Page Summary Programme Management Drop Outs Targeting Area Performance Suite of Programmes 3 4 7 8 9 10 Figure Number of Completions by Year

Percentage Completions from Commencements by Year Accredited Programmes Annual Completion Rates Enhanced Thinking Skills Programme Think First Programme Drink Impaired Drivers Programme Reasons for Dropout 2003-04 General Offending Programmes OGRS2 Scores OGRS2 Scores 2002-03 & 2003-04 Sex and Violence Programmes OGRS2 Scores Drug and Drink Programmes OGRS2 Scores Predicted and Actual Completions 2003-04 Area Completions as Percentage of Target Achieved 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13


1.1 This paper summarises the main annual statistics on the delivery of offending behaviour programmes. Programmes are an important element in the range of interventions offered by the National Probation Service. 1.2 The overall picture is encouraging. The number of offenders who complete offending behaviour programmes continues to rise. A total of 13,136 offenders completed programmes in 2003/04; this is an increase of 70% on that of the 02/03 figure (7,716). Averaged over all programmes the percentage of those who complete a programme once they have started it has increased to 71%; this figure is based on trend analysis of throughput, which continues to show improvement. 1.3 The area where work must continue is engaging with offenders prior to programme commencement, i.e. through case management. This is the area, which shows least improvement, yet would yield significant gains in both effectiveness and value for money. 1.4 The reasons for drop out are very similar to those for earlier years; approximately half of those who do not complete programmes are breached or have their orders revoked, i.e. are dealt with through the courts. 1.5 There are other indicators of improvement. The number of referrals increased from 24,399 to 34,311, an increase of 41%. Perhaps more importantly the number of orders where the court followed the PSR recommendation for a programme increased from 71% in 2002/03 (24,399) to 82% in 2003/04 (35,270). This figure reflects an increased sentencer confidence as well as the improved suite of programmes. 1.6 The overall performance of areas continues to improve. In contrast to 2001/02 where the poorest area achieved only 5% of the target and in 2002 where the lowest figure was 19%, in 2003/04 the poorest area achieved 51%. Twenty areas achieved 100% or more. There are still gains to be achieved by improving on retention of offenders, through focusing on compliance and management of the order, so increasing the value for money of programmes, as well as impacting on effectiveness. 1.7 The NPS achieved 88% of its target for programme completions.


2.1 Programme referrals continue to show a steady increase year on year, from 34,311 in 2002/03, to 42,825 in 2003/04. This is a rise of 25%. Taken with the improvement in targeting profiles (see page 7) this indicates that the broad range of programmes is right for local conditions and sentencers. 2.2 There is a further improvement in the proportion of referrals that result in an order or licence with a condition to attend a programme. The number of new orders/licences with a condition to attend a programme increased from 24,399 (i.e. 71% of referrals resulted in an order) in 02/03 to 35,270 (i.e. 82%). 2.3 There was also an increase in the number of offenders commencing programmes; 22,462 commenced in 2003/04 compared to 15,193 in 2002/03, an increase of just over 40%. 2.4 The major weakness in performance is managing the gap between orders being made and offenders commencing on a programme. Here there has been no improvement in the proportion of offenders on who then start the required programme. The proportion remains at 63% (65% in 2002/03). A new target will be set for this in 2005/06. 2.5 The rates of completion for programmes show a continuing trend towards improvement, particularly once offenders have started a programme.


2.6 The completion figures presented in the graphs above are throughput figures i.e. do not reflect completion rates for a cohort or specific group of offenders. Because they were collected during a period when the volume of delivery was growing they will be an under-representation of the true figure. The OSAP figure is low because this programme was only available in a limited number of areas as a pilot figure. 2.7 The graphs for sex offender programmes are not represented because the throughput figures for them are further reduced owing to the length of the programme. A sex offender programme may take two years to complete so while the number of programmes is increasing throughput figures will significantly under-report completions. A cohort analysis of a sex offender programme is likely to show a good level of completion. 5

2.8 Where it has been possible to establish a trend analysis for programmes, this has been done, using assumptions to allow for time delays in commencing and completing programmes. These produce some very encouraging figures. Enhanced Thinking Skills, Think First and Drink-Impaired Drivers' Programme are shown below as examples. Only when we are able to produce figures based on cohort analysis will it be possible to confirm the completion figures.


3.1 The profile of dropouts (offenders who start but do not finish programmes) continues to be similar to earlier years. About half (51%) of those on programmes are returned to court, either for breach (36%) or revocation (15%). 3.2 The category other contains a wide variation in reasons for failure to complete. Approximately a fifth of offenders (17% of the overall figure) are restarted on another programme. Other reasons are that the order/licence has expired, or the offender has entered drug rehabilitation.

3.3 Until probation areas are entering data into IAPs in real time and are using a full set of reports, it is not possible to provide greater clarity about the reasons for drop out. More monitoring needs to take place to identify at what stage the drop out occurs. This will enable more focused work to identify what issues need to be tackled to improve the proportion of offenders who start programmes. 7

4.1 There is a continuing improvement in targeting, with most programmes showing a profile that is in accord with that suggested by the targeting guidelines. 4.2 For general offending programmes the proportion with OGRS scores in the low risk band (i.e. OGRS less than 31) is generally low. 4.3 The high level of low OGRS scores for those on Think First has been addressed with the relevant areas. It reflects a small number of areas that are delivering the programme to those with low OGRS scores. This may in part be due to their use of ACE as the prime targeting tool rather than OGRS or OASys.


4.4 The sex offender and domestic violence programmes are always likely to have profiles with low OGRS scores as this reflects the likelihood of reconviction for these offences. 4.5 Drink Impaired drivers tend to have low OGRS scores, but may be placed on Probation because courts consider the nature of the offence serious.

5.1 Over the past three years there has been a steady increase in the performance of NPS in the delivery of programme. The number of offenders completing programmes in 2003/04 is approximately three times that of 2001/02. 5.2 Against an increasing tough target, rising from 10,000 in 2001/02 to 15,000 in 2003/04, performance against that target rose from 37% completion in 01/02 to 88% completion in 2003/04.


5.3 This increasing ability to achieve the targets is still marked by variability between the best and worst performing areas, (see Figure 13). Overall performance of areas continues to improve. In contrast to 2001/02 where the poorest area achieved only 5% of the target and in 2002 where the lowest figure was 19%, in 2003/04 the poorest area achieved 51%. 20 areas achieved 100% or more and in addition seven achieved near misses (i.e. achieved between 90 – 99%). This compares with only 4 areas that were on target and 6 near misses in 2002/03. This improved performance has focussed on the work needed to improve engagement with offenders resulting in better retention. There are still gains to be achieved by improving on retention of offenders, through focusing on compliance and case management of the order, so increasing the value for money of programmes, as well as impacting on effectiveness.

6.1 There are now fourteen programmes that are accredited or provisionally accredited for use in the community. Two more are awaiting submission to the Correctional Services Accreditation Panel in July 20041, and a further two will be are at an early stage of development. This will complete the major development work on programmes. Future work will focus on developing motivational package to enhance offender engagement with the overall order as well as maximising the gains from individual interventions. 6.2 For the past year all development work has been undertaken jointly with the Prison Service. Much of the focus has been to try to prepare for new sentences under the CJ Act. Alongside this there has been continuing work to align the business processes for programme delivery within Prison and Probation e.g. by developing a joint framework for audit of programmes, aligning video monitoring and post programme forms and where possible delivery training on a joint basis. The Change Control Board continues to be a joint Board.