Probation Circular

OFFENDER MANAGEMENT FOR CUSTODIAL SENTENCES
PURPOSE
This PC covers a guidance pack designed to help prisons prepare for the phased introduction of offender management for custodial sentences which begins later this year. Offender Management Units (OMUs) are to be in place in every prison by September 2006. ISSUE DATE: 27 March 2006 IMPLEMENTATION DATE: 10 April 2006 EXPIRY DATE: 10/04/2011 TO: Chairs of Probation Boards Chief Officers of Probation Secretaries of Probation Boards Regional Managers HMI Probation Regional Offender Managers CC: Board Treasurers AUTHORISED BY: Richard Mason, Head of Offender Management Unit, NPD. ATTACHED: Annex A – H

REFERENCE NO: PC09/2006

ACTION
Chief Officers should ensure that staff in their areas with the lead on offender management and Custody Plus receive the guidance pack and assist prisons in carrying out its requirements. Every prison will have an offender management lead and areas should make early contact with them. Regional Managers are asked to send a report to Richard Mason (details below), by the end of May, setting out any implications for the NPS that have emerged from their areas’ work with prisons on the guidance pack. There is no set format but it would be helpful if these reports could address such issues as the impact on existing staff contracts with the Prison Service; achieving continuity of offender management; sentence planning and prerelease work (for example prisoners having access to their offender manager prior to release, and arrangements for those prisoners held outside their own area/region).

SUMMARY
The guidance pack has already gone to the Prison Service. Its contents include a summary of the principles of offender management; material on roles and responsibilities in the Offender Management Model; a timetable for implementing offender management for custodial sentences; and a workbook that will enable prisons to undertake a desktop exercise, a report of which they are required to submit to prisons Headquarters by the end of May. The desktop exercise will help prisons gauge the resource implications of the introduction of offender management. A probation input is needed to assist prisons with this work and will also help identify consequential impacts in areas.

RELEVANT PREVIOUS PROBATION CIRCULARS
N/A

CONTACTS FOR ENQUIRIES
Richard.mason3@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk or 020 7217 0727

National Probation Directorate
Horseferry House, Dean Ryle Street, London, SW1P 2AW

Introduction
This Guidance pack is for use by individual prisons, in collaboration with the relevant Probation areas, to support the implementation of Offender Management for sentences with a custodial element. The information provided will help to plan the key elements of Offender Management for sentences with a custodial element including: • • • • Developing Offender Management Units in prisons Assessing the resource implications for the key roles in Offender Management (prison and probation) Understanding the responsibilities (decision making and delivery) of roles within prisons, probation areas, and key partner agencies. Following the key steps towards implementation

The guidance should be used by individual prisons and the relevant Probation areas to effectively plan for implementation in accordance with the implementation timetable (see section 5 for information). Section six is a workbook, providing clear steps to take in completing a desk top exercise in support of implementation. There are three key stages to the Offender Management Desk Top exercises. They are as follows: 1. Planning Meeting Described within section 6 of the contents below, this meeting ensures a suitable date and venue are fixed along with an expected attendance list. It is also important at this stage to nominate someone to be responsible for collating all the necessary information to be used for the exercise. Attendance at this meeting need not be wide. As long as the key areas are represented the meeting can achieve what is necessary (see section 6 of the contents list below for information). 2. Desk Top Exercise The actual exercise itself can be run according to the guidance at section 6 of the contents list below. A suggested agenda is included and ensures all key areas of work are covered during the exercise. The chairperson for the day will have been decided at the planning stage. 3. Exercise Write-Up After the exercise the key issues, facts and figures need to be turned into a report. The report must be in a format that is easily useable by the prison, probation and ROM to take steps towards implementation.

PC09/2006 – Offender Management for Custodial Sentences

(from NOMS guidance pack for prisons)

2

Contents

Contents Message from the National Offender Manager Introduction to the key principles of Offender Management applying to sentences with a custodial element Outline role descriptions for members of the Offender Management Team Offender Management Unit – Description of Function/ Responsibilities Table of responsibilities/ decision making authority for members of the Offender Management team and Governors Implementation timetable and Offender Management expectations at key phases. Workbook covering steps towards implementing Offender Management and setting up a prison Offender Management Unit Annexes: Annex A - Offender Management desktop exercise – planning meeting Annex B - Schedule of information to be collated before the desktop exercise Annex C - Checklist for current activities related to offender management Annex D - An illustration of the output of step 4 of the desktop exercise process Annex E - An illustration of the output of step 3 of the desktop exercise process Annex F - High Security Prisons spreadsheet Annex G - Local prisons spreadsheet Annex H - Training prisons spreadsheet

Relevant Section Message from the NOM Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 Section 5 Section 6

PC09/2006 – Offender Management for Custodial Sentences

(from NOMS guidance pack for prisons)

3

A message from Christine Knott, National Offender Manager
This guidance pack represents the outcome of a programme of joint development work commissioned by the NOMS Board in order to provide some practical tools to support the implementation of offender management, with a particular focus on how offender management will work for offenders whose sentence includes a period in prison custody. The pack contains summary information on the NOMS Offender Management Model itself but also provides practical guidance on an approach to setting up offender management units in prisons. The process of preparing this guidance has benefited from the input and ideas of operational managers and staff in prisons, probation areas, and partner organisations. On behalf of the NOMS Offender Management Team, I acknowledge the valuable assistance of all those involved in this development process, especially the North West Pathfinder team and all those involved in the prison desktop exercises at Hull, Drake Hall, Altcourse, Full Sutton and Wandsworth. The guidance pack is being made available to all prisons in the public and private sectors, probation areas and Regional Offender Managers. It is being issued to support work by provider organisations to meet the agreed implementation timetable for offender management for sentences with a custodial element. This implementation plan sets a target that an offender management unit should be in place for each prison by September 2006. This will then form a foundation for delivery of offender management across the full range of sentences as the implementation programme progresses between September 2006 and March 2009. An early step in the implementation programme will be the new Custody Plus sentence. The structure of this sentence will require sound offender management arrangements to be in place to manage the transition from prison to the community element of the sentence, and the timetable for implementation is designed to ensure that prisons and probation will have systems and structures in place to support the delivery of Custody Plus. The purpose of the pack is to provide a common set of tools which each prison should use, in collaboration with the relevant probation areas, to work through the main issues in setting up a prison offender management unit, to assess using national templates the implications for staffing and prison regimes, and to form the basis for establishment and Area action plans for approval by the Regional Offender Manager. More detailed requirements for the timetable and content of action plans will be issued through line management in due course. As National Offender Manager, I am convinced of the potential of offender management to deliver effective, high quality services, to achieve our overall goal of reducing reoffending. Offender management presents us with an opportunity to work in partnership to deliver “joined up” services, based on an assessment of risks and the requirements of the courts for each offender, the accountability of the offender manager for the whole sentence plan and targeted provision of effective interventions to reduce reoffending. Planning and implementing the detail of how effective offender management will be delivered is a task for provider organisations within the framework set by NOMS, and this guidance pack sets out the framework within which prisons, probation areas and partner organisations can address the practical operational detail of how offender management will be organised at local, area and regional level.

Christine Knott February 2006

PC09/2006 – Offender Management for Custodial Sentences

(from NOMS guidance pack for prisons)

4

Section 1 – Outline of key principles of the Offender Management Model
What is Offender Management? Offender management describes an integrated approach to the assessment, sentence planning and delivery of sentence requirements for offenders. The concept of offender management applies to offenders serving sentences in the community and those in custody and provides a “joined up” approach between the prison and probation services, working within NOMS. A feature of offender management is that each offender will have a nominated offender manager who is responsible for their whole sentence plan, including both periods in custody and in the community. The offender management model includes roles for staff acting as offender supervisors and case administrators to ensure that the assessment, sentence planning, implementation and review processes operate effectively and that offenders are engaged and motivated to work towards their sentence plan targets. The NOMS corporate plan includes a commitment to implement integrated offender management for all sentences, and this has already started for sentences served in the community. Key Principles 1. Offender Management provides continuity across a whole sentence through both custody and community. This is achieved through retaining a single Offender Manager for each sentence. The Offender Manager is based in the community in all cases. Whilst an offender is in custody, an Offender Supervisor within the prison is responsible for the day-to-day delivery of the sentence plan (see role descriptions at Section 2). 2. Offender Management demands commitment from those involved in order to effectively deliver the requirements of the sentence in a way that helps the offender to engage with the process. Staff involved must not simply “go through the motions”, and will have to support, coach and motivate the offenders to engage. 3. Offender Management ensures that there is consistency of messages and approach through a whole sentence. All staff involved are aware of the aims of the sentence plan, where they fit into supporting the delivery of those aims, and what other staff involved are responsible for. 4. Offender Management demands the consolidation of learning during a sentence. Responsibility for coaching and support prior to interventions will also be backed up by post-intervention work on consolidating the learning and putting it into practice where possible. Teamwork In delivering Offender Management, a team work approach is essential, with the Offender Manager being the central point for communication and information. In delivering a consistent whole sentence, all staff must know what the other is doing, and share information:
NOMS Offender Management Model

The Offender Management Team

Key Worker(s)
Delivering Interventions

AT IO N

UN MM CO

CO MM U

NI C

N IO AT IC

Offender Manager
Responsible for overall plan and direction

Case Administrator
Keeping things on course and on time

Offender Supervisor COMMUNICATION
Actively implementing the plan on a day-to-day basis

PC09/2006 – Offender Management for Custodial Sentences

(from NOMS guidance pack for prisons)

5

Sequencing Interventions The delivery of interventions must follow a logical sequence to ensure they have maximum impact. The Offender Manager would take account of the whole sentence rather than use custody and community elements as two separate periods. In custody, the Offender Supervisor would broker interventions in accordance with the sequence of the plan, and not arrange interventions because no others are available. The diagram below outlines the types of interventions and where in sentence they are appropriately delivered.

Sequencing Interventions A Universal Whole Sentence Approach

Punitive Interventions Interventions to Support Protective Factors Interventions to Reduce Barrier Factors Personal Change Programmes Interventions Promoting Community Re-integration Restrictive Interventions

Community

Custody

Community

Commence

Terminate

Resource Tiering Framework Offender Management uses the principle that resources follow risk. Therefore, the high risk offenders will receive the highest level of resource. It is the responsibility of the Offender Manager to match an offender to the appropriate tier. This will inform the level of resource used to deliver the aims of the sentence plan. The basic structure of the tiers is: Tier 1 – Punishment only Tier 2 – Punishment and Help Tier 3 – Punishment, Help and Change Tier 4 – Punishment, Help, Change and Control Tier 4 will relate to MAPPA Level 3 cases and Prolific and Priority Offenders, and attract the most resources. The Full Offender Management Model Version 1.1 of the NOMS Offender Management model is available, and will provide the full detail of the model and a valuable point of reference. A copy should be available to all Governing Governors, Directors and Controllers, and to Probation Areas.

PC09/2006 – Offender Management for Custodial Sentences

(from NOMS guidance pack for prisons)

6

Section 2 – Notes on key roles in the Offender Management Model
These notes give a broad outline of what is expected within each role in the context of a prison OMU. They are not an exhaustive list of tasks and responsibilities. Offender Manager The role of the Offender Manager is relevant to convicted offenders serving sentences in the community or in custody, but excludes juvenile offenders covered by processes within the Youth Justice Board. The Offender Manager provides accountability, consistency and continuity throughout the offender’s sentence and will be based in the offender’s home area. He/she is responsible for: • • • • • • • Assessment using OASys [The Offender Supervisor will also contribute to this]. Commissioning specialist assessments on the offender as triggered by OASys. Producing a sentence plan in accordance with the assessment Co-ordinating implementation of the sentence plan and monitoring its delivery Reviewing the offender’s progress and updating the sentence plan as necessary Implementing enforcement procedures if required (e.g. for breach of licence conditions) Ensuring that offenders subject to special requirements (e.g. MAPPA) are managed appropriately Evaluating the outcomes of the sentence

The Offender Manager will be a named individual; appointment will depend on the arrangements in the offender’s home probation area and will be influenced by the risk tier the offender occupies within the model. The Offender Manager may also, in some cases, fulfil the role of Offender Supervisor or deliver interventions for some or all of the offenders they manage. Where offenders are serving the custodial part of a sentence, there will be a person based in the prison who fulfils the role of offender supervisor. Offender Supervisor The Offender Supervisor role is relevant to convicted offenders serving sentences in the community or in custody, but excludes juvenile offenders covered by processes within the Youth Justice Board. There is likely to be more than one person acting in this role as the offender progresses through his/her sentence. For example, the Offender Supervisor will change if a prisoner is transferred to another establishment, or is released on licence, but the Offender Manager will remain the same. The role of the Offender Supervisor is to provide day-to-day implementation of the sentence plan. The roles of Offender Manager and Offender Supervisor are distinct but complementary in delivering the model. The Offender Supervisor’s role includes: • Being the first point of contact for the offender in the sentence management process • Forming a trusting working relationship with the offender in order to support him/her in achieving their sentence plan goals • Motivating the offender and helping them consolidate learning from the different interventions included in their sentence plan • Brokering arrangements for the offender to attend activities and interventions identified in their sentence plan • Preparing the offender for attendance at such activities and supporting their learning through coaching and example • Contributing knowledge of the offender to reviews, reports and assessments • Identifying any new problems or issues, which may affect the risk posed by the offender or their achievement of their sentence plan goals, and working with the Offender Manager to review and re-plan accordingly.

PC09/2006 – Offender Management for Custodial Sentences

(from NOMS guidance pack for prisons)

7

Case Administration In prisons, this role mirrors a similar role in the community. The Case Administrator provides administrative support to the offender supervisors and OMU team leader, taking responsibility for programming routine interviews and reviews, handling exchange of information between offender managers and offender supervisors and maintaining records. This role will incorporate existing administrative work, which may be located in probation or resettlement teams (e.g. OASys and sentence planning clerks) and possibly in custody offices (e.g. HDC clerk, ROTL administration, licence preparation, parole clerk). It will, both before and after the full implementation of C-NOMIS, be an essential role for ensuring that Offender Management systems operate effectively and that communications are maintained between members of the offender management team, both inside the prison and in the community, and the offender. Interventions/Service provider The interventions/service provider’s task is to deliver an intervention, service or programme for an individual offender or group of offenders as part of the sentence plan. In the prison context, offending behaviour programme managers, workshop staff, CARATS workers, resettlement project workers and many others will fulfil this role. It is recommended that the offender should have a named single point of contact or key worker within the service provider’s team. The key contact would also have a clear understanding of the overall aims of the offender’s sentence plan, and how those aims will be achieved. Service providers will report to the Offender Manager on the offender’s attendance and progress and will contribute to the evaluation process. Managerial issues In addition to the roles defined within the Offender Management model, there are organisational aspects of the prison OMU that will have to be considered. Every prison establishment will need an identified manager/team leader for the offender management unit whose role will include: • Setting up and regulating systems for offender supervision • Uphold quality and ensure staff have adequate training • Dealing with organisational/regime issues such as ensuring offenders attend courses, specialist assessments are organised, liaison with health services • Line managing/organising staff/hours to deliver the work • Ensuring that administrative and information systems are working to support offender management processes • To ensure that there are adequate local facilities for offender managers to carry out their responsibilities for sentence planning • Implementing improvements and developments to the offender supervision arrangements • Be accountable for the unit’s performance against relevant standards/SLA requirements • Allocating cases to Offender Supervisors, taking into account the risk tier and the experience of the Offender Supervisors. Both organisational and professional/technical (e.g. MAPPA requirements) aspects of management accountability need to be considered.

PC09/2006 – Offender Management for Custodial Sentences

(from NOMS guidance pack for prisons)

8

Section 3 – The Prison Offender Management Unit (OMU)
1. What is a prison offender management unit? The term “offender management unit” is used to describe the team of people working in an individual prison (or cluster of prisons) to deliver the elements of the end-to-end offender management process for which the prison is responsible. The prison offender management unit works closely with offender managers based in the community to ensure that offenders receive an integrated and consistent approach to their assessment, sentence planning and implementation of sentence plans across both custodial and community elements of their sentence. 2. What functions does the OMU in a prison perform? The OMU’s detailed functions will develop as the offender management model is implemented across each group of offenders. The key work of the unit is about supporting the end-to-end offender management process for offenders whilst they are in custody and the face-to –face work with offenders that ensures that their sentence plans are in place and acted on. The unit’s functions will include: • Facilitating contact between Offender Managers and the offenders for whom they are responsible, and effective communication with community based OMUs. • Completing OASys assessments /reviews for those groups of offenders who are not yet covered by the roll-out of Offender Management arrangements, and assisting Offender Managers in assessing and reviewing offenders for whom they are responsible • Providing offender supervision for individual offenders to ensure that their sentence plans are implemented, risks are managed, interventions are delivered and followed up, and reviews are held • Providing motivation and support for offenders towards achieving reduced reoffending • Liaison with providers of interventions and other departments within the prison to ensure that offenders are given access to the interventions set out in their sentence plans at the appropriate time • Administering processes within the prison and liaison with offender managers from the community for sentence plan review meetings, temporary release, release on licence, parole reviews and recalls etc. • Co-ordination of MAPPA activities for which the prison holds responsibility • Specialist offender supervision functions such as lifer liaison and foreign national’s liaison where applicable.

3. Who is part of the OMU? The unit is intended to include all staff/resources within the prison that are delivering aspects of the offender management model or directly support the core offender management processes of assessment and sentence planning. The OMU will always include those people who are performing the role of offender supervisors and case administrators within the prison. Section 6, Annex C gives more details. 4. Management of the OMU The management arrangements for the OMU should provide clear lines of accountability. The Guidance pack lists in Section 2 an outline of the duties of the manager responsible for the OMU. It is expected that within prisons, as in the community, there should be a clear distinction between the part of the organisation that delivers offender management, and the organisation for delivery of interventions. The management of the OMU should retain responsibility for quality assurance of sentence management processes including maintenance of offender records and oversight of access to and sequencing of appropriate interventions.

PC09/2006 – Offender Management for Custodial Sentences

(from NOMS guidance pack for prisons)

9

5. What standards will be applied to the OMU’s work and what quality assurance arrangements will be expected locally? The framework of standards will be set by NOMS at a national level, and its standard for Offender Management will cover the whole process of offender management across custody and the community. The Prison Service and National Probation Service will issue their own operational instructions and standards as necessary in line with NOMS requirements. The NOMS standard for offender management is expected to be issued in April 2006. Individual prisons will need to consider how they would ensure that quality assurance arrangements operate effectively at establishment level and may be given further guidance from the Prison Service on standards audit requirements. The development of SLAs with the Regional Offender Managers will provide a mechanism for setting out the delivery requirements for offender management arrangements and interventions within prisons. 6. Links with other functions and processes OCA Offender supervisors will be expected to engage with the offenders for whom they are responsible as soon as possible after their arrival at the prison. Establishments will wish to consider how this will affect the content and delivery of induction programmes. Induction Offender supervisors will be expected to engage with the offenders for whom they are responsible as soon as possible after their arrival at the prison. Establishments will wish to consider how this will affect the content and delivery of induction programmes. MAPPA, Public Protection and PPO arrangements The individual Offender Supervisors have a key role in these processes and would be expected to attend appropriate case conferences and meetings; to update the individual case file appropriately; and to brief the Offender Managers. Self-harm, safer custody, IEP etc Wing based staff would retain their responsibility for these areas of work. Offender Supervisors may have inputs in providing quality additional information. HDC, ROTL, Parole The input of the OMU is vital in these processes. Offender Supervisors may be required to attend assessment boards or to contribute to or prepare written reports to support the decision-making process. Personal Officers The Creation of the OMU does not imply that residential–based personal officer schemes are no longer required. A twoway flow of information between wing or unit staff/Personal Officers and the OMU is vital for the efficient functioning of integrated offender management. Both the Offender Supervisor and/or Personal Officer provide a focal point for offenders and a personal relationship through which constructive work can be developed and progress can be discussed. In addition, the Offender Supervisor facilitates and maintains the vital relationship between the offender and the Offender Manager

PC09/2006 – Offender Management for Custodial Sentences

(from NOMS guidance pack for prisons)

10

The interaction between a Prison Officer and an offender is a central and essential element of security within any prison establishment. It establishes positive staff/prisoner relationships and thus by “knowing what is going on” helps to maintain effective security whilst at the same time maximising sentence effectiveness. Offender Supervisors and Personal Officers should aim to influence offenders’ behaviour through staff example (prosocial modelling) and guidance, encouraging them to face up to, and address, their offending behaviour or lifestyle. In doing so, the principles of “Dynamic Security” will be embraced and a high level of establishment security maintained. Interventions The central importance of the sentence plan in driving access to interventions may highlight a need for individual establishments to review their policies and procedures for placing offenders on education courses, work parties and offending behaviour groups. It may be advantageous to convene regular meetings involving OMU management and Interventions management in order to monitor access to identified interventions, assess and overcome any difficulties, collate evidence of gaps in provision and quality assure processes.

7. How much local flexibility is there in the way the OMU is organised? There is no prescription from NOMS on the way the OMU must be organised at local level, or the numbers or grades of staff that should be deployed in the OMU function. The desktop exercise process set out in the guidance pack (Annex D & E) is designed to give a common baseline process for looking at what work the OMU will have to deliver and an indication of the resources required. Governor/ Directors will be expected to take into account local circumstances in designing the structures for delivery of the OMU’s function, and local proposals will be open to challenge through the line/contract management process.

PC09/2006 – Offender Management for Custodial Sentences

(from NOMS guidance pack for prisons)

11

Section 4 – Offender Management in prisons – table of responsibilities
This table sets out some of the detailed responsibilities/decision making authority for members of the OM team and Governors. The roll-out of offender management is being phased according to sentence type. This table sets out responsibilities after Offender Management arrangements have been rolled out fully. There will be an interim position where existing arrangements apply to some sentences/individuals, alongside new arrangements for others (see implementation plan for details). This table was prepared in December 2005 and reflects the legal framework at that time, plus known changes arising from the implementation of the 2003 CJA. Activity Pre-sentence report Setting initial licence conditions(custody + and intermittent custody) Recommending initial licence conditions (determinate, indeterminate, extended sentences) Initial OASys assessment (pre or post sentence) Immediate action to protect accommodation/employment on initial reception into custody Primary responsibility lies with: • • Offender Manager The court Responsibility for contributing information: • • Specialists as directed by the Court Offender Manager makes recommendations to court where applicable Authority for decision-making lies with: • The court (custody + and intermittent custody only)

• • •

Offender Manager

• • •

Induction/resettlement staff Offender Supervisor

Offender Supervisor (if applicable) Case administrators (collating information on previous offences/sentences) Offender Manager via pre-sentence assessment if completed

Offender Manager

Matching of case to risk tier using national guidance

Depending on local arrangements and SLA details. • Offender Manager (and his/her line manager where necessary)

Case administrators (collating information on previous offences/sentences)

Offender Manager (except where business rules require line management confirmation)

PC09/2006 – Offender Management for Custodial Sentences

(from NOMS guidance pack for prisons)

12

Activity Commissioning specialised assessments/reports to inform sentence plan (except where such reports are automatically part of the prison service’s agreed regime for all prisoners, e.g. basic skills assessments) Allocating an offender supervisor in custody Security categorisation

Primary responsibility lies with: • Offender Manager

Responsibility for contributing information: • Specialist/service providers as appropriate. E.g. CARATS team, mental health team, therapeutic community representative, psychologists Offender Supervisor

Authority for decision-making lies with: • Offender Manager

• •

Head of prison offender management unit Prison OCA unit

• • • •

Case Administrator Offender Manager (by entry of relevant information on offender record ) Offender Supervisor (if applicable) Other prison / agency staff where appropriate Offender manager (by completion of sentence plan) Offender Supervisor Other prison staff with knowledge of the offender Offender Supervisor

• •

Governor/Director Governor/Director

Allocation to prison in accordance with sentence plan Preparing sentence plan including interviewing offender Allocation of prisoners to activities/interventions to meet sentence plan requirements as far as possible Ensuring offender understands sentence plan and what is expected of them Scheduling and organising sentence plan review according to service standards

• • •

OCA unit Offender Manager

• • • •

• • •

Governor/Director (within any requirements of SLA) Offender Manager

Head of prison offender management unit

Governor/Director (subject to SLA)

Offender Supervisor

Offender Manager (through sentence plan) Case administrator (in community)

Case administrator (in prison team)

PC09/2006 – Offender Management for Custodial Sentences

(from NOMS guidance pack for prisons)

13

Activity Operation of routines/procedures to promote decency, care and good order in custody including application of IEP schemes, suicide prevention procedures, antibullying and wing applications Monitoring offender’s progress against the sentence plan and providing motivation/encouragement Updating factual information in offender record

Primary responsibility lies with: • Residential staff (incorporating personal officers)

Responsibility for contributing information: • Offender Supervisor

Authority for decision-making lies with: • Governor/Director

Offender Supervisor

• •

Key workers (e.g. workshop staff, teachers) Residential staff (particularly information re custodial behaviour) MAPPA partners where applicable

Offender Manager– Changing the sentence plan in the light of incoming monitoring information Offender Manager to authorise any resulting change in risk assessment/sentence plan

The member of staff receiving the information, including: • Offender manager • Offender supervisor • Key workers • Case administrators • Case administrator

Scheduling sentence planning/review boards in accordance with standards/Offender Manager decisions Attending/chairing sentence plan reviews

• •

Offender manager Offender supervisor

Offender Manager

Contribution to inter-agency risk management processes and procedures (MAPPA, PPO, CPA)

Offender Manager ( and line manager where applicable)

• • • • • • •

Offender Supervisor (attends) Offender (attends) Key workers as appropriate Other staff/family members as appropriate Offender supervisor specialist service providers wing based residential staff

Offender Manager (updated sentence plan)

As set out in MAPPA protocols

PC09/2006 – Offender Management for Custodial Sentences

(from NOMS guidance pack for prisons)

14

Activity Preparing parole reports (detail may be subject to amendment as agreed with Parole Board)

Primary responsibility lies with: • • • • • • Offender Manager Offender Supervisor or head of prison offender management unit Others as agreed with Parole Board Case administrator – collation Court at time of sentence (Custody + and intermittent custody ) Governor/Controller (unless legislation transfers this authority to the Offender Manager) Offender Manager (initial assessment only in case of regular ROTL for resettlement) Prison security team Case administrator – collation Head of prison offender management unit, using information from records/telephone calls Prison security team Offender Manager

Responsibility for contributing information: • • • Offender Supervisor Key Workers Residential staff/Personal Officer

Authority for decision-making lies with:

Setting licence conditions prior to release

• • •

Court (recommended conditions for determinate sentences) MAPPP in certain cases Offender Manager

• •

Court (Custody + and intermittent custody ) Secretary of State (additional conditions for above sentences, all conditions for other types of sentence) Governor/Controller

Temporary release risk assessments (planned and HDC)

Offender Supervisor

Temporary release risk assessments (emergency)

• • •

• •

Offender Supervisor on request Prison OMU to inform Offender Manager of any such short-notice assessments.

Governor

Managing offender on licence according to sentence plan

• •

• • • • • • •

Requesting recall to prison where necessary

Offender Manager (through line management if necessary) Case administrator in prison

Local administration of recall and appeal processes including arrangement of oral hearings against recall

Offender supervisor in community (if applicable) Key workers in community MAPPA partners (where applicable) Offender supervisor in community (if applicable) Key workers in community MAPPA partners (where applicable) Early Release And Recall Unit

Offender manager, within legal framework •

Executive decision by Early Release And Recall Unit subject to appeal to Parole Board

PC09/2006 – Offender Management for Custodial Sentences

(from NOMS guidance pack for prisons)

15

Activity Participation in oral hearing on appeal against recall

Primary responsibility lies with: • • Early Release And Recall Unit Offender Manager

Responsibility for contributing information: • • Staff whose evidence is relevant to the decision to recall Case administrators

Authority for decision-making lies with: • Parole Board

PC09/2006 – Offender Management for Custodial Sentences

(from NOMS guidance pack for prisons)

16

Section 5 – Offender Management Implementation Timetable for Sentences with a Custodial Element and Transitional Work Responsibilities
Date From April 2006 Responsibilities: Sentence/Offender Type/Actions Setting up of Offender Management Units in all prisons. Prisons to configure staffing and facilities in order to have an OMU able to deliver Offender Management from September 2006.

September 2006 Responsibilities:

Introduction of Offender Management for those offenders in custody who are high/very high risk or PPOs. Offender Management implemented for offenders assessed as a High / Very High risk of Harm (on OASys) or subject to PPO arrangements. Offender Managers allocated to all relevant offenders and responsible for OASys assessments and sentence planning for all such cases. Offender Supervisors allocated to all relevant offenders. Prison OMU to maintain business as usual (Sentence Planning and OASys) for all offenders serving other sentence types.

September 2006

Introduction of Offender Management arrangements for offenders serving intermittent custody sentences, to be in place. Offender Management implemented for offenders subject to an Intermittent Custody sentence. Offender Managers allocated to all relevant offenders and responsible for OASys assessments for all cases. Offender Supervisors allocated to all relevant offenders. Prison OMU to maintain business as usual (Sentence Planning and OASys) for all offenders serving other sentence types

Responsibilities:

November 2006 Responsibilities:

Introduction of Offender Management arrangements for offenders sentenced to Custody Plus. Offender Management implemented for offenders subject to Custody Plus sentence. Offender Managers allocated to all relevant offenders and responsible for OASys assessments for all cases. Offender Supervisors allocated to all relevant offenders. Prison OMU to maintain business as usual (Sentence Planning and OASys) for all offenders serving indeterminate and determinate sentences.

September 2007

Completion of transitional period during which offenders sentenced to under 12 months under pre-CJA 03 sentences are in the system but not subject to Offender Management. No more offenders in custody who are serving pre-CJA 03 short sentences.

PC09/2006 – Offender Management for Custodial Sentences

(from NOMS guidance pack for prisons)

17

September 2007 Responsibilities:

Introduction of Offender Management for determinate sentence offenders. Offender Management implemented for offenders subject to determinate sentences. Offender Managers allocated to all relevant offenders and responsible for OASys assessments for all cases. Offender Supervisors allocated to all relevant offenders.

September 2007 Responsibilities:

Introduction of Offender Management for indeterminate sentence offenders and existing lifers in custody. Offender Management implemented for offenders subject to indeterminate sentences. Offender Managers allocated to all relevant offenders and responsible for OASys assessments for all cases. Offender Supervisors allocated to all relevant offenders. Prison OMU to maintain business as usual (Sentence Planning and OASys) for all offenders still serving pre-CJA 03 determinate sentences.

September 2008

Transfer of all offenders with a determinate sentence not currently managed through the Offender Management process to the Offender Management Model. Offender Management implemented for offenders subject to indeterminate sentences. Offender Managers allocated to all sentences with a custodial element, and responsible for OASys assessments for all offenders. Offender Supervisors allocated to all relevant offenders.

Responsibilities:

April 2009

Signing off of completion of work under the plan by April 2009.

Questions and answers on the implementation timetable Q: My prison/probation area is going to be ready to deliver offender management arrangements more quickly than the timetable set out above. Will we be allowed to move forward at a faster pace? Establishment/ Area action plans for delivering offender management arrangements need to be co-ordinated nationally in order for us to use our resources efficiently. Senior line managers and ROMs will be looking at proposed action plans across whole Prison Service areas and Regions to make sure that this is the case. As offender management will only work effectively if it is in place for the full duration of an offender’s sentence across custody and the community, it will not generally be beneficial to develop localised plans which mean that an individual could fall into and out of offender management arrangements as they move through their sentence. The definition of High/Very High Risk of Harm cases and PPO cases is often problematic in practice. How will we be sure that we are covering the right cases in the phase of implementation that starts in September 2006? It is important that the current OASys is referred to and if there is any uncertainty the Offender Manager is contacted. Ref Prison Service Public Protection Manual on intranet, the OASys Manual Chapter 8 Guidance (from NOMS guidance pack for prisons) 18

A:

Q:

A:

PC09/2006 – Offender Management for Custodial Sentences

on Risk of Harm, Probation Circular PC10/2005- Public Protection Framework, Risk of Harm and MAPPA Thresholds. Further specific guidance will be issued nearer the implementation date. Q: If we have our prison offender management unit set up and ready to deliver offender supervision, can we implement this for a larger group of offenders than the target group at each stage, rather than waiting for the trigger dates in the national timetable? This is a matter for local consideration and discussion through line management, but action plans must be in place to ensure that the target groups of offenders at each stage are covered adequately by offender supervision arrangements before considering any extra provision. Managers should bear in mind that in the transitional period some groups of offenders will not yet be covered by an Offender Manager and that for these offenders the offender supervisor would not be performing the full role. Action plan proposals will be expected to explain any proposed variations from the national timetable. What about OASys completion targets for prisons in 2006-7? The targets are set to reflect the importance of OASys assessment as the basis for sentence planning. In 2006-7, prisoners serving over 12 month sentences will in general not yet be covered by the roll-out of offender management arrangements. It is important that, in this interim period, prisons maintain their existing OASys and sentence planning function for such offenders. Such functions are closely linked with the offender supervision and case administration aspects of offender management, and are logically placed within the new prison OMUs. Does the offender management implementation timetable rely on the roll-out of the C-NOMIS system? The C-NOMIS system has been designed to provide the single case record to support the information needs of staff working with offenders in the community and custody. Once C-NOMIS is rolled out, it will simplify the exchange of information between offender managers, offender supervisors, case administrators and providers of interventions. The implementation timetable for offender management does not however depend on the CNOMIS roll-out. Administrative arrangements for prison offender management units and case administration arrangements in the community will have to be thought through in some detail at local level to ensure that they deliver the required level of team working and communications to support effective offender management, using existing technology until C-NOMIS is in place. A further review of case administration processes will be advisable once C-NOMIS is delivered in order to gain maximum benefits from the new system. Q: A: What is the scope for using video links to support offender management? Experience from the NW Pathfinder has shown the value of using video links to support the sentence plan and review meetings between offender manager, offender supervisor and the offender in custody, and to promote effective communications in general. The workbook in this pack encourages establishments to think through the local implications and priorities for video links to support offender management. A national review of options is currently in progress and further guidance on the procurement options and operation of video links will be issued when available.

A:

Q: A:

Q:

:

PC09/2006 – Offender Management for Custodial Sentences

(from NOMS guidance pack for prisons)

19

Section 6 – Setting up a Prison Offender Management Unit – a Workbook
This workbook forms part of the guidance pack prepared by the NOMS Offender Management Team for use by prisons, probation areas and Regional Offender Managers in preparing for the implementation of offender management across all sentences. It sets out a series of steps covering issues that should be addressed in the arrangements for providing the elements of offender management located in the prison, principally offender supervision and case administration. By working through the sequence of steps and documenting the results, establishments will obtain an outline of the level of offender management activity that will be required in the prison, and an indication of the resources needed to deliver this level of activity. The format for the activities in this workbook is based on the offender management desktop exercises held from AugustNovember 2005. These exercises consisted of a planning meeting, a period of information collation and a one day exercise involving a range of key stakeholders, followed by a written report setting out the exercise findings. It is suggested that establishments follow a similar sequence of activities to reach an assessment of their own offender management unit requirements. It is recommended that the steps set out below are worked through with a team representing at least the following areas within the prison: • • • • • Governor/Director and Controller Head of Resettlement or equivalent Senior Probation Officer and senior representative of local Probation Area (Assistant Chief Officer or above) Staff involved in OASys, sentence planning and related activities, including administration Staff associations as appropriate

The Governor/Director may invite other key stakeholders to take part. A planning meeting will ensure that the right people and information are available for the exercise and that the objectives for the process are clear. A model agenda for a planning meeting is included as Annex A. It is recommended that about 2 weeks are allowed for preparations between the planning meeting and the desktop exercise itself. A lead person should be allocated to ensure arrangements are made for the planning meeting and exercise itself, in good time for the information coming from it to be used in preparation for implementation (refer to implementation timetable at Section 5 of Guidance Pack).

Steps in the desktop exercise process
Step 1 Collate information about the current prisoner population and regime. This will be used to construct a model of the future population mix and in later steps of the exercise. The establishment should provide a snapshot of its population, regime and resources. This should be based on a common baseline date of (31 March 2006), with information on prisoner throughput for the 12 month period (1 April 2005 to 31 March 2006).

PC09/2006 – Offender Management for Custodial Sentences

(from NOMS guidance pack for prisons)

20

Note: the offender management arrangements under NOMS apply only to prisoners aged 18 and over. Prison establishments occupied entirely by juvenile offenders or sections of prison establishments occupied by juvenile offenders should not be included in this exercise, nor should any resources allocated specifically to ASSET sentence planning and management for juveniles. Current YOIs and parts of prisons designated for YOs aged 18 and over should be included. A schedule of the information required is available as Annex B in the toolkit. Within this document there is a further proforma at section 1, identifying the specific population data required for the exercise. It is important to collate all of the data required at this section. It is recommended that this information is collated in advance as a pack for use during the desktop exercise and as part of the record of the process for future reference. Step 2 This step uses data about the current prisoner population to create a projection of the future population mix and the offender management work that they would generate whilst they are in prison. It can be done in advance of the main desktop exercise, with the results made available on the day. Select appropriate worksheet for the type of prison: Annex F for training prisons in the High Security estate. Annex G for local prisons (or any with a mixed local/training role) Annex H for training prisons (excluding High Security estate)

Open the spreadsheet and find the first page, called “Inputs and assumptions”. Enter the population data collected at Step 1, in the yellow shaded boxes on the first sheet. An example is given below, indicating which figures should be entered. There are 10 figures to be entered in all. Worksheet for translating population projections into volume of offender management activity

For use in desktop exercise Input information into yellow boxes only Population information Projected Number of annual new receptions

Type of sentence Custody plus

Number in population

Enter in this box the annual number Enter in this box the “snapshot” figure for of new receptions for sentences of the number of prisoners in the population up to and including12 months serving a sentence of up to or including 12 months Enter in this box the annual number of new receptions for sentences of over 12 months (excluding lifers) Enter in this box the annual number of receptions for lifers Enter in this box the “snapshot” figure for the number of prisoners in the population serving a sentence of over 12 months (excluding lifers) Enter in this box the “snapshot” figure for the number of life sentenced prisoners in the population 21

Determinate sentence

Indeterminate sentence

PC09/2006 – Offender Management for Custodial Sentences

(from NOMS guidance pack for prisons)

Additional factors PPOs in population Offenders assessed on OASys as a high/very High risk of harm HDC cases considered per year Parole reviews per year Enter the number obtained from the population “snapshot” Enter the number obtained from the population “snapshot” Enter the number for the year Enter the number for the year

Do not change any of the entries in other sections of the worksheet. The spreadsheet will automatically calculate population projections and offender management work requirements associated with the projected population. Save the resulting file as a new document. Note that the full spreadsheet includes several pages, all of which will be used in later steps of the exercise. Step 3 This step involves participation from key people involved in the current OASys/sentence planning provision in the establishment. Its purpose is to identify and list existing work in the prison that would become part of the prison’s offender management function when this is set up, and the resources attached to that work. It is recommended that this and the following steps are worked through by the desktop exercise team as a group. List the existing work that is related to offender management/supervision and is currently performed by directly employed staff (e.g. Prison Officers/PCOs, administrative staff) and the resources associated with the work. See Annex C for a list of common job titles/work activities and whether to include them in the list for your prison. See Annex E for an illustration of how the findings of this section could be presented. Refer to the role descriptions from Section 2 of the Guidance Pack as required Step 4 This step involves participation from key people involved in the current probation contract and concerns work performed by staff employed by the Probation Service. Working from the probation contract for 2005-6, analyse the information on existing probation service activities and resources deployed in the prison1 to identify those that: a. Are classed as interventions in the Offender Management model b. Would become community-based in implementing the Offender Management model (i.e. these are to become tasks or responsibilities of the Offender Manager in the community and his/her case administrators) c. Would be work located within the prison’s offender supervision team (OMU) The whole of the service and resources provided under the contract should be split between these headings. Refer to the role descriptions from the OM model as required. List the work covered by the contract under the three headings, and apportion the total resources covered by the probation contract between them, using either actual figures from the probation contract or an estimate informed by the people who do the work. (e.g. a full-time PSO post may consist of 50% delivery of interventions and 50% offender supervision for PPOs). As a general guide, where administration is included in the contract, this should be placed in the exercise under the same heading as the work it supports (e.g. offending behaviour programme administration would go with delivery of interventions under a). Normally, this would be done on the basis of the probation contract. The exercise will work on informal information where the contract is not available. PC09/2006 – Offender Management for Custodial Sentences (from NOMS guidance pack for prisons) 22
1

An illustration of the format and content of output from this step is given at Annex D. Once this step is completed, check that the totals for the different elements of work add up to the total provided in the contract. Step 5 This step is an opportunity to identify of any other activity/resource currently deployed in the prison (e.g. voluntary sector, project work) that delivers elements of offender management, and discuss how this would translate to the new arrangements. In most prisons, there will be little or nothing identified under this step. The majority of resettlement activities will relate to provision of interventions rather than offender management/supervision. Refer back to Annex C at Step 3 for list of common job titles/work activities and whether to include them in the list for your prison. There may however be some services that provide a case management/supervision function that covers work that will in future become the responsibility of the offender manager or be encompassed in the prison offender management unit. An example might be the provision of foreign nationals liaison services provided under contract with a voluntary organisation. Where such work exists, provide a brief description of the work and resources used (including expiry dates for any contracts/short term funding and source of any ring-fenced funding). Step 6 In this step, the meeting has the opportunity to review and discuss the results of the population and work projections created in Step 2. It is important for participants to have copies of the Excel worksheets available. The worksheets have taken information provided about the prison’s population and applied assumptions about the application of offender management processes to these prisoners in order to calculate the resources that would be required to deliver offender management once the roll-out to all sentences is complete. There are slightly different versions of the worksheet to reflect the fact that not all prisons accept prisoners direct from court, and to reflect the different balance of involvement between offender managers and prison offender supervisors for long-term prisoners in the high security estate. The assumptions on which the work calculations are based are set nationally to reflect the expected standards we will be working to and are informed by the findings of the pathfinder team. The key points are: • • The first worksheet contains the population information put in by the prison and a summary of the assumptions. The second worksheet presents the work calculations (figures are in hours’ work per week). The columns represent work for offender managers in the community and for offender supervisors in the prison. The final row of this sheet gives a full-time equivalent number of staff required to deliver this work, where staff have an effective working week of 31.2 hours. The third worksheet presents meetings calculations. This sheet is discussed in later steps of the process.

The group should review and discuss the outcomes of the calculations and note main points of the discussion: is the outcome more or less as expected, and if not, why? The figures presented in the worksheets do not cover case administration. It is expected that the administrative resources identified in Step 3 and Step 4 will be sufficient to cover the custody-based aspects of case administration as part of the OMU. The group should note any reasons why they think there might be significant local variations (+ or -) in the level of case administration needed.

PC09/2006 – Offender Management for Custodial Sentences

(from NOMS guidance pack for prisons)

23

Step 7 This step is an opportunity to consider any specialist knowledge or skills that may be required within the Offender Management Unit. Discuss any specific offender supervision/case administration needs of the prisons population. There are a number factors for certain offenders that may require a degree of specialist knowledge in carrying out the offender supervision/case administration function. Examples of these factors are: • • • • • • • • Offenders who are Foreign Nationals Offenders serving indeterminate sentences, requiring a more enhanced supervision function Younger or older offenders Offender with disabilities Offenders with mental health problems/personality disorder Child protection procedures PPOs Offenders assessed as High / Very High risk of harm on OASys

This is not an exhaustive list. It is important to justify any agreed need for specialist knowledge/skills based on the population breakdown at the prison. Step 8 In this step, the meeting has the opportunity to consider the existing facilities to support the Offender Management Unit. The figures used at Step 6 to identify the resource required to deliver offender supervision will outline the level of facilities required in the prison. In reviewing the required facilities for the Offender Management Unit, consideration is necessary of any existing accommodation used for related areas such as OASys, Sentence Planning and seconded Probation Teams. The meeting must identify any local issues that may demand additional facilities to service the Offender Management Team. Step 9 Calculation and discussion of weekly numbers of interviews/reviews involving Offender Managers As referred to at Step 6, the third spreadsheet calculation outlines the total numbers of interviews/reviews involving Offender Managers per week. This, again, is based on the stated assumptions for the number of reviews/interviews per year for the different types of sentence. The meeting must discuss what the local options are for hosting these meetings. Consideration of existing interview/visits space will identify whether there is an issue about how to facilitate them. Options to consider would include: • • • • Accommodating Offender Manager visits within the Offender Management Unit Whether Offender Managers would all be escorted or if regular visitors can be supplied keys and given the appropriate training. If escorted, whether the relevant Offender Supervisor would be best placed to pick up the Offender Manager from the gate so they can begin to discuss the case prior to the interview/review. Whether Offender Manager interviews/reviews could feasibly be scheduled at times beyond the basic core day, to ease the management of the additional visits by spacing them out further.

PC09/2006 – Offender Management for Custodial Sentences

(from NOMS guidance pack for prisons)

24

Step 10 In this step, the meeting has the opportunity to discuss the potential for and implications of video link technology for Offender Manager communication with the prison. The use of video links in place of some Offender Manager visits is being pursued, although it is still considered crucial that the Offender Manager physically attends the prison for key reviews/interviews. The video links approach will not use existing links for court hearings. This would be a separate system. The meeting has an opportunity to discuss the benefits of video link technology in the prison, and whether there may be specific requirements of any procured system, for example, there may be some benefit in having a mobile system that could be moved throughout the prison and plugged into any telephone socket. If there are any constraints to the use of video links in the prison, then these should be noted also.

Step 11
In this step, consider the discharge areas for offenders at the prison, and whether certain areas have a greater priority for video link technology than others. Should video link technology not be available in all Probation areas, there may be certain discharge areas for the offenders where the technology would be preferred. These areas are likely to be where a reasonable number of offenders are discharged to but where distance from the prison would be a major issue for travelling Offender Managers. Step 12 In this step, the meeting has the opportunity to consider management accountability of the offender supervision function and co-ordination with the prison regime. The management accountability of the offender supervision function needs to be carefully considered to ensure there is some quality assurance in delivery. The meeting would consider options as to where in the current management structure the function best fits, and whether this maintains the balance of the management of the prison regime more widely. The management accountability of the function may depend on whether the meeting decided to deliver the Offender Management Unit’s Offender Supervision function as a central dedicated team or as a devolved function on the various wings. Step 13 In this step, a review and recording of the issues raised during the course of the exercise can take place. In spending a short amount of time going through the key issues raised, the meeting can be sure that all necessary information is available to take away and begin drafting a report of the exercise. Following this, the drafting of an action plan for implementation can be started.

PC09/2006 – Offender Management for Custodial Sentences

(from NOMS guidance pack for prisons)

25

ANNEX A Offender Management desktop exercise – planning meeting

Attendance:

AGENDA 1. Introductions 2. Background and purpose of the exercise 3. Planning for the desktop exercise 3.1. 3.2. 3.3. 3.4. Agreeing a date for the exercise Identification of establishment/population data required in advance of the exercise and how this is to be obtained Communication with the local management team (and staff representatives) about the exercise Understanding the procedures and tools to be used in collating information and modelling the offender management/supervision unit requirements Timetable for the exercise itself; agreeing who will be involved on the day and facilities necessary to support the process Reporting the outcomes of the exercise

3.5. 3.6.

4. Summary of action points 5. Date for further planning meeting / sub-meeting if required

ANNEX B Schedule of information to be collated before the desktop exercise Document or information description 1. Prisoner population profile for HMP ……… (current) – see summary Why we need it for the desktop exercise • • To provide a context for current information on performance and resource allocations To be able to describe the expected population in terms of sentence type and length, security category and home area. To give an indication of the numbers of receptions by sentence length Information on the expected numbers of PPOs , High or Very High risk of harm cases and foreign nationals To be used as a basis for calculating the expected type and volume of offender management/supervision work in the establishment. Number of HDC applications processed Number of parole reviews processed Number of offenders released direct to the community (and whether on licence) To inform likely offender management/supervision requirements Context Identification of any external partnerships/voluntary input that contributes towards sentence plans/resettlement services Who will collate this?

• • •

2. Key statistics

• • • • • •

3. Brief regime description

Document or information description 4. Staffing information and work profiles (Prison Service grades)

Why we need it for the desktop exercise • To be able to identify work and resources currently involved in OASys assessment, sentence planning and related activities To show what work relevant to offender management processes is included in existing job descriptions [OASys assessment, sentence planning, lifer liaison, HDC, parole, personal officer if applicable] To inform transition to offender management/supervision arrangements To describe work completed by seconded staff and enable this to be analysed in Offender Management terms To ensure that the proposed offender management arrangements take into account all relevant work/resources Understanding of current lines of accountability Inform options for future organisation of offender supervision/management To indicate how well existing resources deliver their targets

Who will collate this?

• •

5. Probation Contract/SLA

• • • 7. Performance and delivery against targets 8. Self-audit and/or standards audit findings on sentence planning 9. Latest HMCIP findings on sentence planning and related activity •

6. Organisation chart

As above

As above

ANNEX C Checklist for current activities related to offender management Use this checklist to help you consider current work activities and resources that are part of your prison regime that would become part of the prison offender management unit’s function when it is set up. The audit of current activities will need to cover both dedicated posts (e.g. fulltime OASys assessors) and relevant work that forms part of a wider current job description (e.g. where personal officers have responsibility for writing sentence plans). Current work description OASys assessor OASys clerk/administrator Sentence planning Management/supervision of OASys/sentence planning unit Lifer management/liaison Sentence plan review boards (including YOs) MAPPA work (contribution to risk assessment and meetings) PPO mentoring/liaison Parole administration HDC and ROTL assessments HDC and ROTL administration Administration for release on licence Foreign nationals liaison Personal officer Include in list of Offender Managementrelated work? Yes Yes Yes Yes Comments

Yes Yes Yes

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No- in most establishments

Only include any personal officers’ hours allocated to cover OASys/sentence planning. Other personal officer work is regarded as a residential function.

Induction

No

IEP procedures OCA

No No

Tutors, administrators and programme managers for nationally accredited or locally run offending behaviour programmes One-to one work on offending behaviour (e.g. where there is no suitable group programme in place) Psychology

No

Offender supervisors will have work to do in the induction period but will not run the programme. This is part of the residential function This function is very closely linked with offender management processes and this may be reflected in the management structure This work is part of the “interventions” function

No

This work is part of the “interventions” function

Seconded probation staff

Consider in more detail the range of services actually provided and distinguish between those related to initial assessment/sentence planning (included) and those that deliver treatment/interventions (excluded). Count specialised assessment work as an “intervention” linked to the sentence plan process rather than part of the OMU’s function. Consider work under the probation contract as a separate step (see guidance pack)

Possibly, for all or part of the service provided

Resettlement services

No

CARATS Education/basic skills Healthcare Resettlement projects with fixed-term or ringfenced funding e.g. PS+, PASSPORT

No No No No

Specialist services e.g. for housing advice, debt counselling, employment advice etc are all treated as “interventions”. Any element of case management currently provided under resettlement projects will be unnecessary once offender management applies to all offenders. Included in “interventions”

Typically, these projects are concerned with providing access to interventions to support resettlement and do not need to be included. The establishment will however need to consider the interface between such projects and the roll-out of Offender Management arrangements.

Not all of these heading will apply to every prison, and there may be other locally defined jobs that need to be considered for inclusion in the OMU. The relevant work activities and resources for the individual establishment should be listed along with their resource allocations in current work profiles/contracts as part of steps 3 and 4 in the desktop exercise. Examples of how information can be set out to show the results of the analysis for the individual prison are given in Section 6 - Annexes D and E.

ANNEX D An illustration of the output of step 4 of the desktop exercise process for a training prison The table splits the activity and resources covered by the current probation contract into work which: a) is classed as interventions in the Offender Management model b) would become community-based in implementing the Offender Management model c) would initially become work located within the prison’s offender supervision team (OMU) The resource column sets out the present resources used to deliver this work. HMP …….. probation contract work and resources 2005-6 A: Interventions Description One to one work with offenders Description Parole Reports Supervision of Probation staff C: Prison Offender Management Unit Description Lifer work (offender supervision) MAPPA meetings/risk OASys Supervision Post-transfer induction and problem resolution ROTL & HDC collation of information, family liaison Administrative support TOTAL RESOURCE: Senior Probation Officer x 0.1 Probation Officers x 3 Typist x 1 (P/T 25hrs pw) Resources 0.2 x Probation Officer 0.1 x Probation Officer 0.2 x Probation Officer 0.5 x Probation Officer 0.5 x Probation Officer 25 hours per week – Typist grade Resource 1 x Probation Officer Resource 0.5 x Probation Officer 0.1 x SPO

B: Community-based Offender Management Work

ANNEX E An illustration of the output of step 3 of the desktop exercise process for a local prison Important note: this is an illustration of how the information can be presented, not a template. Each establishment will have to use its own work profiles and descriptions of work/resources allocated to complete this step adequately. OASys (Offender Assessment System) Officer Hours (pw) (figure from work profiles) Duties include: Interviews/ SAQ (PC) OASys – computer time Referrals Collate information/ searches Recent Assessments (PC) DFBIs (PC) Sentence Plan Boards (PC) T&Ts (PC) Queries/ Applications (PC) Mental Health Referrals (PC) Parole Reviews (PC) MAPPP Attendance/ contributions Licence recall reviews (PC) OASys Training RF1s (PC) – Personal Officer profile Admin Hours (pw) (figure from staff numbers) Duties include: Chase up ICAs and Sentence Plans (Transfer ins) Send out RF1s and chase up Allocate to assessors Organise Sentence Planning Boards and minute them Lock off OASys Review log Correspondence with external Probation Process applications MAPPA co-ordination PPO updates T&Ts DFBIs Filing Record Keeping HDC (Home Detention Curfew) Officer Hours (pw) (figure from work profiles) Duties include: Officer interviews Licence explanation Contact with external Probation Report writing Video explanation

Admin Hours (pw) Duties include:

(from staffing figures) Printing pre-cons Printing OASys Printing HDC forms Checking eligibility Faxes/emails to external probation Liaise with Tagging contractors Parole/ DCR (Discretional Conditional Release) Recalls Admin Hours (pw) (from staffing figures) Additional: x hours per month of un-profiled officer work includes: supervising oral hearings/panels, getting dossiers signed/reps, and getting panel members from the gate etc. Additional: y hours per month of un-profiled officer time to supervise oral hearings. ACRs (Automatic Conditional Releases) Admin Hours (pw) (figure calculated from staffing figures) ROTL (Release On Temporary Licence) Admin Hours (pw) (figure calculated from staffing figures) PASSPORT Officer Hours (pw) (figure calculated from staffing figures) Includes: Custody Plans for unconvicted prisoners and sentenced offenders serving less than 12 months. Admin Hours (pw) (figure calculated from staffing figures) TOTAL HOURS: Officer (effective hours): XXXX per week Administrative hours: YYYY per week

Worksheet for translating population projections into volume of offender management activity - High Security Prisons
For use in desktop exercise Input information into yellow boxes only Population information Projected Number of annual Number in new receptions population

Type of sentence Custody plus Determinate sentence Indeterminate sentence Additional factors PPOs in population Offenders assessed as High/Very High Risk of Harm HDC cases considered per year Parole reviews per year

Assumptions used in calculating work Offender manager (inc travelling time as stated) Determinate sentences Determinate sentence plan (initial)** Sentence plan follow-up per week Sentence plan formal review* Indeterminate sentences Indeterminate sentence plan (initial)** Sentence plan follow-up per week Sentence plan formal review * Determinate and indeterminate sentences PPO mentoring per month Contribution to pre release MAPPA Meetings (per case per month) Induction, familiarisation with offender and plan-per reception on transfer Additional work on detail of assessment/sentence plan on arrival in dispersal system 7 0 5.5 Offender supervisor 0.5 0.5 1

7 0 5.5

0.5 0.5 1

0 0 0

1 0.5 0.5

5.5

0

**Initial sentence plans are completed in the local prison *Formal sentence plan reviews scheduled annually in dispersal system. The calculations in this spreadsheet assume the offender manager will attend every review. Participation by video link would be acceptable for most review meetings and result in a saving in travelling time.

Projected work from inputs and assumptions
Do not input into this sheet-figures are calculated automatically from information already given in previous worksheet

All figures are presented as weekly average hours' work Offender manager (inc travelling time as stated) Offender supervisor TOTALS FOR CUSTODY PLUS (WEEKLY AVERAGE HOURS) 0.00 0.00 Additional work on detail of assessment/sentence plan on arrival in dispersal system Sentence plan follow-up per week Sentence plan formal reviewweekly average hours Induction, familiarisation with offender and sentence plan on transfer TOTALS FOR DETERMINATE SENTENCES (WEEKLY AVERAGE HOURS) Additional work on detail of assessment/sentence plan on arrival in dispersal system Sentence plan follow-up per week Sentence plan formal reviewweekly average hours Induction, familiarisation with offender and sentence plan on transfer TOTALS FOR INDETERMINATE SENTENCES (WEEKLY AVERAGE HOURS) Additional activities PPO mentoring per week MAPPA pre-release work per week TOTALS IN HOURS PER WEEK Divisor to calculate full time staff equivalent (indicative only for non-Prison Officer grades) FTE staff for this role

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 Offender manager Offender supervisor

31.2 0.00

31.2 0.00

Number of meetings to be held to support offender management processes
for which offender managers will visit the prison. This is based on the assumption that the OM will attend the annual sentence plan review once during the offender's stay at Full Sutton Do not input into this sheet-figures are calculated automatically from information already given in previous worksheet

Type of meeting/interview Determinate sentence plan review Indeterminate sentence plan review Additional Offender Manager meeting for further assessment on arrival in dispersal system TOTAL

Number per year 0 0

Average number per week 0 0

0 0

0 0

Worksheet for translating population projections into volume of offender management activity - Local Prisons
For use in desktop exercise Input information into yellow boxes only Population information Projected Number of annual Number in new receptions population

Type of sentence Custody plus Determinate sentence Indeterminate sentence Additional factors PPOs in population Offenders assessed as High/Very High Risk of Harm HDC cases considered per year Parole reviews per year

Assumptions used in calculating work Offender manager (inc travelling time Offender as stated) supervisor Custody plus sentence plan 6 Custody plus sentence plan follow-up per week 0 Determinate sentence plan Sentence plan follow-up per week Sentence plan formal review Indeterminate sentence plan Sentence plan follow-up per week Sentence plan formal review PPO mentoring per month Contribution to pre release MAPPA Meetings (per case per month) Induction, familiarisation with offender and plan-per reception on transfer 7 0 5.5 7 0 6 0

0.5 0.25 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1 1

0

0.5

0

0

Note: items shaded in grey are used only for training prisons

Projected work from inputs and assumptions
Do not input into this sheet-figures are calculated automatically from information already given in previous worksheet Note: items shaded in grey are used only for training prisons Offender manager (inc travelling time as stated) Custody plus sentence planning- weekly average hours Custody plus sentence plan follow-up per week Induction, familiarisation with offender and sentence plan on transfer TOTALS FOR CUSTODY PLUS (WEEKLY AVERAGE HOURS) Determinate sentence planweekly average hours Sentence plan follow-up per week Sentence plan formal reviewweekly average hours Induction, familiarisation with offender and sentence plan on transfer TOTALS FOR DETERMINATE SENTENCES (WEEKLY AVERAGE HOURS) Indeterminate sentence planning -weekly average hours Sentence plan follow-up per week Sentence plan formal reviewweekly average hours Induction, familiarisation with offender and sentence plan on transfer TOTALS FOR INDETERMINATE SENTENCES (WEEKLY AVERAGE HOURS) Additional activities PPO mentoring per week MAPPA pre-release work per week TOTALS IN HOURS PER WEEK Divisor to calculate full time staff equivalent (indicative only for non-Prison Officer grades) FTE staff for this role

Offender supervisor

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 Offender manager Offender supervisor

31.2 0.00

31.2 0.00

Number of meetings to be held to support offender management processes
for which offender managers will visit the prison Do not input into this sheet-figures are calculated automatically from information already given in previous worksheet Type of meeting/interview Custody plus sentence plan -initial Determinate sentence plan -initial Determinate sentence plan review Indeterminate sentence plan -initial Indeterminate sentence plan review TOTAL Note: items shaded in grey are used only for local prisons Number per year 0 0 0 0 0 0 Average number per week 0 0 0 0 0 0

Worksheet for translating population projections into volume of offender management activity - Training Prisons
For use in desktop exercise Input information into yellow boxes only Population information Projected Number of annual Number in new receptions population

Type of sentence Custody plus Determinate sentence Indeterminate sentence Additional factors PPOs in population Offenders assessed as High/Very High Risk of Harm HDC cases considered per year Parole reviews per year

Assumptions used in calculating work Offender manager (inc travelling time Offender as stated) supervisor Custody plus sentence plan 6 Custody plus sentence plan follow-up per week 0 Determinate sentence plan Sentence plan follow-up per week Sentence plan formal review Indeterminate sentence plan Sentence plan follow-up per week Sentence plan formal review PPO mentoring per month Contribution to pre release MAPPA Meetings (per case per month) Induction, familiarisation with offender and plan-per reception on transfer 7 0 5.5 7 0 6 0

0.5 0.25 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1 1

0

0.5

0

0.5

Note: items shaded in grey are used only for local prisons

Projected work from inputs and assumptions
Do not input into this sheet-figures are calculated automatically from information already given in previous worksheet Note: items shaded in grey are used only for local prisons Offender manager (inc travelling time as stated) Custody plus sentence planning- weekly average hours Custody plus sentence plan follow-up per week Induction, familiarisation with offender and sentence plan on transfer TOTALS FOR CUSTODY PLUS (WEEKLY AVERAGE HOURS) Determinate sentence planweekly average hours Sentence plan follow-up per week Sentence plan formal reviewweekly average hours Induction, familiarisation with offender and sentence plan on transfer TOTALS FOR DETERMINATE SENTENCES (WEEKLY AVERAGE HOURS) Indeterminate sentence planning -weekly average hours Sentence plan follow-up per week Sentence plan formal reviewweekly average hours Induction, familiarisation with offender and sentence plan on transfer TOTALS FOR INDETERMINATE SENTENCES (WEEKLY AVERAGE HOURS) Additional activities PPO mentoring per week MAPPA pre-release work per week TOTALS IN HOURS PER WEEK Divisor to calculate full time staff equivalent FTE staff for this role

Offender supervisor

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 Offender manager Offender supervisor 31.2 0.00 31.2 0.00

Number of meetings to be held to support offender management processes
for which offender managers will visit the prison Do not input into this sheet-figures are calculated automatically from information already given in previous worksheet Type of meeting/interview Custody plus sentence plan -initial Determinate sentence plan -initial Determinate sentence plan review Indeterminate sentence plan -initial Indeterminate sentence plan review TOTAL Note: items shaded in grey are used only for local prisons Number per year 0 0 0 0 0 0 Average number per week 0 0 0 0 0 0