• • • To provide updated information about DTTOs, in particular an amendment to the DTTO National Standard To advise areas about implementation of the Drug Rehabilitation Requirement (DRR), which will replace DTTOs from April 2005 To provide general advice about drug related issues that affect probation areas

Probation Circular
REFERENCE NO: 55/2004 ISSUE DATE: 5rthNovember 2004 IMPLEMENTATION DATE: Immediate EXPIRY DATE: 4th November 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 to G

Chief Officers and Assistant Chief Officers (substance misuse) to note the contents, distribute to all relevant staff and take actions summarised below.

This circular requires that relevant staff: Note and comply with the amendment to E6 of the DTTO National Standard and the clarification on contact time Comply with guidance on DTTO targets and performance monitoring Ensure additional licence conditions to address offenders’ drug problems are considered in pre-release reports and note there is a presumption that additional conditions will be included in licences for Prolific and other Priority Offenders (PPOs). Note the provisional plans for the DRR under the Criminal Justice Act 2003 Note Drug Interventions Programme (DIP) (formerly CJIP) name change Understand the respective case management roles and responsibilities of DIP and NPS/NOMS Note the good practice reminder following a DTTO drug related death in approved premises: Note the role of the Regional What Works Managers (RWWMs) in DTTO performance management Note NPD Drug & Alcohol Team staff changes

PC 6/2004, PC 47/2004, PC 49/2004, PC 51/2004 and PC 52/2004.

Claire Wiggins tel: 020 7217 8646 claire.wiggins3@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk Robert Stanbury tel: 020 7217 0767 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. DTTO NATIONAL STANDARD AMENDMENT TO PERMIT A SHORT STABILISATION PERIOD IN EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES After three years of operational experience the National Probation Directorate (NPD), with the National Treatment Agency (NTA), undertook a review of the DTTO National Standard to determine whether it was in line with emerging evidence about drug treatment and if it contributed to or prohibited retention and successful outcomes. Following this review, a set of proposals were developed which involved substantive changes to the contact requirement of the Standard designed to introduce greater flexibility in the management of the order. Consultation with probation areas took place through the NPD National Standards Reference Group. We also sought the views of sentencers (Lord Chief Justice and the Sentencing Guidelines Council, Head of the Unified Bench, Magistrates’ Association). In light of feedback from areas, it was decided that, as the proposed amendments involved a change in the level of contact hours delivered under an order, it would not be helpful to introduce these changes at this late stage in the year with one exception. This amendment, introduced with immediate effect, allows, in exceptional cases, an induction period for offenders on the higher intensity version of the order. This change is being introduced now because evidence suggests that some offenders may fail in the early phase of their order if they are required to attend an intensive programme of activities before they have been stabilised. A stabilisation period, for some drug users, is linked to improved retention and completion. The second bullet of section E6 of the higher intensity Standard has therefore been amended (see Annex A) to allow for an induction period of up to 8 weeks, where this is assessed as necessary to enable the offender to become stabilised and where doing so is likely to improve retention on the order. This will require the approval of the line manager in all cases. During the induction period offenders will report on a daily basis (five days per week) for a minimum of one hour. This time should be used to stabilise their medication, address fundamental needs such as accommodation and/or undertake a period of motivational work. It is anticipated that most offenders will not need an induction period and will therefore commence the intensive phase immediately. Offenders who are assessed as needing induction will commence the intensive phase no later than 8 weeks from when the order is made. Where the PSR identifies that a stabilisation period is required, sentencers will be able to reflect this is in the length of the order given. Overall, it is expected that offenders who require an induction period to remove barriers to successful retention will be on a longer order and therefore undertake more total hours in treatment than those who are ready to engage in intensive treatment from the outset of the order. NTA are supportive of the proposed change, which is in line with evidence of what is effective in treating drug misusers generally. It is not planned to amend the monthly National Standard file read monitoring forms. Therefore, cases where an induction period has been applied should be removed from cases identified for the monthly file read sample. NPD will monitor the extent to which the induction period is used and with Home Office Research, Development and Statistics (RDS), assess the impact on retention and, if research priorities allow, in the longer term on reoffending. We will also apply any learning in the longer term to reviews of the new National Standards for the Drug Rehabilitation Requirement (DRR). This change to the Standard will be an interim arrangement until the DTTO is replaced by the DRR. A new set of National Standards will be produced for all requirements of the community order including the DRR. The current change should therefore be viewed as a transitional arrangement to improve retention. 2. NATIONAL STANDARDS MONITORING OF COMPLIANCE WITH DTTO CONTACT AND TESTING REQUIREMENTS HM Inspectorate of Probation (HMIP) and the National Audit Office (NAO) found an unacceptably low level of compliance with the contact and testing requirements of the DTTO Standard but concluded that some of this may have been due to poor recording rather than failure to meet the Standard. Compliance monitoring through the monthly NS file read reporting (NSMART) shows little improvement and recent contact with a few areas about this suggests that, although there are some concerns about levels of treatment provision available, inaccurate recording is likely to be a major contributory factor. Where file reading is shown as “unclear”, this is counted as not having met the standard. Therefore, areas are PC55 /2004 – DTTOs/DRRs Advice and information about changes and future arrangements 2

reminded of the need to enforce the provisions relating to contact and regular testing and, particularly, the importance of timely and accurate recording. The NAO also identified some inconsistency between areas as to what should be counted as a “contact” hour e.g. some areas counted the time offenders spent in travelling to appointments whereas others recorded only the time spent in supervised activities. To improve the consistency of performance reporting between areas, NAO recommended that NPD “should specify clearly what activities can be counted towards the required number of contact hours set out in the National Standard”. Whilst it is not possible to provide an exhaustive list of what can be counted, areas should note that any activity/contact which is included in an offender’s weekly contact log/programme, and for which there is a audit trail, can be counted as contact hours. For example, this may include collection and/or consumption of medication. At an area’s discretion, where travel time is in excess of half an hour each way, some or all of the additional travel time may be included as contact hours if the level of demand made of the offender to keep appointments is high e.g. lengthy journey, poor transport routes or multiple appointments. Where travel time is to count as contact time it should be clearly specified in the weekly contact log/programme. 3. DTTO TARGETS AND PERFORMANCE MONITORING DTTOs with a lower intensity treatment plan Commencements of the lower intensity variant of the DTTO are low. Between April – September 2004 only 136 have been made (annual target 1,000). Some areas have indicated their preference not to introduce the lower intensity variant due to the cessation of DTTOs next year. However, areas who have not met their half-year DTTO target and who have not introduced the lower intensity variant may want to re-consider this decision. It is anticipated that DRRs will allow greater flexibility in treatment levels required and the use of the lower intensity variant now will, to some extent, prepare the way for the introduction of DRRs. Those areas not introducing the lower intensity variant should ensure their Regional What Works Manager is informed of this and that plans are in place to meet the combined target (lower plus higher intensity versions) with only the higher intensity order. It is not possible to count DTTOs with a lower intensity treatment plan as higher intensity orders for the purpose of meeting DTTO targets. In some cases it may be appropriate to change a DTTO, during the course of the order, from a lower intensity to a higher intensity version of the order. Where discretion is used for this to happen (with management authorisation) such cases should be removed from the cases that are part of an area’s monthly National Standards monitoring file read sample. Profiled monthly area targets NPD monitors DTTO commencement performance using a profiled monthly target. To enable areas to match their performance achievement calculations with that produced by the NPD, the monthly profile, by area, is attached at Annex B. Case Transfers Following the issue of PC 52/2004 (Case Transfer Instructions), clarification has been sought about which area counts a DTTO commencement when the order is made for the treatment provision to be residential from the start of the order, and where this will take place in an area that is outside the home and funding area. In making a decision about this issue, the following criteria have been taken into account: • DTTO commencements can only be counted once • Residential treatment paid for by Community Care/DAT funding usually takes place outside the funding area • Funding for residential treatment does not have to be made by the same area that holds the DTTO and carries out the case management role • Under PC 52/2004 cases must be managed by the area in whose address the offender is living; therefore that probation area carries the workload In cases where residential treatment is being arranged before the order starts, the PSR/home area will contact the area where the provider is located to inform them that a proposal is being made and confirm that funding is being arranged by the home area. As the Court will then make the order to the PSA in which the offender will reside, the new area will count the DTTO for the purpose of national monitoring and counting towards the area’s target. If the offender subsequently PC55 /2004 – DTTOs/DRRs Advice and information about changes and future arrangements 3

returns to the original area, the order will be transferred to the home area and this will be recorded on the monthly DTTO monitoring. Where a DTTO is made and an offender subsequently enters residential treatment out of their home area, the transfer process (section 12Cii in PC52/2004) will apply. Although the order must now be transferred to the new area, this will only count as a transfer on the monthly DTTO monitoring. For general enquiries concerning PC 52/2004 contact Matthew Bird Tel : 020 7217 8058 E-mail: matthewc.bird@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk 4. ADDITIONAL LICENCE CONDITIONS TO ADDRESS OFFENDERS’ DRUGS PROBLEMS Areas will be aware that the Government’s Updated Drug Strategy 2002 aims to get drug-using offenders into treatment at all stages of the criminal justice system. NPS staff should ensure that progress made in custody to address problematic drug use is built on post release. Similarly prisons should build on any drug treatment undertaken in the community. Staff are therefore reminded that where offenders are to be released on licence consideration should be given to relevant additional licence conditions including: ‘comply with any requirements specified by your supervising officer for the purpose of ensuring that you address, your alcohol/drug/sexual/gambling/solvent abuse/anger/debt/offending behaviour problems/at the name of course/centre where appropriate’. Whilst the above condition cannot require offenders to receive medical interventions, such as prescribing, it can be used to require offenders to attend for assessment, accredited programmes and other cognitive interventions. National Standards monitoring will be amended to show use of a condition to address drug problems as opposed to just general ‘additional conditions’. Probation areas will shortly be advised of changes in monitoring by the Regions and Performance Unit at NPD. Where drug misusing offenders are identified as Prolific and other Priority Offenders (PPOs), under the local Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships (CDRP) PPO schemes, the expectation is that additional licence conditions to address problematic drug use will be included in the licence unless there is a good reason not to do so. A separate Probation Circular regarding licence conditions for PPOs will be issued shortly. Drug misusing offenders released from custody without a licence or who have completed their licence should be referred to the local Criminal Justice Integrated Team (CJIT) for assessment, interventions and case management. 5. CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003: INTRODUCTION OF DRUG REHABILITATION REQUIREMENT (DRR) Under the new Community Order (Criminal Justice Act 2003,) scheduled to be introduced in April 2005, the DRR will replace the DTTO. It is intended the DRR will bring a change of approach, matching treatment to need and using other requirements, such as unpaid work, to restrict liberty. Final details concerning the Community Order and requirements have not yet been agreed but an outline of the proposed model for the DRR is shown at Annex C. This information is intended for planning purposes only and should not be viewed as the definitive version. Transitional arrangements for DTTOs DTTOs and Drug Abstinence Orders (DAOs)/Drug Abstinence Requirements (DARs) (pilot areas only) will continue to be made until the implementation of the DRR. This will have the effect of orders made under the old legislation and the new legislation being managed simultaneously. More detailed guidance about this will be issued later. Interim advice about commissioning arrangements for DRRs It is acknowledged that, without information about the National Standard requirements for DRRs and advice about funding arrangements for 2005/6, there is uncertainty about commissioning arrangements for DRRs next year. In the absence of this detail, we can provide the following interim advice:• Funding for treatment delivered under the DRR will be provided through the Pooled Treatment Budget (PTB). The planning assumption should be made on the basis that offenders given a DRR are entitled to receive treatment in their local area funded via the PTB.

PC55 /2004 – DTTOs/DRRs Advice and information about changes and future arrangements


Treatment under the DRR should comprise of one or more of the main treatment modalities specified in “Models of Care” (see Annex C regarding DRR). National Standards will be developed for all the new sentences but it is envisaged that the amount of treatment should be determined by assessed need and that other requirements, such as an activity requirement or unpaid work requirement, should be added to the DRR to make the order sufficiently intensive to reflect the seriousness of the offence/offending and to address the full range of offender needs. (See Annex C for detail). “Wrap around services” e.g. accommodation, employment or basic skills will usually be delivered through an activity requirement. Testing will operate in a similar way as for DTTOs and continue to be funded via the PTB in 05/06. The 2005/6DTTO target (16000) is likely to be directly replaced by the equivalent DRR target and areas should ensure sufficient treatment and testing capacity is commissioned to meet their local targets. The modalities of treatment commissioned should be determined in conjunction with the DAT/JCG taking into account the assessed needs of the local drug using population

• •

For enquiries concerning Community Order and DRR implementation please contact: Steve Woodgate Tel: 020 7217 0684 E-mail steve.woodgate@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk Megan Jones Tel: 020 7217 0770 E-mail megan.jone@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk 6. CRIMINAL JUSTICE INTERVENTIONS PROGRAMME (CJIP) NAME CHANGE AND UPDATE Change of CJIP name and list of contacts. The Criminal Justice Interventions Programme (CJIP) has been renamed as the Drug Interventions Programme (DIP). It is anticipated that the change of name will more accurately reflect the focus of the programme allowing easier communication to the general public. Criminal Justice Integrated Teams (CJITs) will continue to be known by the same name at present. For details regarding the new DIP structure refer to Annex D. DIP staff contact details are shown at Annex E. NPS and working with CJITs The 2004/5 area DTTO commencement targets are proving to be a challenge for many areas. CJITs should support access to treatment under a DTTO and should not threaten delivery of DTTO targets. It is important that areas establish local protocols with CJITs so that DTTOs/DRRs fit into identification and assessment processes via Arrest Referral and CJITs. Arrest referral workers should advise arrestees about DTTOs; CJIT workers should assess for treatment suitability, including for DTTOs, and where possible should enable an offender to begin their treatment before an order is made. Assessment or commencement in treatment prior to sentence supports the making of a DTTO, is likely to promote retention on an order and should not be seen as a barrier to a DTTO being made. The Integrated Team Monitoring Data Form (ITMDF) The ITMDF has been in use in the intensive CJIP DATs and was scheduled to be rolled out to the remaining 102 DATs from October 2004. DATs have now been advised that this has been deferred until April 2005 so the form can be revised to better meet the dual requirement of information exchange and data provision/monitoring. NPS has been included in the consultation exercise about the ITMDF (see Annex F for details). DATs may decide to use the ITMDF informally in the absence of a national form and to save the need to devise one locally. 7. CASE MANAGEMENT ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF DIP AND NOMS/NPS NPD/NOMS, DIP and the Prison Service have reached a shared understanding about responsibilities for offender case management. This agreement is shown at Annex G. 8. DTTO DRUG RELATED DEATH: GOOD PRACTICE REMINDER The death of an offender subject to a DTTO whilst resident in approved premises has brought to our attention the need to remind areas that they should ensure that relevant probation, treatment provider and approved premises staff are fully aware of their responsibilities in minimising the risk of drug related deaths.

PC55 /2004 – DTTOs/DRRs Advice and information about changes and future arrangements


Communication between those responsible for supervision, residence and drug treatment is essential. Areas should develop guidance for staff, alongside protocols between probation and partner agencies, to ensure that, as a minimum, information on: risk assessment, risk management plans, test results, missed appointments and changed circumstances is routinely exchanged. Offenders placed on DTTOs and resident in approved premises should be made aware of exchange of information arrangements prior to their admission. This guidance should be included in premises’ strategic plan for reducing sudden deaths (PC 40/04 refers). Clarity about what is communicated and who is responsible for communicating it should be included in protocols and service level agreements. If such agreements do not exist a separate agreement should be produced. Further information about reducing drug related deaths (e.g. the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs Report into Drug Related Deaths, 2000, the Government’s Response to that report, 2001 and advice issued by the NTA) can be found on www.drugs.gov.uk and www.nta.nhs.uk. 9. PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT OF DTTOS AND GENERAL DRUGS ENQUIRIES Since the reorganisation of NPD in August 2003, the NPD Regional What Works Managers (RWWMs) and Regional Managers (RMs) have become responsible for performance management of DTTOs and other drug related work. The RWWMs now take an active role in the performance management of DTTO delivery and provide support to areas in achieving their targets. RMs continue to be involved in DTTOs at strategic/policy and regional/ government office level. Areas are therefore requested to refer any queries relating to DTTO performance or other drug related issues e.g. concerning DIP to their RWWMs in the first instance. Regional colleagues will then contact NPD if appropriate and liaise with Regional NTA Managers. It is envisaged this arrangement will expedite responses and will enable local solutions to be identified wherever possible. 10. NPD DRUG & ALCOHOL TEAM STAFF CHANGES Anne Williams has completed her secondment to NPD and returned to the London Probation Area as ACO for Croydon. We will be advertising for a replacement in the first week of November. The post will be open to probation staff on a secondment basis at ACO level and to Home Office employees at Grade 7. A second post will also be advertised to project manage further work on drug testing.

PC55 /2004 – DTTOs/DRRs Advice and information about changes and future arrangements


PC55.2004 ANNEX A NATIONAL STANDARD FOR DTTO WITH A HIGHER INTENSITY TREATMENT PLAN Second bullet of E6 of the Standard shall be replaced by:“Contact across all the requirements of the order shall usually be on five days per week, for a total of twenty hours per week, for the first thirteen weeks of the order with discretion for this to be reduced to a minimum of three days per week and twelve hours per week thereafter, if the offender is responding well. The minimum for the first thirteen weeks of the order shall be fifteen hours per week and nine hours per week thereafter save in an exceptional case where stabilisation is essential when the intensive phase will be delayed for a maximum of 8 weeks during which time the offender must report daily for a minimum of one hour”.

PC55.2004 ANNEX B

Monthly Profiles (cumulative) by Area 2004-05: DTTO Starts
Profile Apr-04
Avon & Some Bedfordshire Cambridgeshi Cheshire Cumbria Derbyshire Devon/Cornw Dorset County Durha Essex Gloucestershi Hampshire Hertfordshire Humberside Kent Lancashire Leicestershire Lincolnshire Norfolk Northamptons North Yorkshi Nottinghamsh Staffordshire Suffolk Surrey Sussex Teesside Thames Valle Warwickshire West Mercia Wiltshire Greater Manc Merseyside Northumbria South Yorksh West Midland West Yorkshir London North London West London East London South Dyfed/Powys Gwent North Wales South Wales

May-04 23 9 10 16 8 16 23 9 13 22 8 26 12 18 24 28 16 10 12 10 10 21 17 9 10 19 15 27 7 16 8 58 35 32 29 60 46 35 35 33 37 8 12 11 26 46 17 20 32 17 32 45 19 25 44 16 52 23 36 47 56 32 19 24 19 20 42 35 18 20 38 29 53 13 33 16 117 69 64 58 121 93 70 70 66 74 16 24 23 52 1,856

Jun-04 71 27 31 50 26 49 70 29 39 68 24 81 36 56 73 86 49 29 37 30 31 65 54 27 31 59 45 82 21 51 25 180 107 98 89 186 143 108 107 102 115 24 38 35 80 2,861

Jul-04 99 38 43 69 36 69 98 40 55 95 34 113 50 78 102 121 68 41 52 41 43 91 76 38 43 82 63 115 29 71 35 252 149 137 125 260 200 151 150 143 160 34 53 49 112 4,003

Aug-04 124 47 54 87 45 86 123 50 69 119 43 141 62 98 128 151 86 52 65 52 54 114 95 48 54 103 79 144 36 89 44 316 187 172 156 326 251 190 188 179 201 43 66 61 140 5,017

Sep-04 150 57 65 105 54 104 149 61 83 144 52 171 76 118 155 183 104 63 79 63 65 138 115 58 65 124 95 175 44 108 54 383 227 208 190 395 304 230 228 217 244 52 80 74 170 6,078

Oct-04 179 68 78 126 65 124 178 73 99 172 62 205 90 141 186 219 124 75 94 75 77 164 137 70 77 149 114 209 53 129 64 458 271 249 226 472 363 274 272 259 291 62 96 89 203 7,259

Nov-04 205 78 90 144 75 142 204 83 114 197 71 234 103 162 213 251 142 86 108 86 89 188 157 80 89 170 130 239 60 148 74 524 310 285 259 540 417 314 312 297 333 71 110 102 232 8,320

England &


Dec-04 232 89 101 163 84 161 230 94 129 222 80 265 117 183 240 284 161 97 122 97 100 213 178 90 100 193 147 271 68 167 83 593 351 322 293 611 471 355 353 336 377 80 124 115 262 9,405

Jan-05 257 98 112 181 93 179 255 104 143 247 89 294 130 203 267 315 178 107 135 108 111 236 197 100 111 214 163 300 76 186 92 658 389 357 325 678 522 394 392 372 418 88 137 128 291 10,432

Feb-05 286 109 125 201 104 198 284 116 159 274 99 327 144 226 297 350 198 119 150 120 124 263 219 111 124 237 182 334 84 207 103 731 432 397 362 753 581 438 435 414 465 98 153 142 324 11,596

Mar-05 321 123 140 225 116 222 318 130 178 307 111 366 162 253 332 392 222 134 168 134 139 294 246 125 139 266 204 374 95 232 115 819 485 445 405 844 651 491 488 464 521 110 171 159 363 13,000

DRUG REHABILITATION REQUIREMENT Criminal Justice Act 2003 sentencing framework The Drug Rehabilitation Requirement (DRR), one of twelve requirements of the new Community Order and Suspended Sentence Order to be introduced in April 2005, will replace the DTTO (of both higher and lower intensity). The new legislation requires the purpose of sentencing to be defined i.e. punishment, reparation, rehabilitation or protection. DRRs fall into the rehabilitation category. Alongside this, the level of intervention ordered under the Community Order will take into consideration the seriousness of the offence and the level of intervention required to meet the appropriate community sentence band (high, medium or low). Reasons for the proposed DRR model At present, a DTTO is the only drug treatment option available to sentencers but the National Standard requires the same high level (20 hours in the first thirteen weeks or 12 hours for the lower intensity variant) of treatment contact for all drug misusing offenders given this sentence. Whilst this level of treatment will be appropriate for many problematic drug misusers, in some cases lower level provision may be more suitable. Currently there is a risk of “over-treating” some offenders placed on a DTTO. As a high intensity order, the DTTO is frequently imposed as an alternative to custody. Under the new Community Order, the DRR can be imposed to meet rehabilitation needs and other requirements can be added to meet punishment needs. Principles underlying the proposals The NHS ‘Models of Care’ for drug treatment provides a framework for matching treatment to the treatment needs of an individual through an assessment process. To bring drug treatment delivered under a court sentence into line with Models of Care, DRRs need to have more flexibility than DTTOs in their ability to plan the level of treatment required under the order. Increasingly, this may be treatment that has already been agreed, care planned and started pre-sentence under a criminal justice initiative (e.g. Arrest Referral or through Criminal Justice Integrated Teams). The proposed model for DRRs The treatment provided under a DRR would be made up of one or more of the four main treatment modalities defined in Models of Care: • Prescribing (residential detox, community reduction and maintenance)

• • •

Structured Day Care Residential Rehabilitation Care Planned Counselling

The DRR could be made up of one or more of the above modalities, as appropriate, to meet the offender’s treatment needs. This will give clarity to the DRR from a treatment or sentencing perspective. The level of intervention needed to meet the sentence level i.e. to match the overall restriction on liberty with the seriousness of the offence can be achieved by adding other requirements to the Community Order such as an activity requirement or unpaid work requirement. It will therefore still be possible for the Community Order to be as intensive as a DTTO and to place a similar restriction on liberty. The main difference is that the order can be made up of a number of requirements to achieve this. If the treatment needs are low other requirements can be added to reflect the seriousness of the offence. Alternatively, a long DRR, with intensive treatment input e.g. structured day care or residential rehabilitation, may give the required restriction on liberty without the need for other requirements. It is envisaged that DRRs will usually be accompanied by a requirement for supervision. A programme requirement without a DRR may be suitable when: • • The offender is assessed as not needing/suitable for any of the four treatment modalities Consent to a DRR is refused by the offender

It is anticipated that drug testing and review court hearings will operate in a similar way as for DTTOs. Full details will be provided in the Criminal Justice Act Training programme which will commence early in the New Year.

DIP Structure October 2004
Peter Wheelhouse
Head of Unit Lucinda Patt PS Sal Edmunds Deputy HoU Jo Grinter Adult Drug Testing Alcohol policy/pilots Anne Taylor CJITs PPOs Cond Caution Shereen Sadiq Aftercare Housing P2W NOMS Ruth Pope Young People Ian Clements Performance Mgt Best practice Pm stocktakes Gillian Radcliffe Comms support Andy Blacksell

Prog Mgr Programme Mgt MIS/data Briefing/PQs Finance overview

Peter Grime Bill RoB pilots Legislation Drug Courts

PC55.2004 ANNEX E DIP Telephone List Peter Wheelhouse Lucinda Patt Andy Blacksell Sally Edmunds Gillian Radcliffe Grade 5 (Head of Unit) Personal Secretary Grade 6 Grade 6 Consultant Room 122 020 7273 3360 Queen Anne’s Gate Room 125 QAG 020 7273 3335 Room 125 QAG Room 116 QAG 020 7273 4007 7273 3439 07957 446659

Performance Management Stan Bates Ian Clements Martin Fanner Phil Skillen Mary Calvert Judith Cooper Shelagh Hetreed Detective Chief Inspector (DCI) Grade 7 DCI Consultant Senior Executive Officer (SEO) SEO SEO Room 125 QAG Room 125 Room 125 Room 125 Room 125 QAG QAG QAG QAG 07810 790817 020 7273 3431 020 7273 4649 07990 776635 07867 500583

Room 118 QAG Room 125 QAG

CJIT, PPOs & Conditional Cautioning Anne Taylor Dexter Coombe Grant Oliver Bernadette Bruton Aftercare/NOMS Shereen Sadiq Beverly Love Jake Hawkins Grade 7 SEO SEO Room 125 QAG Room 125 QAG Room 125 QAG 020 7273 2277/ 07990 698721 020 7273 2160 020 7273 2377/07967 054584 Grade 7 SEO SEO SEO Room 125 QAG Room 125 QAG Room 125 QAG Room 125 QAG 020 7273 4623 020 7273 2476 mobile: 07990 698722 dexter.coombe@ukonline.co.uk 020 7273 3602 020 7273 2476

Programme Management Karen Whitham Suzy Twigg SEO Higher Executive Officer (HEO) Room 116 QAG Room 116 QAG 020 7273 4045 020 7273 3221

Restriction on Bail/Bill Team Peter Grime Marilyn Blomfield Shimon Fhima Grade 7 SEO HEO(d) Room 118 QAG Room 125 QAG Room 125 QAG 020 7273 4132 020 7273 2287 020 7273 3628

Drug Testing and Alcohol Jo Grinter Chris Ashley Alan Robinson Natalie Wood Young People Ruth Pope Liz White Amie Shallcross Kim Brown Grade 7 SEO HEO SEO Room 114 Room 114 Room 114 Room 114 QAG QAG QAG QAG 020 7273 2490 020 7273 4101 020 7273 2656 020 7273 2424/07887 778807 Grade 7 SEO HEO HEO Room 118 QAG Room 118 QAG Room 118 QAG Room 118 QAG 020 7273 3669/ 07950 300998 020 7273 2578 020 7273 3302

PC55.2004 ANNEX F

Crime Reduction and Community Safety Group Drug Strategy Directorate Criminal Justice Interventions Programme (Drugs Unit) Room 125 50 Queen Anne's Gate, London SW1H 9AT Switchboard 020 7273 4000 Fax 0207 273 3100 Direct Line 020 7273 3160 Email: peter.wheelhouse2@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk www.drugs.gov.uk 5 Floor, Hannibal House Elephant & Castle London SE1 6TE Tel 020 7972 2236 Fax 020 7972 2248 Email: rosanna.o’connor@nta-nhs.org.uk www.nta.nhs.uk

27 September 2004 Government Office Drug Team Regional Managers and CJIP leads and NTA Regional Managers

Dear Colleagues PROPOSED ROLL-OUT OF THE ITMDF FROM APRIL 2005 Rosanna O’Connor and I wrote to you on 14 July 2004 about the “Quarterly update on progress in 102 DATs for Throughcare and Aftercare” and also referred to plans to introduce use of Section B and C of the ITMDF to support continuity of care in the non-intensive DAT areas. This note is to: • • • update you about those plans tell you that roll-out of a revised ITMDF to all areas is now scheduled for 1 April 2005 ask you to communicate these messages to all DATs in your area.

CJIP and NTA have been working with Prison and Probation colleagues to amend the current continuity of care guidance and had intended that the expansion of use of Sections B and C of the ITMDF would take place in October 2004. However, the revision of the guidance and related discussions with colleagues around a broad range of policy, practice and data issues have led us to the conclusion that a more comprehensive review of the content and use of the ITMDF, followed by its full adoption in all areas, is more appropriate. The ITMDF has been a very useful tool since its introduction in the intensive CJIP areas in February. It has enabled us to gather more meaningful information about how we are engaging with our client group and to improve

their continuity of care. Its first months of use have also identified some aspects on which we could improve, to respond to the concerns of practitioners and to ensure it reflects the current policy context and monitoring priorities. Some issues which have already been identified as requiring attention are: • • • • • Lack of consistency in interpretation of certain fields, leading to less robust monitoring data Changes to monitoring requirements eg need for detailed reasons for refusal of assessment Degree of repetition between Sections A and B Practical impact of information from Section A, especially basic details of drug use, not being available to prison-based colleagues Need to explore options around informed consent to facilitate information sharing in general and to respond to new work, such as building relationships between CJITs and Prolific and other Priority Offender (PPO) schemes.

With our prison and probation partners, we have taken the decision that rather than rolling out the use of Section B, when we are all agreed that a more general review is already required, we will delay roll-out until April 2005 and will at that stage be able to introduce a new form in all areas. This is, as I am sure you will understand, a major piece of work. In order to get this right, we are establishing a small working group, including regional and local representation, and will need to consult with you all on some issues; a wider consultation exercise will be embarked upon following this letter. We are aware that a number of non-intensive areas are already using Section B and C, in order to improve continuity of care for those entering and leaving custody. Prisons colleagues find this very helpful in offering continuity of care to CJIP offenders, and we have no intention of hindering this. Therefore: • • • • For CJIP-intensive areas, there is no change to current practice and they should continue using all sections of the ITMDF Those non-intensive areas already using the ITMDF Sections B and C may continue to do so Any non-intensive areas wishing to begin using Sections B and C now, may do so Any non-intensive areas wishing to wait until formal roll-out, which will be fully supported by guidance and a training programme, should not be put under any pressure to use the ITMDF at this stage In order to ensure continuity of care , those non-intensive areas not yet wishing, or feeling able, to use the ITMDF, still need to share information with the prison treatment teams. Annex A contains the information which the Healthcare and CARAT teams would find most useful and which would avoid duplication of information gathering.

I hope this new plan does not cause too much disappointment or inconvenience and that it will, by April, result in a user-friendly, comprehensive monitoring and continuity of care tool with which we can all be satisfied. Thank you as always for your continuing support and co-operation. Yours sincerely

Peter Wheelhouse CJIP (DU)

Rosanna O’Connor National Treatment Agency


Tel: Fax: Client details: • Full name • Address inc NFA status • Age • Gender • Ethnicity • Accommodation – key issues • Treatment history-including details of current prescriber if appropriate • Current drug use • Legal details inc likely outcome of charge /conviction e.g. remand • Health Issues • Social Support • Likely outcome of arrest charge • Any immediate issues – especially in relation to self-harm or harm to others

SUMMARY This document aims to clarify the respective roles of NPS/NOMS and the Drug Interventions Programme (DIP) in the management of drug misusing offenders. Criminal Justice Integrated Teams (CJITs) in 47 Drug Action Team (DAT) partnerships with high acquisitive crime provide a clear focus in the community for referrals and assessments needed for drug misusing offenders in the criminal justice system and those leaving treatment. CJITs should work closely with probation in statutory cases and this will form the basis of developments under NOMS. Where there is a statutory order or licence, overall responsibility for offender management will be NPS/NOMS. CJITs can provide support for drug-related needs. On completion of statutory contact, the offenders drug treatment needs will be managed by a named CJIT worker. When NOMS is implemented, it is envisaged that the Regional Offender Managers (ROMs) will be responsible for ensuring links between CJITs and offender managers. BACKGROUND CJIT will allocate a worker after a drug misusing offender has been assessed and it has been agreed that he/she will be taken onto the CJIT caseload. This can happen at any point in the criminal justice system or on leaving treatment. The CJIT worker will develop a care plan with the offender and link with appropriate interventions. a. Pre sentence Where CJIT have identified an individual who is then remanded in custody, and consents to information being passed, they will fax the assessment to the Counselling, Advice, Referral, Assessment and Throughcare services (CARATs) team. Other CJIT clients will be identified by CARATs and, with consent, will be notified to the relevant CJIT. CARATs will undertake responsibility for managing treatment whilst the offender is in prison through further assessment and work as required. CARATs will inform CJIT of further assessments and significant treatment events. CJIT are responsible for tracking the individual through the courts and informing CARATs if/when a release from court occurs. When a PSR is prepared, on an offender known to CJIT or CARATs, the PSR author will liase with them to ensure the proposed plan for supervision addresses drug treatment needs. This could lead to a proposal for a DTTO or other community sentence. If an offender becomes a statutory case, management of the order will be held by NPS/NOMS b. Community sentence Where an offender is subject to a community sentence, except for a DTTO, and there is an unmet drug treatment need, the supervising officer/NOMS case manager can approach the CJIT in accordance with locally agreed protocols to make a referral. NPS/NOMS retains overall responsibility for delivery and enforcement of the order, although CJIT may broker or

deliver drug treatment interventions. The offender may or may have not been known to CJIT pre sentence, but the order will nonetheless continue to be case managed by NPS/NOMS. Not all drug treatment will be organised via CJITs. If an offender is sentenced to a DTTO, this treatment will have been commissioned via the DAT and will be case managed by Probation/NOMS. Referral to CJIT by Probation/NOMS may however be appropriate before termination of statutory contact where there is on going treatment need. Offenders who decline referral to CJIT, will have their drugs needs addressed through the NPS/NOMS case management. c. Prison sentences of 12m or more or young offenders aged over the age of 18 The process described at the pre-sentence stage may have already occurred for prisoners who were previously remanded. If it has not taken place pre-sentence, it will be carried out for those newly sentenced. If CJIT have been involved pre-sentence they will liase with the CARATs team. CARATs will be involved as described above. CARATs will liase with CJIT when preparing release plans and inform CJIT of release dates. CARATs are also required to liase with sentence planning and resettlement teams in the prison. CARATs will oversee drug treatment delivered in prison, refer to CJIT and will make contact with the CJIT worker in the offender’s home area to ensure consistency of drug treatment provision post release. NPS/NOMS will advise on resettlement arrangements and licence conditions at least 6 weeks prior to discharge, including drug treatment needs. The NPS/NOMS case manager is required to prepare an updated supervision plan within 15 days of the offender release. One component of this supervision plan may include interventions accessed/delivered by CJIT. At the end of statutory supervision NPS/NOMS will liase with CJIT to enable ongoing drug treatment needs to be addressed and CJIT will take over case management. Arrangements for addressing continuing drug treatment or other needs should be specified by NPS/NOMS in the final supervision plan review. d. Offenders sentenced to less than 12 months imprisonment The same processes will be followed by CARATs and DIP as for those sentenced to more than 12 months imprisonment. Working with CARATs, CJITs will identify and broker access to resettlement agencies on release and provide on going support and co ordination.