Wednesday 5 February 2014

What's It Going to be Like?

The one thing that we know about this TR omnishambles is no one knows how it's going to work or what it's going to be like. That should be be pretty worrying in view of some of the people we come across and are responsible for. I thought this comment from yesterday helped crystallise things:- 

It's terrifying. If this goes according to plan, I will hand over at least 80% of my work on 1/4/14. I hold mainly community cases with a high proportion of high risk domestic violence, child protection and sex offenders. I scored virtually nothing on 11/11/13. I have a caseload of around 45 and I write around 4 complex PSR's a month, specialising in mental health and immigration cases. Oh! I forgot, have 3 lifers and 2 IPPs on top. Not any more. I'm going to have the most beautifully filed nails in the CRC while I watch my colleagues in NPS collapse and my cases flounder. If anything is criminal, this is.

I found myself chatting things over in the pub and it was remarked that come the summer, lots of highly qualified PO's will have written their last PSR and lost them for the very last time when nDelius swallows it whole. All those FDR's currently being written by PSO's will have to be picked up by the hopelessly small teams in NPS left to cover vast swathes of the country.

I'm hearing stories of how sifting in some areas for NPS first has left virtually no one for the CRC and vice versa. Whilst colleagues in CRCs will have the variety of their work dramatically curtailed, those in the NPS will by all accounts be run ragged trying to cope. It truly is a disaster of epic proportions that is slowly evolving. 

Here is an interesting blog by Effie Perine, a court officer in London and her take on things entitled "I had what alcoholics refer to as a moment of clarity"

Thought I’d share this snippet from the TR missive that’s just come round in London.

We can now begin to clarify how offenders will be managed between 1 April (when staff will move into either NPS or CRC teams) and the “go live” of the new structures on 1 June.
Essentially, staff will continue to operate as now even though they been allocated to the new organisations and will be working in their new teams from 1 April. The extension of the Trust’s contract notice period gives us the chance to test the new procedures and to complete case allocation by 1 June.
I have emailed the TR queries mailbox asking for more information on the testing procedure. What are the parameters? What does success or failure look like? What happens if the testing period reveals significant problems, or (hem hem) is not long or organised enough to be meaningful? I will of course share a response should I receive one…
Offender Managers will continue with current duties, such as writing court reports, until all current offenders have been appropriately allocated into the CRC or NPS. This is due to be completed by the end of May, following which staff will start to work to the new operating models and the initial training will have been completed.  

~Scooby Doo head-tilt~ Training? Interesting. I pity the poor sods having to try to devise and deliver that.
As I’ve noted before, Grayling has said that cases who would transfer can stay with current case managers if there is a compelling reason for them to do so – and really, this ought to be enough rope to hang this nonsense. There is a compelling reason for every case – it’s called desistance research. The relationship is crucial. Will case managers and/or service users be able to appeal the allocation and transfer of cases? It’s not just an administrative exercise – it could be immensely significant for individuals, and their risk of reoffending, and of harming themselves and others.
This period between April and June will also allow the new teams to meet together and to plan for any moves of staff within their clusters that are required.
The only caveats to this overall picture are that by April we will start to allocate high risk and other offenders to offender managers who will retain responsibility for them following the transition and that staff at Court will start to allocate work using the new assessment tools.
I am currently in a court team and have yet to hear any detail about the new assessment tools. The clock’s a-ticking to get us all trained up. Word is that under the new model probation officer report writers at court will be allocated a maximum of 2 fast-delivery reports per day rather than the usual 3, because of the time needed for the new allocation/assessment tool. There is a clear impact on the service we provide to courts. My team undertake full PSRs too, because of the sheer volume of requests, and get a full day allocated for these in line with London’s workload management tool. Add a lengthy task onto that process and you’ve got a bit of a hangover to the next day (often happens anyway, especially if a lot of digging and liaison is required, or a psychiatric report), and then things get even messier.

So, hands up who has every confidence that the staff and client allocation and transfer will be complete by June? And that the timetable will be revised further or halted if testing brings up serious concerns for public safety?
Oh.
[Title from Pulp Fiction]

22 comments:

  1. In my own ldu and from what I am hearing from other colleagues in my trust, the crc colleagues appear to be a minority. How is a minority of staff (bulked up with numbers of pso staff) going to manage 70% of the caseload? (Leaving aside all the reports they won't be writing). Are they going to have huge caseload numbers?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Don't worry about what it's going to be like, because the Probation Institute is already mobilising: the Institute is planning workshops to assist probation workers to operate the TR model. Here's one workshop:

    'Overview: To consider how the new CRC/NPS interface should operate regarding risk assessment, including managing escalating risk, and to share views on using/developing professional judgement, skills and working with other partners.'

    I see that Tim Rendon, the current chair of Napo, is one of the directors and other Napo salaried staff are on the steering group.

    Napo is anxious to emphasise that the Institute is independent and has been upset that the MoJ has 'conflated' ( according to Tim Rendon) its support for privatisation with its funding of an independent Institute. But it's hardly Macheavalien of the MoJ to make this connection when the workshops of the Institute will effectively serve to underpin and legimatise the TR operating model. It seems to me that the MoJ has no monopoly on the art of conflation. It's no wonder there is a lack of clarity about Napo's strategy but plenty of confusion.

    http://probationchiefs.org/wp-content/u ... te_no1.pdf

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So Chris Grayling has mobilised the Probation Institute to to assist probation workers to operate the TR model.

      Supported by NAPO leaders?

      Explains a lot Napo quietness lately and lack of strategy, and rising unease and confusion in members.

      Delete
  3. It feels to me as if Napo were catapulted into Pbn Inst before they had properly consulted with members & before there was a real engagement with practitioners hence it has not had a good start - anyway it is still premature - even MOJ are scared of allowing legislation to be finalised as ORB is still not back in House of Lords.

    After all working with ALL short sentence prisoners was the main justification for it in the first place.

    We said - impossible within existing budget without massive job or pay cuts and replacement with unpaid volunteers.

    How is the mentor recruitment going - are any visiting at the gate yet after an earlier meeting? Have the prisons been reorganised yet to support that plan?

    I see Times crime reporter is Tweeting about "Prison service said act of "concerted indiscipline" involving 12-13 prisoners began at mid day and ended at 4.30pm" yesterday at Wayland gaol in Norfolk.

    https://twitter.com/RFord4/status/431031627817291776

    Plans seem to be unravelling - before they are really instigated - although I have not had the impression those plans have ever been ravelled!

    Andrew Hatton

    ReplyDelete
  4. Andrew, do you mean "Catapulted" or "Capitulated" - think you might have a typo?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ho, ho - I meant Catapulted - by events - I think the main issue is the timing is wrong - it might have been right after General Social Care Council was established AND we did not insist we be part of it - then Napo might also have reasserted itself as the UK PROFESSIONAL association for all of Probation - but I did not campaign for that - so share responsibility.

      Alternatively it maybe right for Napo to be involved after wide membership consultation and possibly a ballot but not when all else is in flux.

      It is NOT the Officers OR secretariats fault but the NEC's with members appointed - in the main by ordinary members via their branches - but sadly too often (at least in the past) allowed to get on with the national work without much interest expressed by branch members - with usually brief verbal reports in branch meetings, with only a few issues aver really considered at the local level.

      I wonder how many NEC reps discussed the implementation timing of Pbn Inst before it happened - I accept there was a general decision to be involved at the AGM

      I wanted to post the wording of the motion - but cannot find it - maybe a reader who is better at locating things on Napo website will assist?

      Andrew Hatton

      Delete
    2. The Probation Institute motion can be found in last November's Napo News. It's too long-winded to reprint here. As the motion indicated, it was hoped that such an institute would have licensing powers, like the one that governs social workers or the BMA perhaps. Such bodies protect professionalism. But the PI will have no regulatory powers. It is more along think-tank lines, promoting best practice across the public and private sector. It will presumably seek to raise income through its training events. All it will do is seek to influence. It will have no powers to direct anyone or organisation to do anything. At the present time it's the best thing since sliced bread for the MoJ and already, before the probation service is dismembered, it's promoting workshops. There was no urgency for Napo to get on board, it could have done this later, down the line, with a lower profile. But during these unsteady times for the MoJ it can at least point to its constructive arrangements with the unions in setting up a probation institute. It was a successful MoJ seduction: the unions should have played harder to get!

      Delete
    3. Thanks - did you find an online version of Napo News - my links only took me back to December's??

      Licensing powers but no regulatory powers - seems a contradiction. Once some are licensed there has to be a way of judging who qualifies or becomes disqualified - that surely is regulation?

      Any way I agree the timing is wrong - for which Napo members are to blame, though they/we may have not been well advised.

      In this context I am not a 'we' as I am now an associate member without voting rights.

      Andrew Hatton

      Delete
    4. Andrew, from this link, click issue 251 – page 6, point 13. You misread reference to licensing powers. This was merely a Napo hope. The Institute with have neither licensing or regulatory powers. I don't see a lot of blame in the principle of the thing, more one of timing and political nous.

      Delete
    5. The missing link! http://www.napo.org.uk/publications/napo_news.cfm

      Delete
  5. Don't be surprised if we don't see the u12 month supervision commencing until well after the election - if at all. This might explain why the allocation of POs to the NPS currently seems top heavy - the numbers aren't currently needed in the CRCs and this leaves them free to recruit other, cheaper, staff from outside.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Didn't I say a while back that the probation institute was being instituted in order to legitimise the TR omnishambles? Well there we are. No surprise to me this. Corrupt as helll. it's Graylings legitimiser.

    ReplyDelete
  7. It may be worth keeping an eye on the 'provisions' of the ORB that Grayling is seeking to amend.
    Not that I don't trust him or anything....

    http://www.theguardian.com/law/2014/feb/05/chris-grayling-tougher-on-terrorism-crime-bill

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A bit more about the (new today) Criminal Justice and Courts Bill

      http://www.napo2.org.uk/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=488

      Andrew Hatton

      Delete
    2. I'm way beyond being serious now. My health can't cope with any more stress. So, how do you get from Grayling to ORB?

      Answer:
      http://www.aircalculator.com/flightplan.php?from=GOV&to=ORB

      I think its clinically known as a Graham Linehan moment.

      Delete
    3. That made me laugh! Thank you. Now let's have a tune http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hvqgb1D6Opw

      Delete
  8. http://kotaku.com/what-to-do-with-prison-architect-a-video-game-about-b-1505204131
    my geeky friend offered this from his nocturnal ramblings across the web. He says never read the comments. Something for our retirement?

    ReplyDelete
  9. It's not good enough that prisoners leave prison with just £46 in their pocket says Grayling. Well now they'll leave prison with thousands of pounds of debt aswell.
    And a possible 2years imprisonment for going awol on the non custodial part of a sentence (licence)? Good luck with the 12months and under Chris.

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/court-case-costs-criminals-forced-3115931

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Grayling in the Nottingham post. The non custodial part of sentence? It's not just failing to return to custody then- its disappearing whilst on supervision too that may attract a further custodial sentence?

      http://www.nottinghampost.com/Justice-Secretary-Chris-Grayling-s-message-Notts/story-20557898-detail/story.html

      Delete
  10. Justice Secretary Chris Grayling will announce a radical overhaul of cautions later today. Here he gives his views why.

    "We know that crime is falling. You may already know that across Nottinghamshire the number of police recorded crimes has dropped by 1% over the past year.

    "But there is much more that I am determined to do.

    "We have a criminal justice system that is admired around the world. It is transparent, it is open and there is no doubt that it is one of the best in the world.

    "But that’s not to say that it doesn’t have its shortcomings.

    "We have all read the newspaper reports of vandals wreaking havoc in communities and laughing at their punishment because they deem it to be nothing more than a slap on the wrist.

    "We have all heard about the offenders who commit crime with perceived impunity and then brag to their friends about how lightly they got off.

    "And we are all angered when we see dangerous criminals being released from prison halfway through their jail sentence.

    "These people walk out of courtrooms smirking at the system. That’s not right. For the rest of us, the law-abiding majority who just want to work hard and get on in life, I want to make sure we see justice being done.

    "Figures show that 2,329 people in Nottinghamshire were given a custodial sentence in 2012, while 3,184 community sentences were handed down by the courts. Meanwhile, it is unacceptable that 2,244 criminals in the East Midlands went on to commit further offences in 2011.

    "We have already announced how we are going to change the way we rehabilitate ex-offenders and supervise them when they leave prison. These changes are aimed at tackling the depressing merry-go-round of reoffending, and will chip away at the reoffending rates in Nottinghamshire.

    "Alongside those changes, we’ve today unveiled a package of reforms that will ensure serious and repeat offenders are properly punished, to better protect victims and the public. We need to plug the gaps in our justice system to make sure offenders face the consequences of their actions.

    "I am absolutely clear that people who break the law will not escape the law.

    "No longer will criminals who go on the run whilst serving the non-custodial part of their sentence get away without additional punishment.

    "And no longer will child rapists and terrorists be automatically released from prison at the half-way point of their sentence.

    "We have already toughened up community sentences to ensure that those who are dealt with in this way face some kind of punishment, such as cleaning our streets.

    "Together with the restrictions we are putting on cautions, we are tightening our grip on those who plague communities.

    "I became Justice Secretary 18 months ago with a clear vision of delivering a firm but fair system.

    "These reforms should send a clear and unequivocal message to the criminals of Nottinghamshire; you will pay the price for the misery and harm you cause to communities.

    "We are no longer prepared to let you laugh at us."



    ReplyDelete
  11. Napo Members allocated to CRC must have their continuity of service protected re CRC to Nps transfers. If not this is discrimination against a section of the napo membership. The government have conceded the principle regarding speedy changes to legislation surrounding other aspects of TR, so changes linked to staff transfer from CRC to Nps re continuity of service could be done in the same speedy manner. The gulf between Nps and CRC members is widening by the day due to the arbitrary sifting process, the 'you have been ranked' letters, the continuity of service disparity and to top it all off , grayling releasing a press statement stating that 'the best OM's have been sifted into Nps. The divisions evident between Nps and CRC staff will, I fear lead to NAPOs existence being threatened, unless the membership is kept together by napo insisting that all members share the same conditions linked to T&C, pay, continuity of service etc

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am pretty sure Grayling and his ilk will be keen for Napo to break - I would not be surprised if that was not one reason, why the dangerous - and unnecessary splitting of local probation service(s) is such a key part of the TR programme.

      It is not as if in prisons they have said, the private prisons will only hold low risk of harm prisoners!

      Andrew Hatton

      Delete