Sunday 20 April 2014

Mentoring - Probation Light

Well what a surprise! At a key moment, up pops Jonathan Aitken, disgraced former Tory cabinet minister and now firm supporter of yet-to-be disgraced Tory cabinet minister Chris Grayling and his plans for a TR omnishambles. He's written a report for right-wing think tank Centre for Social Justice arguing that what we need is an army of mentors to take on all the extra work coming the way of the CRC's.

The foreword is predictably written by Grayling and the content is all the usual repetitive stuff about 'leaving prison with only £46 in their pocket'. According to the introduction:-
"This report has been researched and written in the spirit of idealism without illusions. We know that the mentoring of offenders is challenging. We know it works in an impressive swathe of individual cases, small though the present numbers are. The fact that these cases have never properly been counted, measured or expanded on a wider scale is a fault line in the present criminal justice system. The TR strategy is a courageous attempt to correct such past faults.
Implementing the TR strategy, specifically in the area of mentoring, will have its difficulties. Initially this may be negatively reported, for the world of Criminal Justice commentators is overcrowded with pessimists prophesying doom for every fresh effort to reduce reoffending. Yet TR is a bold and original strategy. Its emphasis on the wide-scale mentoring of offenders creates a new game changer that can massively increase the chances of making the strategy succeed."
Make of it what you will. Here's how it ends:-
"Conclusion
Mentoring stands at a crossroads of opportunity. It is paradoxically the most hopeful and the most neglected weapon in the arsenal of rehabilitation. The neglect is history. It is uncomfortable to have to remember that rehabilitation has only recently started to edge up the agenda of criminal justice policy (although it was a high priority in Victorian times), and that mentoring has been an unfunded and almost invisible item within rehabilitation.
Two pessimistic mantras have far too long clouded the landscape of mentoring. The first was‘leave it to the Probation Service’. The second was ‘there’s no such thing as a magic bullet’.The Probation Service has many virtues and many fine officers. But mentoring has not been their priority for at least two decades. Indeed you have to go back half a century to find a time when probation officers routinely empowered volunteers to make regular visits to offenders and their families. In those days ‘mentoring’ was not in the vocabulary of criminal justice, but ‘befriending’ and ‘caring’ were words which had a resonance that meant something human to offenders. Probation volunteers were an important part of that humanity. But, alas they were pushed aside by jobsworths whose bureaucratic expansionism made them determined to suppress the work done with offenders by anyone not on the official payroll.
Despite hostility from ‘the system’, charities and volunteers crept back into the thin front line of rehabilitation. In the final years of 20th century, when probation officers were being dragooned by Whitehall away from befriending and towards box ticking, a door began opening to voluntarism. One politician who understood this was the former Prisons and Probation Minister, Sir Peter Lloyd. He realised that the first stirrings of the moves towards mentoring were coming from offenders. As he put it:
‘Prisoners respond most readily to unpaid volunteers who they can see are giving their time because they really want to help their prisoners individually to find themselves and sort out their lives, not because they are agents of the State to fight recidivism in general.’
After leaving government, Sir Peter Lloyd implemented the philosophy of mentoring summarised in the above quote as chairman of the New Bridge Foundation (NBF) – the UK’s oldest mentoring charity. Founded by the late Lord Longford in 1956, NBF has a long track record of organising voluntary mentors for prisoners. As early as 2001 NBF received funding from the Youth Justice Board to run mentoring projects for young offenders and in 2007 it won a three-year grant from the National Lottery for its London Through the Gate (LTTG) scheme to deliver resettlement services for some 360 short-term prisoners released from HMPs Brixton, Holloway, Wormwood Scrubs, Pentonville and Wandsworth.
Although LTTG was evaluated by ARCS (UK) Limited and judged to have been successful, the statistical outcomes were characteristically confusing, not least because they relied on erratic ‘self-reporting data’ from clients disinclined to report on themselves even when their progress was good. So the system pigeon-holed this and several other examples of impressive mentoring by charities, often deploying the cliché used to justify so much inadequate action on rehabilitation. ‘There’s no such thing as a magic bullet.’
Leaving aside the fact that the imagery of firing bullets is inconsistent with the gentle spirit of mentoring, it is undoubtedly true that there is no single route to rehabilitation. Mentoring in particular is a bespoke and highly personalised process. It needs the consensual engagement of the offender just as much as the thoughtful support, advice, and care of the mentor. We know it works in many individual cases. But will it work when rolled-out nationally in 21 CRC areas?
Never before has there been any political will to encourage mentoring as an operational arm of criminal justice policy. Transforming Rehabilitation changes that historic negativity. From 2015 onwards all CRCs will have to demonstrate a positive willingness to provide mentoring services to their areas. This is an exciting opportunity.
Whether the opportunity flourishes or falters depends on many of the key ingredients described in this report. But the most vital ingredient of all is people.
We take great hope from the fact that so many people – in fact a surplus number of people – are potentially willing to volunteer to be mentors or to become professional mentors. We believe that a sizeable number of people coming out of prison actually want to go straight and will appreciate the help that mentors can give them. We think that the main providers of CRCs will be infinitely more capable and more motivated mangers of mentoring than ‘the system’ has ever been. And we think the Transforming Rehabilitation agenda, led by any positive government, will change the landscape, the culture, and the practice of how our society responds to released prisoners with the objective of changing their lives. 
The present reoffending statistics can hardly get any worse. For instance, 58 per cent of those serving sentences of less than 12 months go on to reoffend within a year of release. If mentoring is allowed to play a meaningful part in the implementation of the TR strategy these depressing reoffending figures might become encouragingly better with great human benefits to the individuals concerned and to society as a whole."

27 comments:

  1. Mentors - in other words free probation staff without training or experience, and from what I've experienced in many cases, without the proper credible insight into our work and at times bordering collusion with the client group. This will mean the end of PO's in the CRC and leading to anomalies in work carried out. At least now we know how the other side works, with mentors we will not. To share my experience of the NPS, yes it varies up and down the country, in my experience/office it now means the following:

    • Caseloads of 60-70+ and rising - High risk and MAPPA level 1-3 cases only.

    • 1-2+ PSR's per week - remunerated against an endless cycle of parole reports.

    • The anticipation that both caseloads and PSR's will rise as only NPS PO's are report writers, and that we'll also receive from CRC PO's cases in breach and increasing in risk, and whatever other baggage the CRC wants to shift.

    • The expectation that I'll continue to be required to follow time consuming procedures, meet unnecessary targets and comply with meaningless inspections.

    • The reality of knowing that even before the full TR changes are implemented,that I, my colleagues and my manager/SPO, are already very overworked and struggling to keep up, and we are all very efficient and experienced staff.

    I know my CRC colleagues have their own fears and anxieties, and I do not know of any that are happy about their situation. If fact, as two organisations we continue to work together where we can, staff and managers alike, but sadly the divisions and back biting are beginning to fester.

    There are positives, and I am happy not to be in the CRC where my PO professional status will very soon mean nothing, where restructuring will mean pay cuts and job losses, and where silly fleece uniforms will probably be required. However, I am under no illusions and know that similar gifts will be coming to the NPS at some point especially if this government stays in power. In the meantime I look forward to becoming a civil servant and whatever career development opportunities that may bring, or not!

    The situation is fluid so this is all I can say for now, apart from a big thanks to Chris Grayling for ruining what was a good career path!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, with that smug "I'm alright jack" attitude. I hope you CRASH AND BURN.

      Delete
    2. Just a thought, Anon 11.56. Would you openly state that you hope someone would 'crash and burn' - with or without shouty capitals - if you did not have the cloak of anonymity?

      Delete
  2. I read the Aitken piece – and he is right about the important role that can be played by volunteers across the board, including the work with sex offenders by 'circles of friends'. A common complaint is that the wider public have little knowledge of probation, but in my view they once had more than they do now – and that was attributable to reaching out and using volunteers.

    I started as a volunteer in probation and when I later became salaried probation volunteers were commonplace. But over the years – and Aitken is right about the bureaucratisation of probation and a jobsworth mentality – the volunteers disappeared, the probation service apparently indifferent and uninterested in their contributions. It all went accreditation crazy. Local offices that were once closer to street level and open to casual callers – even non-statutory! - were put behind security screens and it was appointments only, as duty hours were shrunk - and if you weren't on an Order there was nothing probation could do for you. Local offices closed, severing community connections, as mega- offices, remote and miles away, opened. But many of these changes did not seem to bother those responsible for the governance and management of probation and this includes the politicians who are the real villains. It was the mad rush to modernise! - to rebrand probation as a place for offenders, not clients, and to get rid of stupid things like Advise, Assist and Befriend – old fashioned and beyond binary measurement.

    Yes, mentoring and friendship are critical in human affairs. But we don't need Aitken to tell us that and we don't need cynical politicians pretending that the current shape and purposes of the probation service have nothing to do with them. Modern probation is the offspring - mutant is more apt - of politicians of all colours.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Rest assured the cunning weasels have plenty of similar stunts up their sleeves, there's more where that came from - and powerful friends to ensure it gets disseminated wide and loud. Napo, in the parlance of Cameron and his cool kids - "do you get it yet?"

    ReplyDelete
  4. Lots of "hope", "think" and "believe" in there, and little in the way of hard facts. Come back Evidence Based Practice, all is forgiven!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Many of the probation officers I've worked with have colluded with offenders and blatantly lied to the police regarding people on their caseload. Probation officers love acting superior and talking about ther integrity and degrading all other services. They are always less willing to critically look at their own practice

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anon 10:46 Would you like to flesh out those sweeping statements a bit more?

      Delete
  6. I feel compelled to reply to the above comment. I have never and would never think of myself as superior. I have always worked by, how would I wish to be treated if I was sat on the other side of the desk. My aim is to support empower and motivate people who have in the most part not had anyone telling them that there is another way and yes they are worthy of a better life. I criticise myself on a daily basis and always feel I could do better and that's exactly what I try to do. Despite the daily changes, the emotional upset of TR and family life to juggle.

    ReplyDelete
  7. If that is going on where you work you need to take action and report the incident as it happens.As for the rest do not be deluded by poor office banter

    ReplyDelete
  8. Interesing that this story recieved extensive coverage on the BBC this morning yet the indistrial action on the 31/03 and 1/4 was viortually ignored on the grounds that it wasnt newsworthy-so why then is todays non story, story -suddenly accredited as being worthy?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Easy - planned ambush on predictable slow news day! Having said that, an element of luck is always necessary - after all anything can happen at anytime.

      Delete
    2. And well placed contacts within BBC & other media management companies.

      Delete
  9. probation officer20 April 2014 at 12:04

    Anon 10:46. Not all volunteers are bad just as not all probation officers are good. However, most probation officers are top notch and I have never come across a qualified probation officer that would collude with clients or lie to the police - what would be the point of that?

    Volunteers are useful, to work alongside probation and not to replace trained professionals. The government would save far more money investing in probation and current levels of consistency, performance and continuity, with a return to the ethos of advise, assist and befriend.

    For those wanting a more balanced picture of what qualified probation officers do, see the following.

    [url=http://www.napo2.org.uk/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=612]Napo Forum: Probation Officers write about the job[/url]

    ReplyDelete
  10. Mentors will only ever work with those who are motivated and reasonably uncomplicated.. Many are neither. My experience of mentors is that they have their place but are generally only of use for superficial, one-off activities with a minority of offenders I.e. those least likely to re-offend anyway. They will never replace a competent, professional workforce.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree that a competent trained workforce has to be in place in order to properly assess and manage a challenging population. However, I cannot agree that mentors or volunteers can only pick up superficial work. Circles of Support deal with highly complicated risky individuals who have sexually offended. They are often very intelligent, well informed individuals who are trained to maintain boundaries. There is no need to create a mystique about dealing with offenders.

      Delete
    2. A model like this works in a few cases. We are talking about 300,000. If they each had a circle of support involving 10 people, that's 3 million volunteers. Best start recruiting....

      Delete
  11. In the end probation, education health, social work and the rest of the state sector will be flogged off and owned by a handful of Private Equity companies. Private Equity companies buy a significant stake in an operation, load it up with debt and take money out to pay lovely fat bonuses for those at the top. Wages are slashed people become commodities and are treated like shite in order to secure the next quarters bonus for the boys at the top.

    Over the last 30 years the world of finance has attained almost total hegemony we now live in a securitised leveraged world; people don't matter they really are expensive commodities to be replaced by the cheapest machines as fast as possible. No brave probation people we are like the check outs at Tesco to be replaced by machines without a seconds thought and it is like this in America already. This is what the focus of our fight should be and we should be fighting it with the rest of those state sectors in the cross hairs of the private equity firms. Our future is similar to the sad plight of the privatised state sector in Sweden. They are fighting now but do we have to be in the same position before we organise and act in unison at the political level, or can we learn from their struggle and take the bastards on now.

    papa

    ReplyDelete
  12. I have regularly posted in favour of napo, I have to believe in napo as I spend a significant amount of my free time at local level working as a branch officer and to consider anything else means I am doing this for no good reason.
    Well actually I am feeling all at sea now and do not know what to believe. I am loyal by nature but can't help the growing feeling that I am being taken for a fool. I am stressed by the information vacuum from Chivalry Road, I am stressed that I cannot get hold of anyone when I need them to discuss urgent business to get advice for our members. Some situations we face are unpredictable and we need some guidance before we respond at local level. A neighbouring branch quickly heard from Chivalry Road when it was alleged (wrongly) they had acted incorrectly during consultation, so they do respond when they see fit.
    My concerns are;
    1. a union executive becoming increasingly detached from the membership and to be fair, appearing increasingly beleaguered.
    2. a union executive that is making poor judgement calls and failing to learn lessons.
    3. we face the biggest challenges to come for example planning to represent two separate divisions ( NOT leagues, just a forced separation) of probation work and to organise accordingly with clear guidance needed.
    4. what on earth is happening with media coverage and communications? I am sorry but clearly the appointments made have simply not been good enough and we have lost each and every opportunity to put the truth out there to correct government spin, repeated yet again today.
    5.confidence is reducing due to simple errors being made which are inexcusable eg at SAGM forgetting to include our colleagues in Northern Ireland when business from the centre had been drafted.
    6. time being wasted at NEC by branches each pursuing their own agenda. 7. Committees running out of time to discuss really urgent business when members have travelled long distances. No debate, just a round robin of opinions, how do you make informed decisions? To be fair also members not reading their papers properly or forgetting to bring them ( really, confirmed by frustrated union colleagues).
    8.failure to engage all unions representing probation staff to work together eg why couldn't co funding be negotiated to employ a suitable PR company to redress the balance? Several unions together carry the weight of a significant membership we urgently need an (dis?) information protocol.
    9. napo must split campaigning from the day to day activities of the union before it is too late so, in effect, the representation and advice needs of members is fully supported at all times with perhaps a duty officer available at all times at Chivalry Road to take and respond to calls.The admin staff should not be left to be the only interface between officials and branches.

    I feel that in writing this I will be viewed as disloyal but I have no other means of recording my views which in many ways have been formed by reading the honest contributions of others on this blog. The centre is there to serve the interest of the members not the other way around.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous20 April 2014 13:58 - If other think you are disloyal then that shows how ignorant they are. There is nothing wrong with speaking your mind, having your say and putting your point across. Why should you allow others to control what you say and think. It takes allot of courage and personal strength to stand up and speak up and for that, you have my deepest respect.
      ANARCHIST PO

      Delete
    2. 'A neighbouring branch quickly heard from Chivalry Road when it was alleged (wrongly) they had acted incorrectly during consultation, so they do respond when they see fit.' I strongly empathised with this anecdote. In essence they were quick to respond when a complaint came in about the branch, presumably made by the Trust. They simply don't know how to support branches lots of the time.

      Delete
  13. Mr Atkin really is wide of the mark...many, many, myself included came into the Probation Service having volunteered for the Service; me as an undergraduate, for nearly 3 years...unpaid, but very well supervised.

    What on earth is a professional mentor? and all that flowery language.... "From 2015 onwards all CRCs will have to demonstrate a positive willingness to provide mentoring services to their areas. This is an exciting opportunity" Really. Personally, I have throughout my career utilized Volunteers, but always to enhance the service or offer something very different and sometimes, to allow volunteers a glimpse of our work, within strict boundaries; added value for all involved. What TR promotes is something cheap and downright dangerous. The post today, suggests Probation has actively sought to shut volunteers out and of course there may be a small amount of truth in this - but not from the coalface; but from managers who micro manage, walk in straight lines, tick boxes and/or who consider every case a potential SFO..they therefore run a mile at anything that smacks of ingenuity and creativity. Everyone talks about transparency, but in reality, they don't want anyone to look in or any criticism.

    Risk aversion and point scoring has become the managers mantra..although I know that is perhaps an unfair generaliation; recently, that's how it has felt.

    I am also aware that my Trust in the last 18 months has been trying to enlist mentors from the ranks of ex-service users. In principle a fine suggestion, but I have no idea who did the checking on whether they were, to use a footballing analogy, a fit and proper person, to undertake voluntary and by it's very title, mentor - help and support some very difficult, resistent and complex characters 'turn their lives around'. One, for instance was often seen in our reception area, available to service users to complete forms etc. Imagine my horror, when a few months later, I was asked for a SDR on this man, charges: Staking and Harassment- looking at his history, he was an active drug user and had a very long history of violence toward female partners, and more specifically, former partners. In interview he was verbally abusive and dismissive, suggesting the PS were just a bunch of intellectuals, who haven't really lived.

    Alternatively, I had a youth passed to me from YOT and he needed a mentor, if anyone did...but when I made the request of the Volunteer co-ordinator, I was told of the 30+ mentors on her books, there was nobody, sufficiently experienced or trained to work with someone who presented such complex issues and who may be aggressive.

    So Mr Atkin, fill yer boots, go forth and multiply mentors, those wonderful people willing to work with the awkward, complex, mad, bad and often, charming for nowt!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think there needs to be some distinction made between mentor and peer mentor since though they both have a supporting role but their backgrounds are so different. In a mentor, you have a member of society that is giving up their time to help people figure out the every day workings of society; they might be in employment or have worked, not been in trouble with the law etc. In a peer mentor you have the support of someone who has potentially walked in your shoes; they have been there done that and come out the other side in a way which has brought them some success in staying away from crime. Both have a place in working with Probation but only with the right support and training is given to them. I have concerns that peer mentors are being used too quickly following the end of their order and both types are not vetted sufficiently with regards to their current situation.

      Delete
    2. I know of offenders who 'relapsed' after 7 years as a professional drug counsellor. How long is long enough for someone to be able to cope with the demands of mentoring without putting their own rehabilitation at risk? Mentoring, in Grayling and Aitken's world, is and always will be an attempt to secure a service on the cheap, just like Cameron's 'Bog Society'.

      Delete
    3. Big Society. No, sorry. I was right the first time.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous 17:47
      Perhaps a little paternalistic and I fall prey this also. Contrast with Probation Officers who "like a drink" and have never dealt with their addictions and still function (perhaps less well than they might otherwise do). Count the sick leave on Mondays. Working with drug and alcohol agencies I am impressed by the work that the rehabilitated drinker or drug user can do up to the highest level of the organisations. Their relapse should not detract or count against the principle of people's power to change and do good. But unlike the egregious Dr John Reid thought - it does NOT take a man(sic) who has been in a hole to know how to get out of a hole"-
      Mentoring may be probation on the cheap but the wishes of those who have changed to help others should be welcomed as valuable additions to what we have to offer.

      Delete