Thursday 9 January 2014

Trouble With Prisons 2

It's quite ironic that since the Prison Service was allowed to effectively take over the Probation Service under the guise of NOMS, it's the former that have all the problems, rather than the award-winning latter. How is it then that it's the Probation Service that's getting punished and shafted under the TR omnishambles, when many would say the major problem lies behind the prison gates?

This issue has been getting quite an airing on here since we learnt more about the plans NOMS has for killing off 'end-to-end offender management' and effectively taking over control of seconded probation staff in prisons. The truth is that the Prison Service is in crisis, largely of Chris Grayling's making, and the results of which are going to rebound on him quite soon.

We know criticism is coming from a number of sources, such as the National Audit Office as discussed yesterday, and today I notice Russell Webster highlights the findings of the joint inspection by probation and prison inspectors published last month. I'm pretty sure it got a passing mention on here, but it's definitely worth reminding ourselves of the damning conclusions that were drawn, especially in relation to offender management:-

"This is our third report about the quality of offender management of prisoners based on the findings from our joint Prison Offender Management Inspection programme in 21 establishments during 2012 and 2013. 

Offender management is the term used to denote the assessment, planning and 
implementation of work with offenders in the community or in custody to address the 
likelihood of them reoffending and the risk of harm they pose to the public. Community based offender managers and staff in prison Offender Management Units have responsibility for undertaking or coordinating work with prisoners to address the attitudes, behaviour and lifestyle that contributed to their offending.

In our report in 2012 we found a wide variation in the role, importance and effectiveness of 
Offender Management Units in different establishments; we also found that although many prisons paid good attention to the ‘resettlement’ needs of prisoners (i.e. their personal and social circumstances) they did not pay sufficient attention to the ‘offender management’ functions, namely the rehabilitation of the prisoner and protection of the public. Our report, therefore, contained a number of recommendations designed to support the work then happening in prison establishments to make the Offender Management Unit the centre of activities to manage the sentence. 

We were, therefore, disappointed to find on compiling this report that in practice little progress has been made to implement the recommendations from our last aggregate report and that outcomes for prisoners, both in terms of resettlement and rehabilitation, are no better than one year ago. This lack of progress is of particular concern as it casts doubt about the Prison Service’s capacity to implement the changes required under the Transforming Rehabilitation Strategy designed to reduce reoffending rates, especially for short-term prisoners.

This report shows that organisational changes to offender management arrangements have failed to address the culture of poor communication or mistrust between prison departments that undermines the potential of offender management. Successful offender management requires good communication and cooperation and a holistic approach to work with prisoners. The inability of custodial establishments to adopt this approach is nowhere more apparent than in their failure to use one central electronic case record. 

While there have been some modest improvements in practice these are inconsistent. Prisoner officer offender supervisors continue to lack guidance and supervision about what their role should entail, which has an impact on their capacity to improve. Community based offender managers still have insufficient involvement overall to be able to drive sentence planning and implementation.

In addition, there are too few structured programmes available within prisons designed to challenge offending behaviour and promote rehabilitation. Some prisons offered a reasonable range of accredited and non-accredited programmes for their population; others offered no programmes at or were in the process of running down their provision. The lack of programmes was not sufficiently compensated for by prisoners being transferred to prisons where such programmes could be accessed. Provision for offender management was particularly poor at two of the prisons accommodating foreign national prisoners. 

We have come to the reluctant conclusion that the Offender Management Model, however laudable its aspirations, is not working in prisons. The majority of prison staff do not understand it and the community based offender managers, who largely do, have neither the involvement in the process nor the internal knowledge of the institutions, to make it work. It is more complex than many prisoners need and more costly to run than most prisons can afford. Given the Prison Service’s present capacity and the pressures now facing it with the implementation of Transforming Rehabilitation and an extension of ‘Through the Gate’ services, we doubt whether it can deliver future National Offender Management Service expectations. We therefore believe that the current position is no longer sustainable and should be subject to fundamental review and that this work should be taken forward as part of the strategy of implementing Transforming Rehabilitation.

In the meantime, our report contains some recommendations which, if implemented, would serve to ameliorate the situation until more far-reaching changes can be made."

LIZ CALDERBANK NICK HARDWICK

HM Chief Inspector of Probation HM Chief Inspector of Prisons 

December 2013 

This report is utterly damning, and in particular casts serious doubts on whether the TR aspirations for the 71 'resettlement' prisons can work:-

"We have come to the reluctant conclusion that the Offender Management Model, however laudable its aspirations, is not working in prisons. The majority of prison staff do not understand it and the community based offender managers, who largely do, have neither the involvement in the process nor the internal knowledge of the institutions, to make it work. It is more complex than many prisoners need and more costly to run than most prisons can afford. Given the Prison Service’s present capacity and the pressures now facing it with the implementation of Transforming Rehabilitation and an extension of ‘Through the Gate’ services, we doubt whether it can deliver future National Offender Management Service expectations." 

I really do hope that potential bidders for probation work read all this stuff so that they can get a flavour of the chaos that lies behind the polished and reassuring words that regularly emanate from MoJ HQ. We now know that NOMS have decided to ditch the whole OM idea as unworkable and instead make the seconded probation staff responsible for 'driving a case', thus ensuring a change of officer every time a prisoner moves prison and therefore no continuity of involvement.

I thought I'd sign this post off with this comment from yesterday:-

Much of the problems in our prison system lays not with ideology but with idiotology.
There are big budget cuts that have an impact on the daily running of prisons. Private prisons operate on a much reduced staff to inmate ratio to produce profit. The funding for tornado squads and tactical response has almost been halved this year. Its all in the drive to save money.

Yet at the same time Grayling has decided to impose austerity for austerity sake on prisoners. Harder to earn privileges. Not allowed to watch tv in your cell during the working day even if you happen to be locked up for 23 hours and no work can be found for you to do. No parcels from family. Not allowed to wear your own clothing, and maybe even a total ban on smoking.

All these things add up to creating a far more disgruntled and discontent population to manage. With staffing cuts and reduced facilities management of prisoners must become more difficult and problematic, with a far greater risk of disturbances. And whats really achieved?

Take not being allowed to wear your own clothes for example. It might make a good headline in the press, but it goes against the main objective of saving money. All prisoners wearing prison uniforms creates a greater demand for uniforms (isn't that adding a cost?). More uniforms needed more washing needed, more cleaning agents to wash them required. More transport if facilities for washing are not available on site, and more cost to replace worn out and damaged uniforms.

I would argue that the private sector is effected more by this than the public as their wages are paid from the amount of pennies they can squeeze out from any area of running costs.

So the problems we see within the prison system aren't just because of cutbacks. They're also being caused by ill thought through ideas, excessive haste, and lack of understanding and headline grabbing. Idiotology.



Stop Press - Outgoing HMI Liz Calderbank writing in today's Guardian here:-

"The new arrangements for the management of those serving sentences of under 12 months' duration, with any non-compliance during the year-long period of supervision ultimately punishable by further short period of imprisonment, are likely to be attractive to magistrates who generally deal with this difficult group of offenders. But these individuals, many of whom have long-standing problems such as drug and alcohol abuse, poor educational achievement and family disintegration, can be notoriously difficult to engage and often do not comply with any form of intervention. For these individuals, the revolving door back into prison may just have begun spinning a bit faster.
A parallel can be drawn between the offender management model, with its confused lines of accountability, and the arrangements now being set up in the community under Transforming Rehabilitation. That these same problems continue, after nearly ten years, to plague the delivery of rehabilitation work does not bode well."

17 comments:

  1. link to a poa pdf giving advice to members about imposed terms and conditions by employers... sorry, not in a position to cut&paste now, will try later... http://www.poauk.org.uk/carousel/pdfs/Gatsupp11LR.pdf

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's a big document and I might use it as a basis for another post on prisons.

      Cheers,

      Jim

      Delete
  2. http://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2014/01/chris-grayling-mp-under-conservative-justice-ministers-sentences-are-getting-tougher.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The irony wasn’t lost on me when I looked at the front page of the Daily Telegraph yesterday – a story in which Sadiq Khan, Labour’s Shadow Justice Spokesman, was expressing outrage at the sentences being given to some offenders, and complaining that the justice system was too soft.

      This was the very system that we inherited from Labour, which they presided over for more than a decade. If they were so worried about it, why didn’t they act then? Quite to the contrary, under their watch, they let thousands of prisoners out of prison early because they hadn’t provided enough prison places, they let thousands of offenders off with a slap on the wrist caution instead of a proper punishment, and they – to add insult to injury – failed to get any money from prisoners’ earnings for their victims.
      The offences being put about need to be looked at in context. The categories of offences are a very big umbrella, so whilst it suited Labour to run a bit of scaremongering, the truth is that each category covers offences from the relatively minor to the potentially relatively serious. This is why a judge has the leeway to decide, for example that if two teenage boys who’ve never been in trouble before get into a bit of a dust up in the pub, it’s more appropriate to give them a community sentence rather than sending them straight off to prison.

      I’m not complacent – I’ve said there are other areas where I want punishments to be tougher, and I know that’s what the public want too. But let’s be clear about it; under this Government offenders are more likely to go to prison and for longer. Sentences are getting tougher – indeed the average sentence length for sexual offences is now almost a year longer than it was in 2008 under the previous administration. We’re ending automatic early release for the most dangerous offenders. I’ve stopped the frankly ludicrous situation where you could just get a simple caution for the most serious offences like rape and robbery, and I’ve made sure that now there’s a mandatory punishment in every community sentence.

      We’ve also set out how we’re going to change the way we rehabilitate offenders, to get them away from a life of crime, and keep them away from it. If we want to stop there being more victims of crime we’ve got to do something about the reoffending rates in this country, which have been static for a decade. If we don’t change the way we deal with offenders, those rates aren’t going to change either.

      I want people to have faith in our criminal justice system, and I want them to know that people are punished quickly, effectively and properly. And whilst there is a Conservative Justice Secretary rather than a Labour one, that is what will happen.

      Chris Grayling

      Delete
  3. Slightly off topic but I think it should be read. Should you laugh or cry?

    http://m.gainsboroughstandard.co.uk/news/your-mp/cuts-simply-destroying-the-police-1-6360686

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Alongside Government cuts closing the police cells in Bassetlaw, we had on Tuesday a police officer standing at a bus stop for well over an hour for a bus which never came. Other police have taken several hours to get on patrol, because of bus breakdowns. What on earth is happening to this country? I asked Prime Minister, David Cameron what the police should do when patrolling by public transport?

      If they are waiting at the bus stop having arrested someone, do they go upstairs or downstairs on the bus? The reality is that they will not arrest at all. Even if they do arrest, we now have a G4S caravan replacing the police cells providing weekend night time cover in Bassetlaw.

      Five years ago, if you had suggested this, I would have said that you could not make this up. Then Mr Cameron claimed in Parliament that crime in Bassetlaw has gone down by 27 per cent.
      But Nottinghamshire’s Police Commissioner and his top officers have briefed me that it has gone up.

      The truth is that crime has risen by two per cent since last April compared to the same period the previous year. Violent crime that resulted in an injury has gone up 39 per cent, burglary 17 per cent, robbery 27 per cent and theft and handling by 15 per cent.

      David Cameron’s complacent bragging about Bassetlaw crime ‘coming down’ needs to be stood against the reality and effect of the police cells closures and the police being forced onto public transport buses. And it might get worse. The Chancellor has announced a further £25 billion cuts from 2016, with policing included on his hit list.

      Their whole vision of the police is one whereby the policing is increasingly done by unpaid volunteers, just as their model of a future army is one top heavy with reserve volunteers. Even the prison service is being privatised along with probation.

      I am very concerned that the Worksop Magistrates Court is for the chop this year, resulting in more wasted police time and fewer convictions. For hundreds of years we have had local justice and local policing. All of this is under threat. Most people would never have imagined a situation where police are patrolling by using our local buses, yet we now have this.

      Delete
  4. Its becoming very clear that resistance to the wholesale privatisation (or piratisation) of every aspect of our criminal justace system is growing.
    I don't think Grayling will like reading this article.

    http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/super-prison-north-wales-must-not-6482256

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Shadow Welsh Secretary Owen Smith yesterday demanded assurances that G4S will not run the super-prison planned for North Wales.

      Labour has accused the coalition Government of attempting to “cover-up” the facts about disturbances which broke out at G4S-run HMP Oakwood on Sunday. Plaid Cymru yesterday expressed “total” opposition to private sector companies running prisons.

      Mr Smith said: “We need a clear and unambiguous statement from Ministers that there’ll be no involvement of G4S in the running of the new prison planned for Wrexham. With the Serious Fraud Office investigating their contract for tagging criminals, Labour has consistently called from them to be barred from any future Ministry of Justice contracts until and unless they get a clean bill of health.

      “Now, on top of this, there’s the mess G4S are making of Oakwood Prison which they’ve been running for two years since it first opened. This is the prison that the current Justice Secretary has championed as his model for the rest of the system, yet it is failing on just about every level.

      Far from it being a model for how we want other prisons to be, it’s more a model of how we don’t want our prisons to be. There cannot and must not be a repeat of the same mistakes in Wrexham that the Government have made in Oakwood, and that includes keeping G4S well away from the running of it”.

      Plaid Cymru Westminster leader and Dwyfor Meirionnydd MP Elfyn Llwyd MP said: “[Our] opposition to the private sector becoming involved in running prisons is absolute and unconditional. The fiasco involving G4S and others merely goes to underline that profit is the only driving force in private sector prison involvement.

      “They’re clearly not interested in rehabilitation and their recent performance with regard to tagging contracts leaves a lot to be desired...

      “I would have thought that the Labour party of old would have grasped this problem and understood that the only way to ensure an efficient well-run prison is to keep it in the public sector and also, limit its size. It is interesting to me that the Labour party do not even attempt to argue that a medium-sized prison – 800 places – would be fitting for North Wales whereas a 2,000 place prison may well lead to a failing institution - in America this has certainly shown to be the case.”

      The UK Government has described accusations of a cover-up as “ridiculous,” stating: “It was the previous Labour government who in fact kicked off the process to allow private operators to run Oakwood – and for them to turn around now and cry foul is outright hypocrisy.”

      Delete
    2. Any of the guys crying 'foul'at another politician's hypocrisy is, well, hypocritical...

      Delete
  5. http://www.theguardian.com/public-leaders-network/2014/jan/09/decade-problems-prisons-probation-offenders

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The offender management model has really failed to deliver.

      This was demonstrated in a report I published, jointly with HM Inspectorate of Prisons, in my last week as chief inspector of probation. It looked at the work undertaken by prisons to challenge prisoners' behaviour and attitudes.

      The offender management model, developed and implemented in 2004, was set up with the laudable intention of providing a seamless approach to working with those in custody, with probation staff in the community liaising with their prison colleagues to identify and challenge maladaptive behaviour. But it has really failed to meet the expectations placed on it a decade ago.

      And why? Our report touches on a number of questions about what we, the public, expect from our prisons. Are they places where people should be simply contained, albeit with decency and humanity, during the course of their sentence or do we expect more from what is, after all, an expensive investment on the part of the taxpayer? Do we expect them also to be places of rehabilitation? How do we hold the prisons to account for their contribution to reducing reoffending?

      Certainly our prisons have the potential to provide a safe and controlled environment where an individual's behaviour can be challenged and, hopefully, changed. Arrangements can then be made for their safe release. For this to happen, however, probation staff will have to be much more proactive in their work with prisoners during their custodial sentence than is presently possible. Prison officers too will have to adapt and reinterpret their role focus as much on changing behaviour as they now do on issues of security and discipline on the wing.

      We have therefore recommended that the National Offender Management Service reviews its work to rehabilitate prisoners.

      Our report, although focussing on the management of offenders in custody, has much wider implications and has to be seen in the context of Transforming Rehabilitation, the government's attempt to change the way work with offenders is undertaken. The focus given to resettlement and various practical issues such as housing and employment that most people face on leaving prison, is welcome, but not enough. If the intention of Transforming Rehabilitation is to reduce reoffending, a lot of attention needs to be given to working with the prisoner to change their behaviour so that they can accept and benefit from the help offered. To do otherwise is to miss an opportunity.

      The new arrangements for the management of those serving sentences of under 12 months' duration, with any non-compliance during the year-long period of supervision ultimately punishable by further short period of imprisonment, are likely to be attractive to magistrates who generally deal with this difficult group of offenders. But these individuals, many of whom have long-standing problems such as drug and alcohol abuse, poor educational achievement and family disintegration, can be notoriously difficult to engage and often do not comply with any form of intervention. For these individuals, the revolving door back into prison may just have begun spinning a bit faster.

      A parallel can be drawn between the offender management model, with its confused lines of accountability, and the arrangements now being set up in the community under Transforming Rehabilitation. That these same problems continue, after nearly ten years, to plague the delivery of rehabilitation work does not bode well.

      Liz Calderbank

      Delete
    2. I doubt if Grayling or the Moj has considered the impact of the number of recalls of the 12 month and under group (I'm guessing it could be quite a high number) will have on the prison population.
      Given the idea of all prisoners being located in a resettlement prison close to their area of release prior to their release, then these resettlement prisons are surely going to struggle greatly with capacity?

      Delete
  6. Oakwood jail a dangerous place to work, says prison officers association

    Problem-plagued Oakwood jail was today branded as a ‘dangerous and unsafe’ place to work in a stinging attack by the Prison Officers Association. It urged the Government to take control of the 1,600 inmate South Staffordshire prison that was the scene of violent disorder on Sunday and is run by private company G4S.The POA declared in a hard hitting statement: “We call on Ministers to acknowledge our concerns with regard to the management of incidents at HMP Oakwood. The Government should be brave and decisive to prevent an unfolding tragedy.“In the interests of POA members, the prisoners in their care and in order to protect the public we call upon the Government to place HMP Oakwood under the direct operational control of the public sector. It is a dangerous and unsafe place to work.”Twenty prisoners were involved in Sunday night’s trouble which lasted more than nine hours.The POA also voiced concerns of the ‘continued operational viability’ of the prison and cited a catalogue of failings since it opened in April 2012 and the jail being ridiculed as Jokewood.But Justice Secretary, Chris Grayling backed the jail and insisted: “ If you look at the rate of trouble in Oakwood it is not anywhere near the top of the league table. It is average for disturbance and problems in prisons which are always going to happen. Prisoners are always going to kick up and cause trouble, Oakwood is no different to anywhere else.”G4S said: “The mobilisation of any prison is a complex and challenging operation but the size and scale of Oakwood – the largest prison in the country –makes this even more acute. As well as the logistical hurdles in new establishments, prisoners test the regime as well as the staff, many of whom may be new to prison life.“Since the publication of the HMIP report last year we have taken steps to make improvements, appointing an experienced director from one of the country’s best performing prisons, establishing a dedicated task force to address problem areas.”

    ReplyDelete
  7. Seriously, how much more farcical can things really get? It really is getting alarming at the problems the m o j is creating for others down the line to deal with. Will they not listen???

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think many are begining to understand just how big this train crash is becoming. I noticed this from UNISON yesterday.

      http://www.unison.org.uk/news/unison-says-government-should-not-gamble-with-public-safety

      Delete
    2. It is obvious that they ARE willing to gamble with public safety. The question is, when will they realise that they are onto a loser? I think some of the potential bidders have already clocked it and are backing off.

      Delete
    3. UNISON is today highlighting the vital need to keep the supervision and monitoring of offenders within the probation service in the light of new figures showing serious offenders are avoiding jail.


      The figures show that half of convicted sex attackers, violent criminals and burglars are avoiding prison sentences. Thousands of serious criminals have walked free from court, including 107 paedophiles who abused children aged under 13 - 46% of the total. Some 49% of those convicted of sexual assault in 2012 - 2,324 offenders - did not receive a custodial sentence.

      UNISON national officer Ben Priestley said: "These new figures show the government needs to take immediate action to protect the public.
      "It is vital that our probation is publicly run and accountable. Selling it off is dangerous as it would compromise the service and put communities at risk.

      "The government shouldn't gamble with public safety.

      "Risk assessing offenders is complex and requires the skills of trained probation officers. The streets can only be safe if offenders in the community are properly managed."

      Delete