusting
for the available budget.
To ensure contracts are sufficiently resourced regional
contract management and commercial teams will have
responsibility for managing the performance of suppliers
against contractual obligations to deliver the specified
services. They will work closely with regional operations
teams to assess the actual volume of referrals against
estimates and implement actions to manage volume flow
accordingly.
|
|
11
|
We recommend that the Ministry of Justice publish a
commitment to ensure that procurement beyond Day 1 will
take place at a more local than regional level wherever
appropriate and where suitable services exist, to ensure
that the services procured meet specific local needs. We
also recommend that the Ministry of Justice also keep and
publish records of procurement at regional/local levels
and the volume of work awarded to smaller providers.
(Paragraph 86)
|
Agreed
|
The Dynamic Framework is designed to allow for
commissioning at local authority level where that is most
appropriate. Regional Probation Directors have
flexibility to develop commissioning plans that best meet
their needs.
Regionally aligned Commercial business partners will be
put in place and will be responsible for helping the
region define their requirements and advise on the
availability of local providers; they will also be
responsible for developing the market and enabling
increased participation in the DF and supporting local
co-commissioning where appropriate. We intend to publish
records of awarded contracts, including value, location
and supplier status (Voluntary, Community and Social
Enterprise [VCSE]/ Small-to-Medium Enterprise [SME]). All
110 contracts for Day 1 services have been awarded and
approximately two-thirds of contract value has been
awarded to VCSE organisations.
|
|
12
|
We invite the Ministry of Justice to set out what initial
provision will be offered on Day 1 to those who need
financial, benefits and debt services no longer
available, a need that may be exacerbated by the
conditions created by the covid pandemic. We recognise
that suitable services will be made available at a later
date, but we seek clear information on when that will be.
We recommend that the Ministry set out a post-Day 1
procurement timeline for services not in scope for Day 1.
(Paragraph 87)
|
Agreed
|
In the absence of a commissioned service at Day 1,
Probation Practitioners will support offenders to access
available statutory and other provision. Also, suppliers
of Personal Wellbeing services will offer additional
support, including the availability of mentors, to those
who need help to attend appointments and sustain
engagement with existing provision.
The holistic service for Women will include tailored
services for those with needs in relation to finances,
benefits and debt.
In relation to those serving custodial sentences, Through
the Gates (TTG) staff moving into the Probation Service
will continue to deliver Finance, Benefit and Debt
services, including opening of bank accounts with
associated activity to obtain ID and arranging to contact
creditors at start of a sentence. Guidance is being
developed to support access into other prison-based
services, such as the Prisoner bank account programme and
Department for Work & Pensions (DWP).
Commissioning decisions after Day 1 will be driven by
commissioning plans developed by Regional Probation
Directors, recognising they are best placed to decide
what they need to prioritise to meet particular local
needs. Commercial Business Partners have begun engagement
with Regional Probation Directors to identify local
needs, including in non-day 1 categories such as Finance,
Benefit and Debt; and pipelines will be shared as
commissioning plans are developed.
|
|
13
|
We recommend that the Ministry of Justice set out how
they intend the new [resettlement] model to be delivered
practically on a local level, and how the model will work
alongside those services commissioned through the Dynamic
Framework. The Ministry should detail how they will
ensure the “in-reach” (pre-release contact between the
probation offender manager and prisoner) aspect of the
new model works in practice, considering challenges often
faced in regard to security clearance, access to space
and the operational capacity for prisons to deliver.
(Paragraph 102)
|
Agreed
|
The resettlement approach in the unified model is based
upon the principle of the Community probation
practitioner responsible for managing people post release
from prison, becoming responsible for pre-release
activities. They will hold the single sentence plan
including all resettlement planning, ensuring risk
planning and victim issues are addressed within
preparation for release. This will include the following:
- An enhanced Offender
Management in Custody (OMiC) model for determinate
sentence prisoners, bringing more people in scope of
allocation to a Prison Offender Manager and moving the
current handover to a consistent 7½ months pre-release,
along with introducing 2 further pre-release meetings.
- Community probation
practitioners responsible for referrals to the
Commissioned Rehabilitation Services (CRS) providers and
maintaining contact as the service is delivered to ensure
co-ordination and sequencing with sentence management
activities.
- CRS providers based in the
communities where prisoners are released to, with the
majority of services delivered post release. This
supports CRS providers building relationships with local
services supporting transition into the community.
- Accommodation services
would start pre-release to sustain existing tenancies and
support obtaining accommodation for release. This
includes continuing support post-release to sustain
accommodation.
|
|
13—continued
|
|
|
- A mentoring service
starting pre-release to support people in prison with
little or no community-based support to build social
networks post release.
- Short Sentence function
will be established in all Probation Service Regions to
provide a responsive, multi-agency approach for all
people in prison serving short prison sentences. These
provide the opportunity to sustain existing community
services and refer promptly into new services where not
already in place.
- A Resettlement pack with
local information provided to all who leave prison,
including from Court and those unconvicted. Details of
local information, including out of hours contact
numbers, supports people released from prison access
local services to receive the support they require.
In order to ensure pre-release contacts with
community probation practitioners are taking place,
performance measures are being developed to provide
assurance. Action plans can be put in place. Work is
progressing to address the challenges posed by an
in-reach service where people in prison are held
considerable distance from home areas. This includes
working with Regional Probation Directors to build on
work to identify options to ensure contact takes
place at a frequency conducive to building positive
relationships pre-release. The increased use of
virtual contact during Covid restrictions enables
lessons learnt during restricted contact to be
incorporated into guidance for the Probation Service.
|
|
13—continued
|
|
|
As part of the evaluation strategy, we will be evaluating
resettlement interventions pre- and post- release and, in
fact, an evaluation of the Enhanced Through the Gate
Specification was published in October 2020, the findings
from which have already helped to shape the resettlement
model.
Due to the requirement for additional probation staff to
complete all pre-release activities and the levelled up
OMiC model, the Resettlement approach will be implemented
over a period of time. From 26 June:
|
|
14
|
We recommend that the Ministry of Justice set out the
status of roll-out of the OmiC model, including how many
prisons are implementing the model fully, partially and
not at all. Should the model not yet be fully
implemented, we invite the Ministry to provide a
timetable for its full roll-out. (Paragraph 103)
|
Agreed
|
The roll out of OmiC began in 2018 and has been delivered
across the prison estate through an incremental,
implementation approach:
- Phase 1—Key Work
implemented in the closed male estate at the beginning of
2018.
- Phase 2—Case Management
implemented in the closed male estate in October 2019.
Due to COVID–19 pandemic, implementation of OmiC in the
women’s estate and male open prisons was paused in March
2020.
- Phase 3—Changes to Case
Management introduced in all open male prisons at the end
of March 2021.
- Phase 4—A bespoke Offender
Management model introduced in the women’s estate at the
end of April 2021. It recognises the different challenges
and opportunities in the women’s estate, where self-harm
and the complex needs of some women are of significant
concern.
The OmiC model has been designed with two distinct but
interconnected elements: Key Work and Case Management:
- Key Work—The aim of Key
Work is to develop constructive staff-prisoner
relationships, foster positive behaviours, build prisoner
trust and confidence, hope and commitment to change. Key
Workers provide one-to-one sessions with prisoners,
supporting them to make appropriate choices and giving
them hope and responsibility for their own development.
|
|
14—continued
|
|
|
- Case Management—Relates to
offender management activities undertaken in both custody
and the community for people who are serving a custodial
sentence. The offender management provision an individual
will receive will be dependent on a number of factors
which include risk, need, time left to serve and sentence
type.
The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly reduced Key Work
and Case Management delivery within the prison estate and
the disruption to normal operating caused by restricted
regimes will inevitably impact upon the realisation of
OmiC benefits in the short-term. However, there are
recovery plans in place for OmiC delivery, with a
commitment to ensure that prisons are appropriately
resourced to deliver offender management tasks and that
it is aligned with the changes to be introduced by the
Unification of probation services in 2022.
Assurance of OmiC delivery will continue to be provided
via independent scrutiny bodies, the Operational and
System Assurance Group (OSAG) in HMPPS alongside the
development of performance and quality measures and
operationally by regional HMPPS Senior Leadership Forums.
|
|
15
|
We recommend that the MoJ confirm whether the pledged
1,000 additional probation officers will be in addition
to the 464 existing vacancies. (Paragraph 126)
|
Agreed
|
We have met our target to recruit 1,000 additional
trainee probation officer starters in 2020/2021. This is
a significant uplift on our recruitment of around 600
trainees in previous years. Trainee Probation Officers
take between 15 and 21 months to become fully qualified
and be able to fill Probation Officer vacancies. At 31
March 2021 there was a shortfall of 518 FTE Probation
Officers, but there were 1,186 FTE staff undertaking PQiP
training.
We are increasing our recruitment of trainee probation
officers even further to 1,500, the maximum we believe
the business can manage, in 2021/2022 to meet increased
demand as a result of the recruitment of 20,000 police
officers and backlogs in courts as a result of COVID-19.
In addition to the recruitment of new trainee probation
officers, we are putting in place measures to increase
retention of staff to manage current vacancies in
probation. We are making it more straight forward and
attractive for staff that leave the probation service to
re-join on permanent terms, whether they have taken on
temporary terms as agency workers or have had a career
break. We are also developing specific plans to increase
retention of experienced staff who are considering
retirement.
Agency workers in the NPS play an important role in
helping to meet staffing demands, particularly in areas
where there are challenges in recruiting staff on
substantive NPS contracts. We are undertaking an
assessment of our current use of agency workers across
Probation Services Officer, Probation Officer and Senior
Probation Officer grades within the NPS, to help
establish patterns of agency worker deployment and inform
decisions about future agency worker use.
|
|
16
|
We recommend that the MoJ commit to ensuring that
individual caseloads do not exceed a baseline figure of
50. We recognise caseload numbers may fluctuate below
this number, but they should not exceed it. The Ministry
should also set out what work is being done to reduce
caseloads, beyond the recruitment of additional probation
officers and what support is available to staff with high
caseloads, to ensure they are able to manage risk for all
offenders in their caseload adequately. (Paragraph 127)
|
Agreed
|
We agree that where cases require ongoing risk management
work as part of the delivery of the requirements, they
are subject to, a caseload of no more than 50 is
reasonable. For Probation Officers, the national average
number of cases per full time equivalent stood at 32.5 on
21 April 2021, with 2 per cent of Probation Officers with
caseloads in excess of 50.
There are cases, such as those where the only element is
Unpaid Work, where the requirements of case management
are limited, and the activity is more focussed on
engagement and enforcement to ensure attendance and
completion. For these cases a specific caseload is less
indicative of a volume of work. Currently some Probation
Service Officers in CRCs holding low risk standalone UPW
cases will have caseloads over 50. The case complexity is
therefore a key focus for our organisation to understand
in respect of resource with resource following risk and
need.
In May 2021, we implemented a new Unified Tiering Model
(UTM) into our current Workload Management Tool (WMT).
This provides management with oversight of the work
involved in cases resulting from case complexity, which
we suggest is more accurate than a fixed value. The UTM
is more generous in its provision for timings and
therefore caseloads managed at the correct level through
the WMT should reduce further.
The WMT is currently being redesigned with a new version
due to be deployed in December 2021. This will have
additional functionality to support the active management
of work in teams and increasing the management oversight
of work pressures.
|
|
17
|
We recommend that the MOJ and HMPPS set out a detailed
timeline for how it will recruit and deploy these [150]
ex-offenders. (Paragraph 128)
|
Agreed
|
External consultation has been critical to the
development of the Probation Reform Programme. This has
included capturing feedback from people supervised by
probation through all available sources, such as forums,
national surveys, and embedding a consultant with ‘lived
experience’ into the programme. We have also worked with
Revolving Doors to run a challenge process on the Target
Operating Model involving individuals from ethnic
minority backgrounds. Understanding and learning from the
experiences of those probation works with has been an
essential component of the overall design process, and it
is firmly believed that this will help to promote people
engagement with the new design model and support long
term desistence.
The Probation Workforce Programme workforce strategy
creates a commitment for the Probation Service to enhance
our recruitment approach to attract people with lived
experience of the criminal justice system.
A significant step towards this will be taken on 26 June
2021 when the formal unification of probation service
delivery is implemented and we expect to transfer in a
large number towards our target of 150 through former CRC
staff with lived experience transfer to permanent roles
as Civil Servants in the newly created Probation Service.
Extensive work has been undertaken to plan for the
vetting process that all transferring staff will need to
complete, to ensure that for this staff cohort any
barriers to them continuing their roles can be removed.
|
|
17—continued
|
|
|
As part of a separate initiative we are introducing the
Cabinet Office’s “Going Forward into Employment” (GFIE)
programme in Probation. The GFIE programme is open to
individuals within two years of finishing their sentence
and allows applicants to access a two-year contract in a
civil service role.
The trial cohort will test the application of this scheme
in the Probation Service and will aim to recruit to
between 20–30 vacancies by April 2022.
We are aware of the many benefits that those with lived
experience can bring to roles within the Probation
service. We also are cognisant of the unique issues that
may arise for applicants with lived experience working in
a Probation context. In order to ensure the best
experience possible for applicants we are working with
Regions to ensure candidates are supported and feedback
on the programme is captured. Findings and lessons
learned from this trial cohort will be used to inform
future strategies to increase the recruitment of those
with lived experience into the Probation Service.
A key aim of the GFIE scheme in Probation will be to
encourage the retention and progression of those with
lived experience within the service. We will therefore be
providing support for participants to apply for permanent
positions following the scheme.
|
|
18
|
We recommend that the Ministry publish a detailed
timetable setting out milestones towards transition, and
we seek a monthly update on the progress made against
those targets. (Paragraph 142)
|
Agreed
|
We agree to sharing regular progress updates with the
committee, starting with a set of Day 1 metrics which
give a snapshot of what the Programme has delivered to
date and what work for transition remains outstanding,
against which we will update on remaining issues after
transition. Once the unified model for probation service
delivery has been implemented on 26 June 2021, we are
committed to ensuring the committee is kept up to date on
longer-term progress towards realising the end-state
benefits of the planned reforms.
Progress to
date:significant progress made towards
implementing the first phase of Probation Reform. We have
successfully restructured into 12 probation regions
across England and Wales and laid the people, estates,
competition and ICT foundations for transition in June.
This puts us on track to transfer staff, assets and
services to either the unified Probation Service or a new
provider of Commissioned Rehabilitation Services. We have
published our Target Operating Model and National
Standards to set the future vision and have achieved HMT
sign-off on our Final Business Case (a £155m pa uplift in
core funding).
All 110 Commissioned Rehabilitative Services contracts
for Day 1 services have been awarded, over 7,000 staff
provided with devices and had data and email migrated and
transferred the legal title to 97 properties.
|
|
18—continued
|
|
|
In April the Programme underwent an IPA Gateway 4 Review,
the review team scored the Programme at Amber whilst
noting that ‘exceptional’ progress has been made since
the previous review in October last year. Our recent
Three-Month and One-Month Readiness Testing found no
major blockers to Day 1 readiness.
The Programme continues to make strong progress towards
Day 1 readiness on 26 June. Data migration and onboarding
to MoJ technology and systems remains on track, we have
now provided devices and migrated over 7,000 users’
emails and their data. All 110 Commissioned
Rehabilitative Services contracts have been awarded and
signed across all competitions (ETE, Accommodation,
Personal Wellbeing and Women’s Services) and mobilisation
remains the key focus; approximately two-thirds of
contract value has been awarded to VCSE organisations.
The list of individual staff who will transfer has been
finalised. The People team are continuing to answer
queries and review appeals.
|
|
19
|
We recommend that the MOJ clarify to relevant voluntary
sector supply chain partners their position in relation
to TUPE, including what staff members are eligible and
what contract they fall into. (Paragraph 144)
|
Agreed
|
MOJ has used data provided by the incumbent CRC and
supply chain partners to clarify who is in-scope to
transfer under each competition area (Region or PCC)
under each service category of the Commissioned
Rehabilitation Services (CRS), as part of the bidding
process.
As part of our support to mobilising the Dynamic
Framework (DF) contracts and in line with TUPE
regulations, we continue to encourage the current
employer (CRC & Supply Chain), to consult and engage
with the new supplier of Day 1 services (either DF or
co-commissioned) as soon as possible, in order to provide
them with key people data and staffing numbers as part of
their due diligence process to identify those in scope to
transfer to the future employer.
We remain committed to providing assurance that the
required staff transfer activity between the incumbent
CRC and supply chain partners is completed in timely
manner in order to ensure the provision of Day 1
services.
|
