Interventions News

Issue 25 – November 2006

Contents
Introduction 25/01: NPD Interventions Unit Contact Details 25/02: Update on Unpaid Work 25/03: Unpaid Work Manual 25/04: Unpaid Work in Warwickshire 25/05: Links with the Resettlement Estate in the Midlands 25/06: Prolific & other Priority Offenders 25/07: General Offending Programmes Review 25/08: Change Control Domestic Violence Programmes Update Researching ‘what works’ for NOMS Interventions Accredited Programmes Evaluation Measures CALM Symposium, 13 October 2006 European Funding for Accrediting Offender Learning 25/14: Some Dates for your Diaries 25/09: 25/10: 25/11: 25/12: 25/13:

INTRODUCTION This issue of Interventions News provides more examples of the range of work that is going on across interventions. For instance, the national unpaid work conference earlier this month provided a platform for showcasing examples of best-practice. There are articles about innovative work in the West Midlands linking prisons and probation in relation to unpaid work, on offending behaviour programmes and news of an exciting series of seminars on prolific and other priority offenders We hope that this issue will be of interest to all probation staff and if you too have a story to tell why note share it with the rest of us by writing an article for this newsletter. Contact details for the editor, John MacGregor, are on page 19. Sarah Mann Head of NPD Interventions Unit 25/01: NPD INTERVENTIONS UNIT CONTACT DETAILS During the last few months there have been a number of staff changes, so herewith the most up-to-date list of unit members: Head of Interventions Sarah Mann Personal Secretary Julie Taylor 020-7217 8432 020-7217 8546 fax 020-7217 8496 Community Reintegration Team Head of Community Reintegration Jill Shaw 020-7217 0673 Personal Secretary Julie Taylor 020-7217 8546

Skills for Life Manager Roger Stevens 020-7217 8283 Employment & Skills Policy Manager Ian Henshaw 020-7217 0682 Unpaid Work Project Implementation Manager Neill Martin 020-7217 8877 Business Services Manager Jake McClure 020-7217 8992 Unpaid Work Scheme Manager David Mead 020-7217-5120 PS Plus Manager David Preston 020-7217-8323 Employment & Skills Advisor Marcus Smart 020-7217 0766 Team Support Manager Olubusola Shokan 020-7217 8448 Team Support Mark Chidwick 020-7217 0681 Team Personal Secretary Alison Graham 020-7217 0686 fax 020-7217 0693 Intensive Interventions Team Head of Intensive Interventions Claire Wiggins 020-7217 8646 Personal Secretary Julie Taylor 020-7217 8546 PPO Development Manager Robin Brennan 020-7217 0916 Drugs & Alcohol Implementation Manager Fiona Bauermeister 020-7217 0768 Drug & Alcohol Development Officer Robert Stanbury 020-7217 0767 Drug & Alcohol Advisor Vacancy 020-7217 8003 PPO Development Officer Corinna Griggs 020-7217 0760 Team Support Mark Chidwick 020-7217 0681 Team Personal Secretary Alison Graham 020-7217 0686 fax 020-7217 0693

2

Offending Behaviour Programmes Team Head of Offending Behaviour Programmes Danny Clark 020-7217 0675 Programme Implementation Manager Diane Anderson 020-7217 8895 (ASRO/OSAP/DID) Programme Implementation Manager Elizabeth Hayes 020-7217 8401 (SOTPs) Programme Implementation Manager Phil Mackin 020-7217 8044 (IDAP/CDVP/CSB) Programme Implementation Manager Jonathan Martin 020-7217 8081 (ETS/Think First/One to One/Women’s Acquisitive Crime) Programme Implementation Manager Phil McNerney 020-7217 0674 (ART/CALM) Head of Psychology & Evaluation Liz Bird 020-7217 8418 Principal Psychologist Jo Day 020-7217 8999 Senior Psychologist Karl Williams 020-7217 8991 Psychological Assistant Sinead Bloomfield 020-7217 8813 Psychological Assistant Natalie Letts 020-7217 0676 Senior Research Officer Victoria Dawson Wheeler 020-7217 8815 National Training Manager Tudor Williams 020-7217 8068 Training Development Advisor Eileen Davis 020-7217 8211 Training Development Advisor Alex Law 020-7217 8211 Training Development Advisor Emma Myatt 020-7217 8211 Training Development Advisor Karen Townend 020-7217 8211 Executive Officer Lesley Smith 020-7217 8336 Executive Officer Ruth Taylor 020-7217 1779

Administrative Officer Ali Moghal Team Personal Secretary Vacancy

020-7217 0679 020-7217 0677

Business Support & Communications Manager John MacGregor 020-7217 8520 fax 020-7217 0693 25/02: UPDATE ON UNPAID WORK

A successful national conference for practitioners involved in the delivery of Unpaid Work was held at the Hilton in London’s Docklands on November 2nd. It provided a forum for the launch of the new Unpaid Work Practice Manual, which replaces the ECP Manual. The conference was a platform for showcasing examples of best-practice in Unpaid Work, with presentations from West Midlands, Warwickshire and Aston Business School. The programme included keynote speeches from Gerry Sutcliffe MP, the Under-Secretary for Criminal Justice and Offender Management, and Roger Hill, Director of the National Probation Service. There was a panel discussion relating to the use of the new Unpaid Work Practice Manual and a series of workshops in the afternoon, focusing on contestability, visibility, partnerships, links with employment and Community Payback.

3

The aims of the day were: • To inform practitioners of Government priorities for Unpaid Work; • To launch the new Unpaid Work Practice Manual; • To enable probation staff to discuss the implementation of the Manual; • To increase awareness of ways of increasing visibility and awareness of Community Payback; • To provide a forum for innovative best-practice in the area of skills and employment; • To emphasise the value of partnerships between probation, the civic sector, the voluntary and community sector, the corporate sector and the general public. Visibility and working with the Voluntary and Community Sector (VCS) were key elements of the conference, and NPD are keen for institutions and organisations from the VCS to work alongside probation Areas in providing support and ideas for unpaid work placements. An example of this is the recent collaboration between the Round Table and the NPS which has led to four major cities benefiting from a clear-up campaign. Bradford, Leicester, London and Portsmouth will see events take place in late November during Inside Justice Week whereby offenders work alongside established business figures in a variety of projects which include the restoration of a community football pitch and the cleaning of graffiti from a deprived London district. This partnership is by no means the first of its kind, and the NPS is encouraging more and more of these to develop. 2007 is of course the centenary year of the NPS, and it is hoped that June will be designated a national partnership week whereby voluntary organisations will spearhead an ongoing campaign to bring Community Payback to the forefront of public awareness.

In terms of awareness-raising, our new Community Payback link is designed to help to direct members of the public to the appropriate website/contact information for the community in which they live, in order to allow them to suggest projects and placements: http://www.probation.homeoffice.gov.uk/output/Pa ge332.asp We also hope to encourage local government sites along with those of the VCS organisations with whom we work to display a link to our site on their web pages. Neill Martin, Unpaid Work Manager and Jake McClure, Business and Development Manager for Unpaid Work, joined the NPD Interventions Unit, Community Reintegration Team, in August and David Mead, Unpaid Work Scheme Manger, joined the team in October. FURTHER INFORMATION: Jake McClure, NPD Interventions Unit Email: Jacob.Mcclure2@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk Tel: 020-7217 8992 25/03: A MANUAL ON THE DELIVERY OF UNPAID WORK The Unpaid Work Manual was launched at the London Docklands Conference on the 2nd November. The Manual builds on the success of Enhanced Community Punishment. It therefore retains many of the underlying principles of ECP, but in a more concise and practice orientated format. The Manual also includes a section on the management of risk in Unpaid Work and establishes standards for the management of health and safety. Other sections refer to maximising inclusion, compliance and community payback. The Manual will be available on EPIC in the near future, as will an Executive Summary of the

4

Manual, together with a full Equality Impact Assessment. The Executive Summary and Impact Assessment will also be referenced on the Home Office Website. Revised Unpaid Work training materials will be available early in 2007 and it is intended that the Manual will be reviewed one year after implementation. FURTHER INFORMATION: David Mead, NPD Interventions Unit Email: David.Mead6@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk Tel: 020-7217 5120

25/04: UNPAID WORK IN WARWICKSHIRE After a recent visit by Jill Shaw, (Head of Community Re-Integration), and Janet Power, (latterly Project Implementation Manager, Unpaid Work), I have been asked to submit this article about unpaid work in Warwickshire with a particular emphasis on the SYDNI Project that we visited that day. Since our launch of Community Payback in November last year we have continued to look for

5

and identify more and new ways of highlighting our work so that our local communities and faith groups can easily access our services and be confident that the work that we undertake will be to a good standard and that the offenders will be well supervised. We currently have a good relationship with our local newspapers and we regularly send them press releases including before and after photos. In setting up projects we specifically seek beneficiaries’ permission to use the project for publicity purposes when considered appropriate and we have offenders sign confidentiality waivers if they are prepared to engage with local media. We also seek to plaque or certificate completed projects. Our supervisors wear branded clothing and, if after assessing the risk it is considered appropriate, we put up branded “A” Boards where we are working.

We were one of the areas involved in the “CleanUp 06” campaign and we received good publicity when 5 projects in the Warwick area were put to the public vote to see which was undertaken first. All 5 were projects that we were already engaged with and we have continued to work with all the organisations ever since. There were over 300 votes cast with the winner receiving 111 votes. SYDNI was one of the projects and, although it didn’t win the vote, we have continued to work there and our involvement at the Centre has been mutually beneficial. On the day that Jill and Janet visited, I had arranged for them to meet the project manager, Alaina MacGregor. As always, the place was a hive of activity and despite the fact that we were late in arriving and Alaina was in a meeting, she still managed to find the time to give us an informative tour of the centre and enthuse us with her passion for The Sydenham

6

Neighbourhood Initiatives Project (SYDNI). Starting life 8 years ago, SYDNI has successfully raised over £1.2 Million to build the Community and Resource Centre in the heart of the Sydenham estate. The SYDNI Centre opened in 2002 and saw over 4000 people use the building within the first year of operation. Sydenham lies on the south-east edge of Leamington Spa, approximately 2 miles from the town centre. Within the estate lie a handful of shops, a private medical centre, a private members drinking club and a pub. There are two primary schools on the estate and one large secondary school on the edge of the estate. Other than these there are no accessible services to the residents. In the opposite direction from town lies country fields and private nonaccessible farming land. Sydenham is an isolated housing estate of some 2000 households and over 4000 people. The population is diverse with 30% recorded as being from Ethnic Minority Groups, predominantly Asian but with a growing Portuguese population currently standing at around 800. The main aim of SYDNI is to work in a multiagency partnership to help people alleviate social isolation and exclusion and to regenerate the area. SYDNI supports local people and groups in identifying their own needs and helps them to look at various resolutions and options to address those needs. This is done by SYDNI offering the facilities, advice, advocacy and support for groups and individuals and they provide classes, activities and events which are open to their community. They also work with Community Representatives identifying isolated and vulnerable groups on the estate and setting up appropriate support groups, namely: Parents/Toddlers group, Older People’s Group, Youth Group, Elderly Asian Women’s ’Group.

There are numerous community events held by SYDNI throughout the year celebrating cultural differences. These assist in broadening people’s awareness and understanding and breaking down the barriers that may have been erected by negative stereotyping. The Project Manager also works within the schools on two or three projects a year delivering programmes focused on intercultural and intergenerational work with young children promoting positive difference, identity and self-esteem. The project is more than just the Centre, but the Centre is the focal point of the community. The building houses training rooms, counselling room, IT and language support centre, an Asian Elders Day-care centre, a Community Café, a youth centre and a main sports hall. It is set in a disused school site and the 125 year lease is managed by the Project Team. Since the beginning of this year Probation has worked with SYDNI, assisting in the maintenance of the building and site. Projects have included cleaning the Community kitchens, Painting the Youth room, Graffiti removal, and maintaining grounds and fencing. We also have individual placements helping out in the Community Café. Compliance and completions on these placements have been excellent and two offenders have been reluctant to leave the project on completion of their hours. In return SYDNI have been an Ambassador for The Probation service and have promoted our work to other peer projects across the region. They have introduced us to new and/or potential beneficiaries and have also assisted some of our individual placement offenders in job-search activities and accredited training courses. Both parties have their eyes wide open to the pitfalls of the type of work and the tenuous nature that this type of relationship could potentially have. However, with good team management and strong communication between all parties, to

7

date, there have been few hiccups and the relationship grows from strength to strength. Offenders can see that it benefits the community and the community can see that offenders are paying back for their offending. Articles such as these and newspaper clippings are good for relaying information but working in communities at grass roots level can make or break you. The two-edged sword will come heavily down upon your neck if your standards drop or you fail to produce the goods, but if you deliver a quality service the local grapevine will ensure that more work will be forthcoming and, more importantly, that you are chosen provider of delivering the service. Many thanks to Alaina MacGregor for her assistance in putting this article together. FURTHER INFORMATION Frank Gravenor, Unpaid Work Scheme Manager, Warwickshire Probation Area Email: Frank.Gravenor@warwichshire.probation.gsi.gov. uk Tel: 024 76482822 25/05: LINKS WITH THE RESETTLEMENT ESTATE IN THE MIDLANDS An exploratory meeting took place in August between probation managers and prison colleagues from HMP Hewell Grange and HMP Brockhill, the Community Reintegration Team from NPD and NOMS to consider sharing resources for programmes and unpaid work. This has been followed by local meetings in which information sharing has been agreed to ensure the best use of opportunities for community work placements. Health and safety risk assessments will be consolidated, and an excel spreadsheet devised to ensure a shared database of projects.

Potentially there is the possibility to share storage space and workshops; apply for joint funding, and have some shared marketing and media campaigns in relation to unpaid work/community placements. In addition prisoners who are eligible for release on temporary licence (ROTL) are attending probation led offending behaviour programmes, and there is scope for an increase in provision. Other Areas who are interested in developing similar schemes may contact Stephen Gill ACO West Midlands or Les King Area Manager Interventions West Mercia or alternatively Jill Shaw, Head of Community Reintegration, NPD. FURTHER INFORMATION: Stephen Gill, West Midlands Probation Area Email: Stephen.Gill@west-midlands.probation.gsi.gov.uk Tel: 0121 248 2700 Les King, West Mercia Probation Area Email: Leslie.King@west-mercia.probation.gsi.gov.uk Tel: 01562 820071 Jill Shaw, NPD Interventions Unit Email: Jill.Shaw5@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk Tel: 020-7217 0673 25/06: PROLIFIC AND OTHER PRIORITY OFFENDERS PSR quality A number of Probation Areas assisted with a PPO PSR review to investigate how far report writers were following the guidance contained in PC33A/05. The reports were read by six SPO’s from different areas, working in pairs. The findings appeared in the recent NPS Bulletin. NPD is now producing a checklist for PSR writers to reiterate the guidance and is considering the most appropriate format for this.

8

PPO Toolkit We are still collating best practice, examples of good inter-agency working, useful protocols, and problem-solving procedures. Due to a lack of information we have brainstormed with our October Reference Group and will upload this information into EPIC late November in addition to presenting at the Regional Workshops. Examples are still more than welcome – the toolkit is a pin-board for good practice and will constantly evolve. We are happy to receive examples by email, or call if you wish to discuss. Drug-testing on licence Areas are reminded that all PPOs are to be

included in the NSMART sample since this is the means by which this initiative is being monitored. Thereafter the numbers are made up to 20 per cent (for commencements) with other cases. If you are in any doubt about this process please contact us. Regional Workshops The following regional events have been agreed, topics for discussion/themes for the day to be concluded at least two months prior to each event, however the draft national agenda items are currently – PSR refresher, toolkit, targets and drug testing procurement. Wales have yet to pick their date – the blank NPS region/contact columns indicate the remaining available dates.

Event No 2 3 4 5 6 8 7 1

NPS Region London

Darian.Mitchell@london.probation.gsi.gov.uk

Contact

Actual Event 17/01/07 26/01/06 05/03/07 15/12/06

West Midlands North East

Neil.Appleby@west-midlands.gsi.gov.uk Stuart McPhilips (Wendy – wdale@go-regions.gsi.gov.uk) Barbara.Bate@manchester.probation.gsi.gov.uk Hardyal.Dhindsa@nottinghamshire.probation.gsi.gov.uk

16/02/07 13/03/07 11/04/07

10 12 14 11

9

East Midlands Yorks & Hum South East South West

North West

29/03/07 26/04/07 08/05/07

Patrick Wilkes / Peter G Wright / Janice Williams Garry Holden / Elizabeth Moss Andrea.Saunders@sussex.probation.gsi.gov.uk

13 15

East of England

Jan.Kemp@go-east.gsi.gov.uk

06/06/07 06/04/07

01/06/07 02/07/07

01/08/07

9

Drug testing quality assurance We are conducting an evaluation of the process in which the NPS areas are drug testing PPO’s to ensure accuracy and to highlight the possible need for regular quality assurance akin to our DIP colleagues. We requested that each NPS area provide at least one drug testing site and so far we have confirmed 67 sites from 40 NPS areas. Initial findings have shown that NPS areas are paying a varied price for drug testing kits and confirmatory tests and more astonishingly they are testing for a whole range of drugs when we only have the legal basis to challenge cocaine and opiates. Two samples are due to be sent out this week to each of the sites and the results will be presented to the Project Board in the first week of December and communicated wider the following week. FURTHER INFORMATION: Robin Brennan, NPD Interventions Unit Email: Robin.Brennan@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk Tel: 020-7217 0916 Corinna Griggs, NPD Interventions Unit Email: Corinna.Griggs2@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk Tel: 020-7217 0760 Overall responsibility for PPO policy lies within the PPO Implementation Team in the Home Office Drugs Interventions Programme, which has kindly provided the following update: Re-launching the PPO Programme The Home Office document entitled Rebalancing the Criminal Justice System in favour of the lawabiding majority was published in July. It explicitly notes the success of the PPO programme and includes a commitment to re-launch it later in the year, and to align it more clearly with the Drug Interventions Programme, to ensure that the highest crime causing drug users are identified and targeted.

The PPO Programme Team and Drug Interventions Programme Team, in the Home Office, have merged together to form the new Offender-based Interventions Unit. This unit is currently mapping out what needs to be done to meet the commitment of the CJ Review to ensure the two programmes are working alongside each other as effectively as possible. PPO Evaluation To coincide with the re-launch and closer alignment with DIP, the PPO Team will be publishing a full evaluation of the Programme so far. The interim evaluation of the PPO programme reported a 10% reduction in recorded offending reflected in convictions, over six months. This evaluation can be found on the PPO minisite: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs05/dpr46.pdf The full evaluation will look at several aspects of the PPO Programme, such as the implementation of the scheme and good practice issues through a number of PPO staff interviews. It will examine the PPO’s own perceptions of the effectiveness of the programme through a series of offender interviews. The full evaluation will also look at the impact of the PPO programme on recorded offending reflected in convictions over a far longer time period than the interim evaluation. The final report will aim to strengthen delivery of the programme and communicate the key results to practitioners and other interested parties. PPO Newsletter In order to keep all our stakeholders informed of new developments during the PPO Re-launch and alignment with DIP, the PPO Programme Team will be producing a regular newsletter. In this we hope to cover such issues as information sharing, effective offender and case management, performance monitoring, and treatment services and support pathways.

10

JTrack New functionality will ensure that key information about all PPOs in prison, including location and release information, is available on JTrack. This has been achieved by cross-referencing a download from Prison Service IT systems against the list of PPOs on JTrack so that, where there is a match across data fields on both systems, key information is attached to the JTrack file. This should allow offender managers working in prisons and on schemes, to be aware which offenders have PPO status, where they are being held, and when they are due to be released. Gregg Mead, PPO Implementation Team, Home Office Drugs Interventions Programme FURTHER INFORMATION: For detailed information on the PPO Programme please visit the PPO minisite: http://www.crimereduction.gov.uk/ppo/ppominisite 01.htm A copy of Rebalancing the Criminal Justice System in favour of the law-abiding majority can be found on the Home Office website: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/documents/CJSreview.pdf?version=1 The PPO Implementation Team is very interested to hear how the PPO re-launch and alignment with DIP is going on the ground, so please get in touch and tell us what has worked well for you. We are currently compiling a database of case studies to better understand the challenges faced in delivering excellent services to PPOs. Please email Rachael Laurence if you have a case study to share: Rachael.Laurence@homeoffice@gsi.gov.uk

25/07: GENERAL OFFENDING PROGRAMMES REVIEW

We are progressing our joint review with the Prison Service of all the General Offending Programmes currently delivered in England and Wales. A Project Board has been created consisting of representatives of both bodies and we are about to embark upon a full literature review of all our current programmes with a view of producing a refreshed programme which will be compatible in both prison and probation settings. We will be involving practitioners and mangers in both settings as part of this review as we want the refreshed programme to represent the experience staff have gained delivering the current programmes. The timescale we are working to indicates that we should have a new product to present to the Correctional Services Accreditation Panel by July 2007. Following successful accreditation of the Programme a further Business Case will be devised to outline the national implementation plan. Please contact me if you would like to offer your views on this project.

11

Phil Mackin, Project Manager, General Offending Programme Refresh Project FURTHER INFORMATION: Phil Mackin, NPD Interventions Unit Email: Philip.Mackin3@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk Tel: 020-7217 8044 Mob: 07768 803241 25/08: CHANGE CONTROL The Change Control Board sat on 26 October 2006. As we are in the process of amending the Change Control procedures to involve the Effective Practice Training Managers, the Board was on a smaller scale then other years. Nevertheless there were a range of issues discussed and the Report will be available in December 2006. FURTHER INFORMATION: Phil Mackin, NPD Interventions Unit Email: Philip.Mackin3@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk Tel: 020-7217 8044 25/09: DOMESTIC VIOLENCE PROGRAMMES UPDATE Every Probation Area now delivers an accredited Domestic Violence Programme. The majority of Areas deliver the Integrated Domestic Abuse Programme (IDAP) while the North East and North West regions plus Thames Valley deliver the Community Domestic Violence Programme (CDVP). The Programmes are bedding in well but inevitably there are implementation issues which need reviewing. The pressing concern is the high number of offenders being sentenced to complete either Programme but then having a join a waiting list. The continued roll out of the Specialised Domestic Violence Courts may have contributed

to this situation in addition to all Courts appreciating the need to effectively sentence Domestic Violent Offenders. To start dealing with this situation a questionnaire is to be sent to each area designed to gain a view of the current position in each area. Additionally the recent Change Control Panel reviewed both Programmes’ manuals and agreed to the roll out of the amended versions early in The New Year. During the summer there was a debate regarding the suitability of Domestic Violent Offenders to complete General Offending Behaviour Programmes. This is a complex matter and we need to explore the range of issues involved over time. The initial view taken by the designers of IDAP and CDVP and ETS is that a General Offending Behaviour Programme should never be considered as the only form of intervention for such an offender. To ensure appropriate referrals are made Offender Managers need to consult with their Intervention colleagues and form a joint view based in the individual’s need and level of risk The Programme designers considered that they may be a case for the development of a joint relapse prevention programme and this will be costed into next year’s business plan. This debate also brought into focus the need for a clear understanding of the term Instrumental Violence and as to whether this can be applied to every case of Domestic Violence. The view of the designers is that this definition is not sufficient to describe the complexities of a Domestic Violence Offence and have asked for further research to be undertaken. Again this research project will be costed and included into next year’s budget. The role of the Woman Safety Worker is key to the safe running of the Programmes and my predecessor Sue Pearce made a successful bid for extra funding, which has been available to areas from June to ensure Areas were able to maintain and develop this role. Additionally we have been able to provide five national training

12

events for WSWs and are considering how we can streamline the training to be able to provide a National Vocational Qualification. This has been a very busy period for all staff involved with the delivery of Domestic Violence Programmes and the current position of demand outstripping supply will remain at least in the short to mid term. However given the professionalism of all staff in this area of work we are heading towards achieving this year’s completion target which indicates that we are intervening appropriately to ensure the reduction in reoffending and importantly we are doing a worthwhile job to ensure the safety of others. FURTHER INFORMATION: Phil Mackin, NPD Interventions Unit Email: Philip.Mackin3@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk Tel: 020-7217 8044

25/10: RDS NOMS, RESEARCHING ‘WHAT WORKS’ FOR NOMS INTERVENTIONS RDS NOMS is the Home Office Research, Development and Statistics unit embedded in NOMS. RDS NOMS produces evidence and provides evidence-based advice to inform policy development, the implementation of new NOMS interventions, and the impact of existing programmes. As part of this work, RDS NOMS Research and Evaluation (RDS NOMS R&E) conducts Rapid Evidence Assessments and manages Systematic Reviews to synthesise existing knowledge about ‘what works’. We also manage and undertake process, feasibility and outcome studies and use action research to produce evidence to support decision making throughout NOMS, the Probation Service and Prison Service. This evidence will improve the targeting and delivery of interventions across the services.

13

‘What works’ An important part of RDS NOMS’s work is to advise colleagues about ‘what works’ to reduce re-offending. Currently, cognitive-behavioural programmes for general offenders, substancemisusing offenders and sex offenders have the strongest evidence base to suggest they can help reduce re-offending. The Washington State Institute for Public Policy’s (2006) review is one of a number of international studies (with, amongst others, Wilson et al, 2005; McGuire, 2002) which has found that cognitive behavioural programmes are effective in reducing recidivism for general offenders. While UK-based studies (e.g. Friendship et al., 2002; Falshaw et al, 2003) have so far produced a mixed picture of the effectiveness of cognitive-behavioural interventions, this may be due to weaknesses of implementation or research designs (Debidin & Lovbakke, 2004). In addition, amongst the psychological programmes for sex offenders, behavioural and cognitive behavioural approaches showed the most robust effects (Lösel & Schmucker, 2005). Indeed, International and UK evidence supports using treatment programmes with sex offenders and have shown that they reduce re-offending (e.g. Washington State Institute for Public Policy, 2006 and Friendship et al, 2003) There is a similar picture in relation drug treatment programmes. Several UK and international studies (e.g. Bullock, 2003; Ramsay, 2003) have concluded that the successful completion of drug programs is likely to reduce recidivism, with therapeutic communities and drug courts found to be particularly effective in reducing drug crime (Holloway et al, 2005). Several researchers (e.g. Prendergast et al, 2004; Wexler, et al, 1999) have also highlighted the importance of successfully completed aftercare programmes in reducing re-offending amongst this group.

Focusing briefly on the delivery of interventions, while some evidence (McGuire, 2000) suggests more positive results are produced in a noncustodial setting, and that offenders themselves perceive community sentences to be useful (Mair and May, 1997); more recent work by Landenberger and Lipsey, 2005) suggests that effectiveness of treatments is not related to their setting. Evaluations of other types of interventions, including violent offender treatment programmes and education, training and employment interventions, have so far produced promising but inconclusive results Why is research quality important? Producing high quality, robust knowledge about interventions is not easy, but it is important we take action to address the relative shortage of strong UK evidence of the effectiveness of interventions. This is because high quality evidence provides a knowledge base for decisions at all levels of an organisation like NOMS. For example, if decisions are based on flawed evidence there is a much greater chance of unexpected effects which could have serious consequences on the ground. This could potentially hinder delivery, impede development and waste resources. Future research NOMS has six goals which it will focus on in 2005-2008 – supporting sentencers and implementing sentences; implementing the Criminal Justice Act 2003; establishing integrated offender management; taking action to reduce reoffending; developing commissioning and contestability; and developing the organisation. RDS NOMS R&E is working closely with NOMS, the Probation Service and the Prison Service to develop a wide range of research studies which will provide high quality evidence to support the

14

delivery of these goals. For example, RDS NOMS is managing four large-scale cohort studies, including one focused on offender management. These will provide evidence on which interventions are associated to reductions in reoffending. By providing accessible information on ‘what works’, RDS NOMS research will be of use to frontline delivery staff and policy makers in the Probation Service, the Prison Service and partnership agencies. FURTHER INFORMATION Daniel Ramsey, RDS-NOMS Research & Evaluation Email: Daniel.Ramsey7@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk Tel: 020-7035 3445 References • Bullock, T. (2003). Key findings from the literature on the effectiveness of drug treatment in prison. In Ramsay, M. (ed) Prisoners’ Drug Use and Treatment: Seven Research Studies. Home Office Research Study 267. London: Home Office Debidin, M. and Lovbakke, J. (2004). ‘Offending behaviour programmes in prison and probation’. In Harper, G. and Chitty, C. (eds.) The impact of corrections on reoffending: a review of ‘what works’. Home Office Research Study 291. London: Home Office. Falshaw, L., Friendship, C., Travers, R. and Nugent, F. (2003). Searching for ‘What Works’: an evaluation of cognitive skills programmes. Home Office Research Findings 206. London: Home Office. Friendship, C., Mann, R. E., & Beech, A. R. (2003), Evaluation of a National Prison-Based Treatment Program for Sexual Offenders in England and Wales. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 18(7), 744-759

Friendship, C., Blud, L., Erikson, M. and Travers, R. (2002). An evaluation of cognitive behavioural treatment for prisoners. Home Office Research Findings 161. London: Home Office. Holloway, K., Bennett, T. and Farrington, D. (2005). The effectiveness of criminal justice and treatment programmes in reducing drugrelated crime: a systematic review. Home Office Online Report 26/05. London: Home Office. Landenberger, N. A. and Lipsey, M.W. (2005) ‘The Positive Effects of Cognitive-Behavioural Programs for Offenders: A Meta-Analysis of Factors Associated with Effective Treatment.’ Journal of Experimental Criminology. Lösel, F. and Schmucker, M. (2005). ‘The effectiveness of treatment for sexual offenders: A comprehensive meta-analysis’. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 1, 117-146. Mair, G. and May, C. (1997) Offenders on Probation. Home Office Research Study 167.London: Home Office. McGuire, J. (2002). ‘Criminal Sanctions Versus Psychologically-Based Interventions with Offenders: A Comparative Empirical Analysis’. Psychology, Crime and Law, 8, 183-208. McGuire, J. (2000) What Works in Reducing Criminality. In Graycar, A. (Ed.) Reducing Criminality – Partnerships and Best Practices. Australian Institute of Criminology. Prendergast, M.L, Hall, E.A., Wexler, H.K., Melnick, G. and Cao, Y. (2004). Amity PrisonBased Therapeutic Community: 5-Year Outcomes. The Prison Journal, 84(1), 36-60. Ramsay, M. (ed) (2003). Prisoners’ Drug Use and Treatment: Seven Research Studies. Home Office Research Study 267. London: Home Office.

15

Washington State Institute for Public Policy (2006). Evidence-Based Adult Corrections Programs: What Works and What Does Not. – Washington State Institute for Public Policy. [Available online at: www.wsipp.wa.gov] Wexler, H.K., Melnick, G., Lowe, L. and Peters, J. (1999). ‘Three-year reincarceration outcomes for in-prison therapeutic community and aftercare in California’. The Prison Journal, 79(73), 321-336. Wilson, D.B., Bouffard, L.A. and MacKenzie, D.L. (2005). ‘A quantitative review of structured, group-orientated, cognitivebehavioural programs for offenders’. Criminal Justice and Behaviour, 32(2), 172-204.

25/11: ACCREDITED PROGRAMMES EVALUATION MEASURES FEEDBACK REPORTS, PSYCHOMETRIC ASSESSMENTS This article is to highlight the recent publication of the Evaluation Measures: Psychometric Assessment Feedback Reports for the General Offending Behaviour Programmes ((GOBPS) Enhanced Thinking Skills & Think First), Substance Misuse Programmes (Addressing Substance Related Offending & Offender Substance Abuse Programme) and the Drink Impaired Drivers Programme (DID). For each of these programmes a National Report was produced and it is available on EPIC. For those Probation Areas which had more than 50 matching offender pre and post programme psychometric assessments an individual report was published comparing area data to the national results. An e-mail as well as paper copies of these reports were sent to the relevant Area Chief Officer. It is a great achievement to be able to announce the publication of these reports which have been produced using the psychometric extracts from IAPS and based on data sent previously to NPD by Areas. This is a testament to the time and effort given by programme and other staff to administer and enter the psychometric assessments. On this occasion NPD were pleased to provide feedback reports for 15 Probation Areas delivering DID1, 2 Probation Areas delivering Substance Misuse programmes2 and 8 Probation Areas delivering GOBPs3. The information in each report aims to provide management and programme staff in areas and at NPD with an easy to read summary of the data collected so far on psychometric assessments
1

2 3

Teeside, Lancashire, Greater Manchester, North Yorkshire, Derbyshire, Leicestershire & Rutland, Staffordshire, West Midlands, West Mercia, Dyfd-Powys, Essex, Hampshire, Kent, Thames Valley, Avon & Somerset. Thames Valley, Avon & Somerset. Northumbria, Lancashire, Staffordshire, West Midlands, West Mercia, Hampshire, Kent, Thames Valley.

16

and provide a useful prompt to explore the following: • • • An indication of how programmes are being implemented; An indication of how well evaluation and monitoring systems in particular are operating; An indication of whether the measures are going in the desired direction in relation to the key treatment targets of each individual accredited offending behaviour programme.

The reports aim to provide a useful piece of management information about programmes. On the whole, it was pleasing to see that generally the information gained from the psychometrics indicates that they are going in the desired direction for the relevant treatment targets of GOBPs, DID and Substance Misuse Programmes. They give an indication that locally and nationally there is a need to focus on improving data accuracy and quality, and that there is a need for Areas to continue to work towards entering programme data on IAPS in ‘real-time’ rather than as a back office function. The reports for individual Probation Areas provide a comparison with the national data and identify where results are going in an undesired direction. This enables areas to focus attention on identifying the potential reasons for this and take action as appropriate. This is also applicable at a national level, for example NPD has noted that two psychometric assessments used in GOBPs (the locus of control and the Gough Socialisation scale) need attention as they are currently consistently moving in an unexpected direction pre to post programme. There is a need to improve the quality of programme data as much data was lost when it was cleaned nationally due to issues such as

dates not matching or having a post assessment for an offender but not a matching pre assessment. In order to help address this issue, a current project for the Offending Behaviour Programmes Team is to provide a framework that can be used locally and nationally to improve the quality and accuracy of data collected for programmes. Finally, the feedback reports provide a snapshot of data from Areas and if psychometric assessments have yet to be inputted onto IAPS they will not have been included in the reports. This may be one reason that some probation areas did not receive a specific report for ETS, Think First, ASRO, OSAP or DID. In the future, once sufficient data is available nationally, reports will be produced on the One to One, Cognitive Skills Booster and Womens’ Programmes. In the next six months NPD will aim to provide feedback reports for the CALM, ART and Domestic Violence Programmes. In the meantime once having read the reports, if you have any feedback please e-mail them to the OBPT helpdesk: NPD.OBP.Helpdesk@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk This feedback will be used to assist future refinement of the report structure and content. Finally, a big thank you again to all the staff in all the Probation Areas who have taken the time and effort to administer the psychometric assessments and enter the data onto IAPS or send it to NPD. FURTHER INFORMATION: Jo Day, Principal Psychologist, NPD Interventions Unit Email: Jo.Day@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk Tel: 020-7217 8999

17

25/12: CALM SYMPOSIUM, 13 OCTOBER 2006 As successful Symposium on the CALM programme was held in Yorkshire to celebrate the roll out of the programme and outline future areas of development. CALM (Controlling Anger and Learning Mange it) is a cognitive behavioural programme which teaches skills in managing anger and emotion. It is delivered in both prisons and community to male offenders who have been assessed as having offended due to poor emotional control. The principal speaker was Dr Bill Winogron, the Canadian author of CALM whom having spent the initial part of the week leading a CALM Training for Trainers course then used the opportunity to demonstrate a prototype of eCALM, an IT based training programme which will act as an adjunct to the more traditional methods of training staff, not only in CALM but also the principles of effective interventions. The audience was particularly impressed as demonstrated by the number of areas volunteering to pilot the project. Other key speakers included Dr Danny Clark; Head of Offending Behaviour programmes at NPD who argued that whilst it was still too early for a full evaluation of the effectiveness of the programme, the analysis of psychometrics indicated positive outcomes. The symposium ended on a high with Dr Bill Winogron arguing that when compared to other jurisdictions, the Probation service in England & Wales has the most skilled and motivated staff and delivers the most effective programmes – a pleasing contrast to some of the more recent headlines. FURTHER INFORMATION Phil McNerney, NPD Interventions Unit Email: Philip.Mcnerney2@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk Tel: 020-7217 0674

25/13: PROBATION AREAS SECURE EUROPEAN SOCIAL FUND (ESF) SUPPORT FOR ACCREDITING OFFENDER LEARNING The National Learning and Skills Council, in partnership with the National Probation Directorate, have successfully accessed ESF Equal funding. This will provide additional support to the Offender Learning and Skills Service and ETE work undertaken by Probation Areas. In addition to the employability focussed interventions that will be developed to support OLASS, two key projects for Probation will be developed. Both projects look to develop formal accreditation of offender learning that takes place within both unpaid work and general offending behaviour programmes. The preferred model of accreditation is the National Open College Network’s suite of Progression Awards that are compatible with the developing ‘Framework’ for achievement. NOCN offer an excellent opportunity to develop a credit based approach to accrediting offender’s achievements. 15 Probation Areas have been successful in securing £1.5million of European Social Fund (ESF) support to develop accreditation opportunities for offenders undertaking unpaid work and general offender behaviour programmes. A further project looking at developing an Intermediate Labour Market Model will be managed by Merseyside Probation Area. The development of ESF Equal provision in the community will be supported by the Community Re-integration Unit. The unit has responsibility for the key area of Education, Training and Employment operational policy development and interface with Probation Areas.

18

The projects will run for a twelve month period to December 2007 and will be monitored and evaluated. Best practice emanating from the project will be disseminated to all interested Areas. FURTHER INFORMATION Ian Henshaw, NPD Interventions Unit Email: Ian.Henshaw@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk Tel: 020-7217 0682 Marcus Smart, NPD Interventions Unit Email: Marcus.Smart@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk Tel: 020-7217 0766 25/14: ADVANCE NOTIFICATION OF TWO EVENTS, EARLY 2007 Some dates for your diaries for the New Year: 30 January 2007 – PS Plus Forum, London 21 & 22 March 2007 – National Employment & Skills Conference, Birmingham Further details about these events will follow shortly. Marcus Smart, NPD Interventions Unit Email: Marcus.Smart@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk Tel: 020-7217 0766

Thanks to all contributors to this edition of Interventions News. If you have a story to tell about implementation of what works/ interventions, why not write an article, preferably with a photograph, and send to: JohnA.MacGregor@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk

19