DRUG TREATMENT & TESTING ORDERS 2004/5: TARGETS, PERFORMANCE MEASURES AND POOLED BUDGET ADVICE

PURPOSE
To inform areas about: • their 2004/5 DTTO targets and new performance measures • the revised DTTO monitoring requirements • the Pooled Budget arrangements for 2004/5 guidance issued by the NTA to Drug Action Teams (DATs) regarding the commissioning of DTTOs

Probation Circular
REFERENCE NO: 06/2004 ISSUE DATE: 22 January 2004 IMPLEMENTATION DATE: Immediate EXPIRY DATE: 31 March 2005 TO: Chairs of Probation Boards Chief Officers of Probation Secretaries of Probation Boards Lead ACOs – Substance Misuse CC: Board Treasurers Regional Managers DTTO SPOs/Managers AUTHORISED BY: Claire Wiggins, Head of Intensive Interventions Team ATTACHED: Annex A - B

ACTION
Chief Officers are asked to: • Note the contents of this circular and distribute it to relevant staff Ensure that the revised DTTO monitoring requirements are put in place by 1 April 2004

SUMMARY
DTTO commencement targets for 2004/5 will increase to 12,000 orders with a higher intensity treatment plan and 1,000 of the new lower intensity variant. £76m funding has been made available for this, of which £42m will be transferred to the Department of Health Pooled Treatment Budget to fund the treatment and testing components of the order in England. Funding for DTTO treatment and testing in Wales will be included in the 2004/5 Main Resource Allocation to the four Welsh areas. Additional DTTO performance measure targets, agreed with the NTA, will be introduced from April 2004 for completion and National Standard first appointments arranged to take place with probation and the treatment provider. NTA guidance for DATs on the commissioning of DTTOs is attached to this circular.

RELEVANT PREVIOUS PROBATION CIRCULARS
PC 116/2001, PC 19/2002, PC 06/03, PC 68/03

CONTACT FOR ENQUIRIES
Anne Williams, Drug & Alcohol Performance/Interventions Manager Tel: 020 7217 0768 Email: anne.williams@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk Robert Stanbury, Drug & Alcohol Policy Developer Tel: 020 7217 0767 Email: robert.stanbury@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk

National Probation Directorate
Horseferry House, Dean Ryle Street, London, SW1P 2AW General Enquiries: 020 7217 0659 Fax: 020 7217 0660

Enforcement, rehabilitation and public protection

1. BACKGROUND The Government’s Updated Drug Strategy 2002 set out a range of targets to drive delivery of it’s main aims. A key target is to increase the participation of problem drug users in treatment programmes by 100% by 2008 and a significant increase in funding has been made available to achieve this. Various initiatives are being introduced through the NTA and the Criminal Justice Interventions Programme (CJIP) to expand treatment availability and increase pathways into treatment. As part of the expansion of treatment places, funding is available to increase the 2004/05 DTTO commencement target to 13,000 - 12,000 orders with a higher intensity treatment plan and 1,000 of the new lower intensity variant. Since 2001/2 arrangements have been in place to transfer the treatment and testing element of DTTO funding for England to the Department of Health who, through the NTA, distribute this funding as part of the Pooled Treatment Budget to DATs. The funding to deliver DTTO treatment and testing provision in Wales continues to be included in the Main Resource Allocation to the four Welsh areas. 2. 2004/5 DTTO TARGETS The targets shown below are the indicative DTTO 2004/5 targets. These are awaiting final approval but are not expected to change. Commencement Targets: The DTTO commencement target for 2004/5 has been distributed to areas using the same percentage share (based on an area’s share of the Main Resource Allocation) as for the other Performance Bonus Scheme linked targets. Areas have been allocated their percentage share of both higher and lower intensity orders (shown at Annex A). An individual Probation Area’s DTTO ‘commencement target’ is made up by combining the targets of both higher and lower intensity orders. Where an area exceeds its target of higher intensity DTTOs, these will count towards the overall DTTO target, and can effectively be used to substitute the number of lower intensity orders made. However, the reverse situation does not apply i.e lower intensity orders made above the lower intensity DTTO target at the expense of making higher intensity DTTOs will not be counted against the DTTO ‘commencement target’. New targets: The following new targets, applicable to each area, will be introduced from April 2004 and will be jointly applicable to both higher and lower intensity orders: 1. 35% of DTTO terminations between April 04 and March 05 to be satisfactorily completed orders (normal termination at end of order and early revocation for good progress) 2. 90% of first appointments with probation arranged to take place within one working day of the order being made (E6 of National Standards refers) 3. 90% of first appointments with the treatment provider arranged to take place within two working days (E6 of National Standards refers). An order will be deemed to be “completed” and count for the purpose of meeting the target when the order has either reached it’s expiry date with the offender still on the treatment programme and under active supervision, or, where the order has been terminated early for good progress. An order that expires with outstanding breach proceedings/warrants (ie where the order is not active and the offender is not responding) will not count as a completed order. Performance Bonus Scheme indicators Next year the DTTO completion target will also be included in the Performance Bonus Scheme. The scheme target is to achieve 90% across all the indicators, which are weighted as shown below:
PC06/2004 - Drug Treatment & Testing Orders 2004/05: Targets, Performance Measures and Pooled Budget Advice 2

The number of DTTO commencements against the area target - weighting 7% The proportion of DTTO completions against the target of 35% - weighting 7% 3. DTTO PERFORMANCE MEASURES AND MONITORING In addition to the above targets, performance monitoring of first appointments kept with probation and treatment providers and retention on orders at three, six and twelve months will be introduced from April 2004. This data will be used to collect some baseline information about retention on DTTOs at critical points to establish if drop out of the order is more likely at any specific point. The data will enable comparison by area and support the development of practice to improve engagement and retention. NPD are aware of the many monitoring demands made on areas, particularly in respect of DTTOs and have given particular attention to ensuring no additional DTTO returns would be required. The target and performance measurement will therefore be collected by NPD as follows: • commencements are measured through the monthly DTTO returns submitted by areas to NPD and these returns will continue to be required • Performance measured against the completion target which will be introduced for England and Wales in 2004-05 will also be taken directly from the monthly DTTO returns. However, areas are asked NOT to include any order that is not active at the point of termination (ie in breach and no contact/warrant outstanding). Such cases must be included in the ‘OTHER’ section of the monthly monitoring form with the reason clearly given in the text box. The number of orders that terminate in this way will be closely monitored but will not be counted in calculations for completion. The reason for this is that the order cannot be viewed as a “successful” completion, but it would also be inequitable to penalise a probation area for performance by agencies responsible for executing warrants (the areas responsibility to undertake breach promptly is already assessed by other performance measures). • first probation and treatment provider appointments arranged and achieved are monitored via the monthly National Standard monitoring. Currently this is required on all cases commenced and terminated but in recognition of the heavy demand this makes on areas, monitoring will become consistent with other orders and be monitored on a sampling basis (20% of commencements and 7% of terminations) with immediate effect. retention at 3, 6 and 12 months will be monitored through the Quarterly Probation Lists (old Form 20s). From this data we will be able to extrapolate data relating to the age, gender, ethnicity, offence and length of order and cross reference this to retention 4. DTTOs WITH A LOWER INTENSITY TREATMENT PLAN PC 68/03 advised that the DTTO with a lower intensity treatment plan, introduced this year in nine probation areas, where the 30 BCUs with the highest levels of acquisitive crime are located, would be rolled-out across the NPS from 2004/05. Areas will need to agree with their DATs/JCGs what treatment provision will be appropriate for the lower intensity variant, as the indicative funding for treatment and testing is about half that provided for a higher intensity order. 5. DTTO COMMENCEMENT TARGETS AND FUNDING NPD recognises that the allocation of DTTO commencement targets to areas, based on the percentage of funding an area receives under the Main Resource Allocation funding formula, does not necessarily sit well with the proportion of Pooled Treatment Budget funding allocated to DATs within an area through the York Formula. However, in retaining DTTO commencement targets in the Performance Bonus Scheme, the NPD needed to ensure fair distribution of DTTO targets to probation areas. To determine whether or not this method of apportioning DTTO commencement targets has a significant impact on probation areas and/or DATs, NPD undertook work with the NTA to assess:

PC06/2004 - Drug Treatment & Testing Orders 2004/05: Targets, Performance Measures and Pooled Budget Advice

3

• •

the percentage apportionment of area 2003/4 DTTO commencement targets (for England) to DATs against DATs’ percentage allocation of the Pooled Budget the apportionment of the 2003/4 DTTO commencement target (for England) to probation areas against the problematic drug user (PDU) prevalence figures 1

The outcome showed a close correlation between the 2003/4 distribution of DTTO targets, problematic drug misuse prevalence and the percentage share of funding received by DATs from the Pooled Budget. In light of this, it was decided that, set against the need to be consistent with other probation cash linked targets, no change would be made in the distribution method of DTTO commencement targets to probation areas for 2004/5. Areas with more than one DAT do have flexibility to negotiate with their DATs about apportioning area DTTO commencement targets taking various local factors into account, which could include: 1. 2. 3. 4. the number of PDUs who would meet DTTO suitability in a DAT area the distribution of Pooled Budget funding to DATs within a probation area local drug related crime profile whether or not a CJIP area with enhanced funding for drug misuser identification and treatment provision

Where a probation area has more than one DAT, apportioning the area’s DTTO commencement target to the relevant DATs must be jointly agreed by those DATs. In any area where agreement cannot be reached, it is important that both the NPD and local NTA Regional Managers are advised as early as possible. 6. POOLED TREATMENT BUDGET There are no plans to change the arrangements for the transfer of the treatment and testing element of DTTO funding for England. The baseline for 2004/05 is expected to remain unaltered and accordingly, it is anticipated that £42m will be transferred in 2004/05. This transfer is included in the Three Year Drug Misuse Treatment Allocation to DATs. PC 06/03 sets out the framework within which the NPD and NTA expect that joint commissioning of the treatment provision for DTTOs will be carried out and includes the expectation that DATs will agree DTTO targets and commission treatment that enables DTTO National Standards to be met. That circular included advice that the NPD expects accredited substance misuse or, where appropriate, offending behaviour programmes to be delivered to address offending behaviour within the DTTO context and that the relevant costs of delivering these programmes should be met from the Pooled Budget. The principles outlined in PC 06/03 are applicable to DTTOs with the lower intensity treatment plan. NTA has confirmed that offenders on DTTOs would require high threshold interventions irrespective of their links with the criminal justice system and that, therefore, the Pooled Budget contribution is to meet the costs of providing the additional drug treatment and testing provision necessary to comply with National Standards. The NPD and NTA recognise that not all DATs have readily signed up to DTTO commencement targets or commissioned adequate treatment provision to meet the National Standard. The lower total uplift of the Pooled Budget in 2004/5, with variable increases across DATs, could potentially lead to more DATs being resistant to jointly owning DTTO targets next year. The attached NTA guidance “Commissioning Drug Treatment & Testing Orders” (Annex B), is being issued simultaneously with this circular to DATs and Joint Commissioning Managers. This guidance advises that the NTA considers DATs are being funded at a level that reflects local need and this includes funding to commission adequate DTTO provision.

Estimating the Prevalence of Problematic Drug Misusers for Drug Action Team Areas in England and Wales Using the Multiple Indicator Method – Frischer, Heatlie & Hickman 2003 PC06/2004 - Drug Treatment & Testing Orders 2004/05: Targets, Performance Measures and Pooled Budget Advice 4

1

7. JOINT COMMISSIONING Responsibility for meeting DTTO targets at a local level must be jointly owned by probation areas and DATs. The range of treatment provision that must be delivered as part of a DTTO and the level of contact required is set out in the National Standard. Commissioning treatment provision to meet the Standard is the role and responsibility of DATs through their Joint Commissioning Groups (JCGs). The NTA and NPD agree that, wherever possible, JCGs should be working towards integrating DTTO treatment provision into mainstream provision. Service Level Agreements or Service Specifications that determine contracts with treatment providers need to be clear about requirements for DTTOs and robust enough to be monitored by JCGs whether a stand-alone service or part of mainstream provision. National Standards monitoring shows a low achievement of the required contact with offenders on DTTOs It is unclear yet if this is due to poor feedback and/or recording processes or whether provision does not meet the contact requirement level required by the National Standard. Areas need to identify where improvement needs to be made and, those with more than one DAT determine whether there are differences in performance between the DATs. Any probation area that considers insufficient provision has been commissioned to meet the anticipated treatment needs of offenders on DTTOs should try to resolve this with their JCG/DAT. Where this continues to prove an issue, and could place an area at risk of not meeting the completion target and/or the National Standard, NPD and NTA need to be notified. Probation representatives must play a full role in the process of jointly commissioning treatment provision within a DAT area. Although their principal role is to ensure that criminal justice needs are identified and met, they should not restrict their activity to probation or criminal justice provision. 8. DTTO NATIONAL STANDARDS The National Standard for DTTOs, introduced in February 2001, was primarily based on the limited experience of the DTTO pilot areas. Various factors including the introduction of the Models of Care framework, over three years of DTTO delivery and research evidence about treating crack users and retaining drug misusers in treatment suggest that the current Standard should be reviewed. In particular, the contact and enforcement requirements are limited in their flexibility and may act against completion of orders. The new Criminal Justice Act includes legislation which replaces provisions in Section 53 of the Criminal Justice and Court Services Act 2000 which had not been enacted. This means that the current National Standard enforcement requirements are governed by legislation and cannot be amended. However, NPD is looking to issue guidance about the discretion that exists in respect of enforcement of all intensive interventions, including DTTOs Consideration is presently being given to revising DTTO contact levels within the National Standard and a decision is expected early this year. Guidance and any revision to the National Standard will be issued before April 2004. 9. IMPACT OF CJIP ON DTTOS The introduction of additional funding this year to DATs in high crime Basic Command Units (BCUs) under the CJIP initiative has provided more scope to enhance criminal justice based interventions in those areas, including DTTOs. Twenty five DATs located in nine probation areas received additional funding for 2003/4 and a further twenty three DATs based in the existing nine or five new probation areas will receive increased funding for 2004/5. Additionally, all DATs will receive extra funding to deliver the CJIP Through and Aftercare initiative next year.

PC06/2004 - Drug Treatment & Testing Orders 2004/05: Targets, Performance Measures and Pooled Budget Advice

5

The impact of this on DTTOs has been development in three main areas: 1. improved identification, screening and assessment including Tier 2 intervention to motivate and reduce pre-sentence attrition 2. integrated teams working directly with DTTO teams, treatment providers or alongside them 3. easier access to post-DTTO treatment provision All areas, whether or not they are designated as a “CJIP” area, should work with their DATs/ JCGs to make the best possible use of the additional funding to enhance criminal justice drug treatment provision. In some areas this will mean establishing close working arrangements with the new criminal justice intervention teams (CJITs) who will be able to make a significant contribution to the achievement of DTTO commencement targets.

PC06/2004 - Drug Treatment & Testing Orders 2004/05: Targets, Performance Measures and Pooled Budget Advice

6

Indicative Area Targets 2004-05

(1)

Annex A

Avon & Somerset Bedfordshire Cambridgeshire Cheshire Cumbria Derbyshire Devon & Cornwall Dorset Durham Essex Gloucestershire Hampshire Hertfordshire Humberside Kent Lancashire Leicestershire Lincolnshire Norfolk Northamptonshire North Yorkshire Nottinghamshire Staffordshire Suffolk Surrey Sussex Teeside Thames Valley Warwickshire West Mercia Wiltshire Greater Manchester Merseyside Northumbria South Yorkshire West Midlands West Yorkshire London Dyfed-Powys Gwent North Wales South Wales Total

% Share 2.47 0.94 1.08 1.73 0.90 1.71 2.45 1.00 1.37 2.36 0.85 2.82 1.24 1.94 2.56 3.02 1.71 1.03 1.30 1.03 1.07 2.26 1.89 0.96 1.07 2.05 1.57 2.88 0.73 1.78 0.89 6.30 3.73 3.42 3.12 6.50 5.01 15.11 0.85 1.32 1.23 2.79 100

Offending Behaviour Programme ECP Completions Completions 370 740 141 283 161 323 260 519 134 269 257 513 367 735 150 300 205 411 355 709 128 256 423 845 186 373 292 583 384 767 452 905 256 513 154 309 194 389 155 310 160 320 340 679 283 567 144 287 160 320 307 614 235 470 432 863 109 218 267 534 133 266 946 1,891 559 1,119 514 1,027 468 936 974 1,949 751 1,502 2,266 4,532 127 254 198 395 184 368 419 837 15,000 30,000

Higher Intensity DTTO Starts 296 113 129 208 108 205 294 120 164 284 102 338 149 233 307 362 205 124 155 124 128 272 227 115 128 246 188 345 87 214 106 756 447 411 374 779 601 1,813 102 158 147 335 12,000

Lower Intensity DTTO Starts 25 9 11 17 9 17 24 10 14 24 9 28 12 19 26 30 17 10 13 10 11 23 19 10 11 20 16 29 7 18 9 63 37 34 31 65 50 151 8 13 12 28 1,000

Total DTTO Basic Skills Basic Skills Starts Starts Awards 321 789 197 123 302 75 140 344 86 225 554 138 116 287 72 222 548 137 318 784 196 130 320 80 178 438 110 307 757 189 111 273 68 366 902 225 162 398 99 253 622 156 332 818 205 392 965 241 222 547 137 134 329 82 168 414 104 134 331 83 139 341 85 294 724 181 246 604 151 125 307 77 139 341 85 266 655 164 204 501 125 374 921 230 95 233 58 232 570 142 115 283 71 819 2,017 504 485 1,193 298 445 1,096 274 405 998 250 844 2,079 520 651 1,602 401 1,964 4,834 1,209 110 271 68 171 421 105 159 392 98 363 893 223 13,000 32,000 8,000

(1) Figures have been calculated using the basic funding formula.

Annex B

Commissioning Drug Treatment and Testing Orders
Guidance for drug action teams and commissioners
January 2004

1. Introduction
National targets for Drug Treatment and Testing Order (DTTO) commencements have increased from 6,000 in 2002/03 to 9,000 in 2003/04. They will further increase to 12,000 (referred to as higher intensity orders) plus an additional 1,000 new lower intensity orders in 2004/05. The Home Office contribution to the pooled treatment budget has been increased to reflect these annual increases. The new targets are challenging, particularly for the next financial year (2004/05) when some drug action teams (DATs) will receive little or no uplift in their pooled treatment budget allocations. This paper provides guidance to DATs and joint commissioning groups (JCGs) on the commissioning of DTTOs. Similar guidance is being issued by the Probation Service in their probation circular.

2. Key principles
The key principles behind the commissioning of DTTOs are outlined below. • • • • National DTTO commencement targets are determined by the Home Office and apportioned to probation areas. Responsibility for meeting local targets must be jointly owned by probation areas and drug action teams. Probation service representatives need to be recognised by DATs as full partners in the joint commissioning process. Their contribution should not be restricted to DTTOs and criminal justice issues. Wherever possible, joint commissioning groups should be working towards integrating DTTO provision into mainstream treatment rather than commissioning stand-alone services. In general, drug users who are assessed as suitable for DTTOs are individuals who would require high threshold interventions irrespective of their links with the criminal justice system. The Home Office contribution to pooled treatment funding is provided in acknowledgment of the additional costs associated with DTTOs. This funding is intended to provide a contribution to the cost of drug treatment provision for every offender on a DTTO.

DTTO – NTA guidance

January 2004

1/5

Annex B

3. Pooled treatment budget (PTB)
Some drug action teams have expressed concern that they are being expected to meet the increased targets for DTTO commencements for 2004/05 in a year when they are experiencing little growth in their pooled treatment budgets. The pooled treatment allocations announced in 2002 were based on a revised funding formula (known as the York formula). It was widely accepted that the previous formula was heavily weighted to reflect a number of irrelevant factors and led to an inequitable distribution of funds. Consequently DATs with higher levels of need were under-funded, in relative terms, whilst other DATs benefited disproportionately. The new formula was weighted towards populations of 15-44 year olds and included a range of more relevant measurement criteria. The revised formula led to considerable re-adjustments in PTB allocations and in order to ameliorate the impact, a decision was made to phase in the changes to ensure that no DAT faced a budget cut and that the changes were spread over a three year period. DATs were also given indicative budgets for 2004-2006 to enable them to forward plan. The net result of these changes is that DATs are now being funded at a level which reflects local need and this includes the funding to commission adequate DTTO provision. Probation Circular 06/03 sets out the framework for the joint commissioning of treatment provision for DTTOs.

4. DTTO targets 2004/05
The Home Office issue national targets for DTTO commencements. Probation areas are then allocated their own targets, which in line with other targets, are based on the probation funding formula. The National Probation Directorate (NPD) has confirmed that probation areas can negotiate with their DATs on the basis of their allocated targets and, if necessary, re-apportion targets across the DATs in their areas. The NPD/NTA has undertaken a joint piece of work to assess whether existing DAT targets were allocated on an equitable basis and whether there was scope for redistributing them more fairly. The study involved a comparative analysis of DAT DTTO targets (20002/03) against the following criteria: • problematic drug user (PDU) prevalence figures based on a recent study by Keele University • the probation cash formula • as a percentage of the pooled treatment budget allocation. The outcome of this analysis showed a very close correlation between existing targets and those produced if they were based on the above criteria. This study confirmed that the current targets reflect perceived need and resource allocation. PC 06/04 confirms DTTO commencement targets per probation area for 2004/05 and also introduces the following new targets which will apply from April 2004 to both higher and lower intensity orders: 1. 35% of DTTO terminations to be completed orders (normal termination at end of order and early revocation for good progress) 2. 90% of first appointments with probation arranged to take place within one working day of the order being made (E6 of National Standards refers) 3. 90% of first appointments with the treatment provider arranged to take place within two working days (E6 of National Standards refers).
DTTO – NTA guidance January 2004 2/5

Annex B

Next year the DTTO completion target will also be included in the Performance Bonus Scheme. The scheme target is to achieve 90% across all the indicators, which are weighted as shown below: The number of DTTO commencements against the area target - weighting 7% The proportion of DTTO completions against the target of 35% - weighting 7%

5. DTTO national standards
The National Probation Directorate and the National Treatment Agency have been looking at the impact of national standards for DTTOs. These standards are primarily based on the limited experience of the DTTO pilots and have now been in operation for nearly three years. The current arrangements have the advantage of providing consistency with other community sentences in relation to breach procedures. However, the approach to contact levels and enforcement does not reflect the current evidence base in terms of what works in relation to drug treatment. DTTO national standards need to achieve a balance between developing effective drug treatment responses and providing clear, consistent and enforceable standards that maintain credibility in public protection and criminal justice terms. Discussions have focused on two key aspects: Contact levels: Models of care requires treatment to be based on a clear assessment of the needs of the drug user, with a care plan individually tailored to meet those needs and flexible enough to respond to changes over time. The evidence base in relation to the reduction of offending behaviour also indicates that the intervention should be proportionate to the risk of reoffending. The current contact level of 20 hours per week for the first thirteen weeks for all offenders on a DTTO does not always conform to this evidence base. Enforcement: The rigorous enforcement standards currently in operation are at odds with the accepted notion of problem drug use as a relapsing condition. Treatment interventions need to be flexible and responsive enough to accommodate and re-engage those who are unable to adhere to their treatment plans consistently. The NTA considers that treatment for those on DTTOs needs to be consistent with the principles enshrined in Models of care (NTA 2001) and with the emerging evidence of what is effective in treating drug users. This approach is supported by the NPD. The new Criminal Justice Act includes legislation which replaces provisions in Section 53 of the Criminal Justice and Court Services Act 2000 which had not been enacted. This means that the current National Standard requirement in respect of enforcement is governed by legislation and cannot be amended by the NPD. However, the NPD will shortly be issuing guidance that offers greater clarity about the way that discretion around the enforcement of National Standards can be exercised to provide greater flexibility. Changes in relation to the DTTO contact levels are also under consideration

6. DTTO reconviction study
A Home Office study published on 25 September 2003 looked at 2 year reconviction rates for 174 offenders placed on DTTOs in the three pilot areas (Croydon, Liverpool and Gloucestershire)
DTTO – NTA guidance January 2004 3/5

Annex B
1998-2000. Nearly a third of offenders completed their orders, enabling this particularly hard-toreach/treat group, with entrenched patterns of drug misuse and offending, to lead more stable and crime-free lives. The study concluded the following: • • Two years after the start of the order, offenders who completed DTTOs committed less crime than in any of the five years prior to sentence. There were statistically significant differences in reconviction rates between those whose orders were revoked (91%) and those who completed their orders (53%).

The study confirms the positive impact that drug treatment can achieve in reducing drug-related crime but also points to the need to improve retention and completion rates.

7. DTTO costs
Establishing the true cost of DTTO provision can be a barrier to effective commissioning. Ascribing a fixed cost per order is unhelpful because a significant proportion of orders do not reach their full term. The unit cost of a DTTO is likely to vary quite widely from one area to another depending on how DTTO provision is delivered. There is clearly greater scope for reducing costs and achieving economies of scale where DTTO provision is integrated and delivered in the context of mainstream treatment services. Joint commissioning groups and probation areas should work together to identify the overall cost of their DTTO provision. This will require an understanding of local retention and completion rates and an ability to disaggregate the cost of the different components of the order to establish: • which aspects are delivered within existing service provision • additional elements that are commissioned specifically to meet DTTO requirements • what is paid for by the probation service from their retained funding • This information can then be used to produce a detailed breakdown including, staff, treatment, accommodation, drug testing and travel costs etc. The NTA will shortly be issuing guidance on how to calculate unti costs which will provide additional assistance with this process.

8. Impact of Criminal Justice Intervention Programme (CJIP) and throughcare/aftercare funding
The implementation of CJIP in nominated high crime areas and the availability of throughcare/ aftercare funding to all DATs as of 2004, will provide greater scope to augment and enhance criminal justice based interventions. The new criminal justice intervention teams will be able to contribute to the delivery of DTTOs at a number of different levels e.g. screening and assessment, offering relapse prevention and tier two motivational engagement and providing aftercare support. Joint commissioners and probation areas should work together to make the best possible use of resources available from both the pooled treatment budget and these new initiatives to add value and flexibility to existing DTTO provision.

DTTO – NTA guidance

January 2004

4/5

Annex B
Further information For further information visit www.nta.nhs.uk and www.drugs.gov.uk or contact your NTA regional office, or NTA’s criminal justice team at 020 7972 2215.

Published by the National Treatment Agency 5th Floor, Hannibal House Elephant and Castle London SE1 6TE Tel 020 7972 2214 Fax 020 7972 2248 Email nta.enquiries@nta-nhs.org.uk www.nta.nhs.uk This report is available online at www.nta.nhs.uk

DTTO – NTA guidance

January 2004

5/5