Probation Bench Handbook

A guide to the work of the National Probation Service for Judges and other Sentencers

Edition Two August 2007

The information in this publication draws upon material prepared by the National Offender Management Service (NOMS) at the Ministry of Justice to help probation staff implement the sentencing framework introduced through the Criminal Justice Act 2003. It is consistent with guidance from the Sentencing Guidelines Council. In some instances it sets out the views of NOMS as to the interpretation of the Act. NOMS wishes to make clear that this publication is intended solely to inform and assist. It is not intended to constrain or in any other way interfere with the independence of those members of the judiciary who, it is hoped, will find it a useful reference work.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Probation Bench Manual is a National Probation Service publication. The Probation Bench Manual editorial steering group was Ruth Allan, Richard Mason, and Susan Lord (National Offender Management Service) and His Honour Judge Stone QC. Many probation staff contributed their knowledge and expertise to the compilation of this manual. Despite all this valued assistance, the publication remains entirely the responsibility of the National Offender Management Service and any errors or omissions are ours.

Foreword

FOREWORD

I welcome the National Offender Management Services�s initiative in producing this s�s comprehensive guide to the Probation Service�s work with the courts. This is the second edition of the Manual which has proved a most valuable publication for judges. The manual comes at a time of continuing change in the Criminal Justice System. The Criminal Justice Act 2003 introduced new sentences which affect many sentencing decisions and much of the work of the National Probation Service. This manual does not set out to cover legal aspects of the new sentencing regime – that is a task for the Judicial Studies Board – but it seeks to provide a practical guide to the implementation of the sentencing options available to the court and to provide a valuable insight into the thinking behind proposals made in pre-sentence reports. It is invaluable to have in this book a practical guide to those sentencing changes. I welcome the exposition in the manual of the Community Order together with the Requirements which can be imposed under it and the increased flexibility which those sentencing provisions afford for sentences in the community. I also welcome the increased range of options now available as alternatives to short custodial sentences. At the other end of the spectrum I welcome the guidance on long-term supervision which is offered under the new indeterminate sentences and the emphasis on the assessment of harm posed by high-risk offenders in the community. I also welcome the exposition of key provisions relating to mentally disordered offenders. I am certain that this manual will prove a valuable companion for all those engaged in the Criminal Justice System.

Lord Chief Justice 

Preface

PREFACE
All those involved in the Criminal Justice System have a shared aim to see the system become more effective at reducing crime and rehabilitating offenders. This is a time of major reform which offers us the opportunity to build essential partnerships to accomplish real and lasting change. The new sentencing framework provided by the Criminal Justice Act 2003 has given the courts more effective sentences. Most importantly, there are alternative solutions to replace current short custodial sentences, and the new generic Community Order offers a menu of interventions and levels of supervision which can be individually tailored to match the risk, need and the seriousness of the offending. In addition, there are initiatives to revitalise the fine. Making these penalties available and credible is, of course, essential, but targeting them at the right people is also crucial. The Sentencing Guidelines Council provides guidance on the appropriate level of punishment for particular offences, taking into account what is costeffective in terms of sentencing. We in the National Probation Service need to ensure that we play a full part in this process by providing all the feedback that we can to sentencers about what works. Targeting the right sentence on the right offender needs to be followed through with delivering that sentence in a properly planned and managed way. That is why we have developed an offender management approach that is now used nationally for all offenders, whether in prison or in the community. Such an approach is crucial to the new sentences introduced by the Criminal Justice Act 2003 so that there is greater continuity through the management of the whole sentence, in the form of an ‘end-to-end� approach to sentence delivery with interventions being delivered to the right person at the right time. This manual provides a detailed guide to the services that Probation offers the courts – the range of reports it can provide, the risk assessment process and its application, and the range of sentences and interventions available. It does not purport to be an authoritative representation of the law. It forms an important strand in our communications with sentencers and should help to ensure that you get the best out of our services and resources. In so doing, the manual seeks to underpin our shared aim of providing more effective sentences and, ultimately, reducing crime and increasing public confidence in the Criminal Justice System.

Roger Hill Director National Probation Service 

Contents

CONTENTS
Foreword Preface ntroduction: The Sentencing Provisions in the Criminal Justice Act 2003 Chapter 1: Bail Bail information reports Tagging on bail Referral to approved premises Chapter 2: Pre-Sentence Reports Chapter 3: Community Order The Requirements • • • • • • • • • • • • Unpaid work Activity Programme Prohibited Activity Curfew Exclusion Residence Mental health treatment Drug rehabilitation Alcohol treatment Supervision Attendance Centre   1 2-5 2 2 3 6-8 9-29 10-11 12 13-14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23-24 25 26-28 29 30-35 36-44 36 37 -39 40-41 42-44 45-52 49-52

Enforcement of Community Orders Prolific and Priority Offenders (PPOs) Chapter 4: Electronic Monitoring Chapter 5: Custodial Sentences (including licence arrangements) Prison sentences of 12 months or longer Public protection sentences Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements Work with victims Chapter 6: Mentally Disordered Offenders Community Order with a Mental Health Treatment 

Contents

Appendices 1. Offender Assessment 2. Offender Management 3. Offending Behaviour Programmes • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • The Accreditation Process Enhanced Thinking Skills Think First One to One The Women�s Programme Aggression Replacement Training (ART) Controlling Anger and Learning to Manage it (CALM) Community – Sex Offender Group Programme (C-SOGP) Thames Valley – Sex Offender Groupwork Programme (TV-SOGP) Northumbria – Sex Offender Group Programme (N-SOGP) Internet Sex Offender Treatment Programme (i-SOTP) Drink Impaired Drivers (DIDs) Addressing Substance Related Offending (ASRO) Offender Substance Abuse Programme (OSAP) Personal Reduction in Substance Misuse (PRISM) Community Domestic Violence Programme (CDVP) Integrated Domestic Abuse Programme (IDAP)

53-82 53-56 57 58-75 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76-77 78-80 81 82

4. Conditional Cautions 5. Research on the Effectiveness of Sentencing and Interventions 6. National Standards summary 7. Glossary 

V

Introduction

THE SENTENCNG PROVSONS N THE CRMNAL JUSTCE ACT 2003
The sentencing framework The Act makes radical changes to the structure of prison and community sentences. It sets out the purposes of sentencing as follows: • • • • • The punishment of offenders The reduction of crime (including its reduction by deterrence) The reform and rehabilitation of offenders The protection of the public The making of reparation by offenders to persons affected by their offence(s) The new sentences The Criminal Justice Act sentences currently in force are: • • • • Community Order Determinate Sentences of 12 months or longer Indeterminate Sentence for Public Protection Extended Sentence for Public Protection These provisions were implemented on 4 April 2005 and apply to offences committed on or after that date. The sentences and provisions not yet implemented are: • • Custody Plus – not available. Petty Persistence (Section 151). The resources are not yet in place to implement this provision, so no date has been set, The under 12 months custodial sentence with automatic unconditional release at the halfway point will continue to be available. Other New or Revised Disposals: The Act also introduces Conditional Cautions in pilot areas and new provisions to strengthen Deferment of Sentence. The conditions available with a caution are aimed at reparation for the offence and rehabilitation of the offender. The legislation extends the scope of the National Probation Service so that it can play a role, if appropriate. The deferred sentence provisions allow the courts to appoint an officer of the Probation Board or any other person it considers suitable to monitor the offender during the period of deferment.

1

Chapter 1 - Bail

BAL
Bail Information Reports The Probation Service currently provides a bail information report service in a limited number of courts. Where the service is available, it is normally targeted at defendants from black and minority ethnic communities, young adults and women or is provided in response to requests from the defence. All local prisons have bail information officers who produce bail information reports in respect of remand prisoners for hearings other than the first hearing, and these are normally targeted at the same groups and at those who are bailable. Bail information reports are intended to assist the Court in determining a defendant�s suitability for bail by providing the Court with verified information to add to their factual knowledge of the defendant, including an assessment of risk of harm to the public and accommodation options. Bail information reports may help courts decide whether a defendant may be granted bail subject to conditions, perhaps including accommodation and/or support (see below) and/or electronic monitoring (see below and Chapter 4). Bail information services in the local prisons are being enhanced in 2007 to allow more defendants to be interviewed and more reports to be provided to Courts. Tagging On Bail A curfew monitored with an electronic tag is available as a condition of bail for both adult and juvenile offenders. In September 2005 Her Majesty�s Courts Service (HMCS) sent out information to sentencers inviting courts considering a remand in custody to consider imposing a curfew backed by electronic monitoring as an alternative to such a remand. The use of tagging on bail for adults has increased considerably in the last year, particularly since the issue in September 2006 of Home Office Circular 25/2006 which sets out the procedures to be followed by courts, the Electronic Monitoring suppliers and the police when the Court decides that a curfew is to be monitored electronically with a tag. Bail Accommodation and Support Services NOMS is introducing a bail accommodation and bail support service for adult defendants. The services will be available by July 2007 and will be provided by ClearSprings Ltd. on a regional basis. The contract will be managed by the Regional Offender Managers and the Director of Offender Management for Wales. The availability of these accommodation and support services will provide Courts, in appropriate cases, with alternatives to remand in custody for defendants who are currently unable to provide a bail address, or who could not be bailed without support. The accommodation will be in small shared (typically 3 sharing) flats and houses in the community, not in hostels. All those given accommodation will be given induction and movein support and will be helped to find accommodation to move-on into on completion of bail (unless they are then sentenced to custody, or return to the home address).

2

Chapter 1 - Bail

The support services will offer three contact sessions in each of the first three weeks followed by one session a week thereafter. Courts may wish to make attendance at these a condition of bail. The support worker will help the defendant to comply with bail, to maintain the ‘tenancy� and to address any offending-related needs, in part through engaging existing specialist public and voluntary services as appropriate. The support worker will work in liaison with the Offender Manager in those cases where one is allocated by probation. Defendants will be reminded to attend court and the contractor will monitor behaviour, initiating breach procedures as necessary. These support services are available also for those who have accommodation but could not be bailed without such support. The availability of accommodation and/or support for individual defendants will be communicated to the Courts through bail information reports which will be sent from prisons to the CPS, defence and to the Court in time for the hearing. It is open to Courts to apply a curfew order supported by tagging on defendants who are bailed into the accommodation and/or support services provided by ClearSprings. The bail accommodation provided by ClearSprings is aimed at lower risk defendants. Where suitable alternative accommodation is not available to a defendant who poses a medium or higher risk consideration may be given to a place in Approved Premises as an alternative to remand in custody. Referral To Approved Premises Approved premises (previously known as probation hostels) provide an enhanced level of residential supervision for: • • • defendants on bail in criminal proceedings offenders serving community sentences with a condition of residence offenders released from prison on licence The core purpose of approved premises is to protect the public from offenders who pose a significant risk of harm. For this reason, the majority of bed spaces are occupied by offenders released from custody, some of whom have been convicted of very serious offences. Often offenders are placed in approved premises as part of a risk management plan devised under the auspices of the Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA See Page 59). Some approved premises may have some restrictions on the categories of residents who may be accommodated. Local probation staff will be able to advise where such restrictions apply. In terms of bail referrals, priority is given to: • Convicted offenders assessed as high or very high risk of harm, where the placement is necessary in the interests of public protection and/or for a period of bail assessment to assess their suitability for a condition of residence at the premises as part of a Community Order Unconvicted defendants assessed as medium, high or very high risk of harm where the placement is necessary for public protection reasons and/or to enable specialist assessments (e.g. psychiatric or psychological assessments) to be undertaken
3 3

Chapter 1 - Bail

In order to avoid ‘bed blocking� the normal expectation is that bail placements will be for a period of not more than six weeks, or two adjournments; this is usually sufficient time for the necessary assessments to be completed or for the court to be provided with a new, verified address for the remainder of the bail period. Approved premises operate to a national occupancy target of 90 per cent. This means it is not possible to hold vacant beds on the chance there may be a referral from the courts. Staff in approved premises are able to advise the court of vacancies on a daily basis. In order to determine the suitability of a referral, a full assessment of risk and needs is always undertaken, based on information made available from the court. The decision to accept or reject a referral depends on this risk and needs assessment. Reasons for refusal are made clear to the court at the earliest opportunity by probation staff. Difficulty in obtaining full information can cause delays but, whenever possible, the decision should be made on the same day. The general principle applied to admissions is that the offender/defendant must require an enhanced level of supervision, management and oversight; the need for accommodation alone will not suffice. Enhanced supervision Approved premises provide enhanced supervision of offenders in the interests of public protection. Typically this includes: • • • • • • • Internal and external security measures such as CCTV, alarm systems, room searches and facilities for electronic monitoring A minimum of two members of supervisory staff on duty at all times, including during the night A standard curfew from 11.00pm-6.00am, which, in the case of bailees, can be extended by the court Delivery of a core regime that is motivational and includes individual and/or groupwork sessions Routine observation and assessment of residents� behaviour Safe systems for issuing essential medication Access, on site or in the community, to drug and alcohol services, education, training and employment (ETE) resources, relevant accredited programmes, mental health services, multi-cultural/multi-faith links Additional conditions Sometimes additional bail conditions will be requested to assist in the safe management of the person bailed. These could include: • • • Not to contact named people (e.g. victims or known criminal associates) Additional curfews at certain times of the day Not to visit a named public area Standard rules All residents must read and sign the approved premises rules. This is important in securing
4

Chapter 1 - Bail

compliance and is vital to enable proper enforcement if a breach occurs. The rules cover areas such as: • • • • • Required standards of behaviour Prohibitions on alcohol and drug use Payment of rent Participation in chores and other activities Access for visitors Breach and enforcement Approved premises have systems in place to ensure the court is informed immediately when defendants do not arrive or abscond from the placement. Minor breaches of the rules may be dealt with by formal warnings; serious or persistent breaches will result in the defendant being returned to court. Suitable Wording When a bail place is available in approved premises, the appropriate wording for a condition is: To reside at (name and address of approved premises) and to abide by the financial and disciplinary rules of that approved premises.

5

Chapter 2 - Pre-Sentence Reports

PRE-SENTENCE REPORTS
Statutory Background Under Section 158 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 a pre-sentence report (PSR) is a report which: a) with a view to assisting the court in determining the most suitable method of dealing with an offender, is made or submitted by an appropriate officer, and b) contains information as to such matters, presented in such manner as may be prescribed by rules made by the Secretary of State. Purpose of a PSR The purpose of a PSR is to provide information to the sentencing court about the offender and the offence committed and to help the court decide on a suitable sentence. Typically the production of a PSR involves interviewing the offender, reading court papers, and an assessment of likelihood of reconviction and risk, which may include use of the Offender Assessment System (OASys – see Appendix 1). When to Seek a Report If a report is requested by the court the Probation Service is under a statutory duty to provide one. There are a number of circumstances under which a PSR might not be necessary. These include cases in which: • • an offender has recently been sentenced, with a PSR, for a similar offence and the sentencer decides on advice from the Probation Service that the existing PSR can be re-used an offender is held in custody, having been convicted of murder, and a post-sentence report will be prepared instead of a PSR because the offender is to be sentenced to a mandatory life sentence a custodial sentence is being considered by the court and the sentencer is clear that the issue is merely one of sentence length and that he or she needs no Probation Service assistance in deciding this the court is sentencing to a Community Order with a single Requirement, the offence is in the low range of seriousness, and the National Probation Service will not be involved in the delivery of the sentence. where the sentencer is minded to impose a fine only. Type of Report There is more than one type of report available to sentencers and these are outlined below. Also outlined are the time periods in which sentencers should generally expect these reports to be delivered.
6

Chapter 2 - Pre-Sentence Reports

• • • •

on the day requested or within five working days for Fast Delivery PSRs within 15 working days for Standard Delivery PSRs where the offender is remanded on bail within 10-15 working days for Standard Delivery PSRs where the offender is remanded in custody within the timescale set by the commissioning court for Crown Court cases

It should be noted, however, that some local variation is permissible subject to agreement with the Regional Offender Manager (ROM) and Local Criminal Justice Board. Sentencers should always check arrangements that have been made locally. Visiting Recorders should note that PSR practice may differ slightly from area to area and should ensure they are briefed on this. Oral Advice Probation officers may be able to offer oral advice where the court only wants a limited amount of information. In these cases the sentencer might ask the probation officer for an oral report rather than a written PSR. PSRs There are two national PSR templates available: The Fast Delivery PSR – normally to be completed on the same day or for the next working day. Completed using the OASys risk of serious harm screening tool but usually without a full OASys assessment for completion on adjournment based on a full OASys Assessment

The Standard Delivery PSR –

Where a custodial sentence is being considered by the court a Standard Delivery PSR including a full OASys assessment would normally be appropriate. There may be some straightforward custodial cases that do not require this level of analysis, and where a Fast Delivery PSR would be appropriate. For cases in which the court has indicated that it is considering passing a Community Order and requires a PSR, the court�s direction on seriousness will provide the initial trigger for the type of PSR to be used. In most low seriousness cases, and in a significant number of medium seriousness cases, a Fast Delivery PSR would be used whilst in most high seriousness cases a Standard Delivery PSR would be used, but this would be dependent on the information the court requires, the court�s intended purpose/s of sentencing and the outcome of the report writer�s initial assessment. Content of a PSR Every PSR should be: • Objective, impartial, free from discriminatory language and stereotype, balanced, verified and factually accurate 

Chapter 2 - Pre-Sentence Reports

• •

Completed following a risk of harm screening and a likelihood of reconviction assessment and/or be based on a full OASys assessment Based on at least one interview with the offender

Every court report should include: • • • • • A front sheet providing basic facts about the offender and the sources used to prepare the report An offence analysis An assessment of the offender An assessment of the risk of harm to the public and the likelihood of re-offending A sentencing proposal

Sentencing Proposal In all PSRs report writers must make a sentencing proposal. In many cases the PSR sentencing proposal, following assessment of the offender and his offending, will concur with the court�s provisional view. The report writer�s sentencing proposal will be consistent with the court�s direction of seriousness and sentencing purpose(s) and the OASys assessment. However, there will also be cases in which the PSR proposal recommends a different sentence from the one the court initially had in mind. In line with the SGC Guideline which states that sentencers should consider all sentences available, whether within or below the threshold passed, the report writer, after assessing the offender and his or her circumstances, may recommend that a fine or discharge should be considered rather than a Community Order, or a Community Order imposed rather than a custodial sentence. 

Chapter 3 - The Community Order Chapter 3

THE COMMUNTY ORDER
Background The Criminal Justice Act 2003 introduces a new Community Order which replaces all existing community sentences for adults. It applies to offences committed on or after 4 April 2005. Offences committed before 4 April will be sentenced under the old legislation. The Sentencing Guidelines Council says that when deciding whether to impose a Community Order: “Sentencers must consider all of the disposals available (within or below the threshold passed) at the time of sentence…so that even where the threshold for a community sentence has been passed a financial penalty or discharge may still be an appropriate penalty. Where an offender has low risk of re-offending, particular care needs to be taken in the light of evidence that indicates that there are circumstances where inappropriate intervention can increase the risk of re-offending rather than decrease it. In addition, recent improvements in enforcement of financial penalties make them a more viable sentence in a wider range of cases.” The content of the order is defined by one or more of 12 possible Requirements specified within them. All Community Orders consist of at least one Requirement. (The same menu of Requirements is available for the Community Order and the new Suspended Sentence Order or ‘Custody Minus�. Requirements can be combined to produce an individual package for each offender, subject to the overall restriction on liberty being commensurate with the seriousness of the offending, and the suitability for the offender. The seriousness of the offending is defined according to the current offence(s) and any relevant previous convictions which the court may take into account. The different Requirements ordered must also be compatible, and not interfere with the offender�s religious beliefs or times of work and education. The SGC has identified three sentencing ranges (low, medium and high) within the community sentence band. It suggests that the low range is for offences only just crossing the community sentence threshold, the medium range is for offences that obviously fall within the community sentence band, and the high range is for offences that only just fall below the custody threshold or where the custody threshold is crossed but a community sentence is more appropriate in all the circumstances. According to the SGC Guideline, “In most cases [of low seriousness], only one Requirement will be appropriate and the length may be curtailed if additional Requirements are necessary.” For high seriousness cases the SGC Guideline states that “more intensive sentences which combine two or more Requirements may be appropriate”. When adjourning for a report, the SGC guideline says that the court will indicate which of the three sentencing ranges within the Community Order is relevant and the purpose(s) of sentencing that the Requirements are required to fulfill. The guidelines state that usually the most helpful way for the court to do this would be to produce a written note for the report writer, copied on the court file. This information will be the starting point for the Probation Service to make a recommendation to the court in the appropriate report format. The content of this recommendation will be determined by the seriousness of the offence, risk of 

Chapter 3 - The Order The Community Community Order

harm, likelihood of re-offending, and the particular offending related needs of the offender. The 12 Requirements The Requirements available for use in a Community Order are: • • • • • • • • • • • • Unpaid work Activity (Accredited) Programme Prohibited Activity Curfew Exclusion Residence Mental health treatment Drug rehabilitation Alcohol treatment Supervision Attendance Centre

Probation staff have been trained in the application of an “Implementation Model” that helps them arrive at a suitable recommendation based on seriousness, purpose(s) and an assessment of risks and needs. All Requirements start from the sentence date, but implementation may be sequenced by the Probation Service in accordance with probation National Standards (see Appendix 4). The PSR writer will make a decision on sequencing and advise the court. The decision will be based on the offender�s needs (e.g. the offender may require detox before his or her offending behaviour can be addressed via a Programme Requirement) and resource issues (e.g. the point at which a place on a programme can be made available). For multiple Requirement orders the court can specify a shorter completion time for one Requirement than another, but otherwise all Requirements are considered to terminate at the end of the order Judges should be aware that if a Community Order is made specifying an overall duration for the Order, and this overall duration is greater than the longest community Requirement within the Order, the following circumstances apply. The resulting gap (where no Requirement is in force) cannot be considered an “at risk” period during which the offender can be breached for re-offending. Similarly the offender will not be supervised during the period where no Requirement is in force, regardless of the overall length of the Order. The Probation Service will recommend that separate Requirements be used to deliver each component of an order. For example, the delivery of basic skills and education is likely to be proposed as a separate Activity Requirement and the delivery of an accredited substance misuse programme will be proposed as a Programme Requirement (and not within a parallel Alcohol Treatment or Drug Rehabilitation Requirement). This ensures that: • • • • the offender is clear about the expectations placed upon him or her the court is clear about the full extent of the level of intervention to be delivered the intentions of the court can be clearly enforced the use of specific resources is recorded and the demand for such provision monitored. The exception to this is that a small amount of skills assessment or learning may be

10

Chapter 3 - The Community Order

undertaken within an Unpaid Work Requirement within the limits set by probation National Standards. The following descriptions of the 12 Requirements include suggestions for duration at the different seriousness levels. This is the Probation Service interpretation of what could be included and is based, where available, on the SGC Guidelines. The descriptions also include suggested main purposes. Courts are, of course, free to make their own assessments on a case by case basis.

11

Chapter 3 - The Order The Community Community Order

Unpaid Work (UW)
Main purposes: Seriousness levels: Punishment + Reparation + Rehabilitation Low = 40 – 80 hours Medium = 80 – 150 hours High = 150 – 300 hours (based on SGC Guideline) In hours between 40 and 300 The court must be satisfied that the offender is suitable to perform work.

How is it expressed? Further information required?

The Requirement must be completed within one year unless extended on amendment by the court on the application of the responsible officer. For multiple offences dealt with on the same occasion, the hours can be concurrent or consecutive subject to a maximum of 300. The increase in the maximum number of hours brings England and Wales in line with existing legislation in Scotland. Because courts will no longer have the option to take no action in the event of a breach of a Community or Suspended Sentence Order, one course of action in making the order more onerous will be the imposition of hours of Unpaid Work. Where this is an extension of an existing UW Requirement then there is no minimum number of hours which may be added, but the total on aggregate must not exceed 300 hours. Where no Unpaid Work Requirement is in existence, the court can add one in the event of breach, but the Requirement will be subject to the same 40 hours minimum as at the time of sentence. At present Guided Skills Learning (where delivered) is done within the ordered hours since most of the learning takes place while carrying out the work. Probation officers have been advised by the Home Office that, where identified as a need, either at the time of OASys assessment or subsequently during the post-sentence Unpaid Work assessment process, a small amount of skills-related activity, such as basic skills, could be incorporated into the Requirement. However, where any significant amount of skills learning is necessary, an Activity Requirement might helpfully be included in the order, to permit the offender to undertake up to 60 days of assessment and training in ETE (Employment, Training and Education), with related support and advice. In this instance, consideration might be given to reducing the number of Unpaid Work hours ordered, so as to ensure that the order remains commensurate with the seriousness of the offending.

12

Chapter 3 - The Community Order Chapter 3

Activity
Main purposes: Seriousness levels: How is it expressed? Rehabilitation + Reparation Medium – 20 to 30 days High – up to the maximum 60 days (based on SGC Guideline) In days, up to a maximum of 60. In proposals to courts, length will be expressed in days, but also give details of the actual period and content of each attendance (e.g. an Activity Requirement of 30 days, attending a basic skills assessment and training programme at [venue] for three hours once a week). An Activity Requirement cannot be made without the consent of any person whose co-operation is necessary for the offender to comply with the Requirement. The consent of the offender is not necessary. The court must also be satisfied that compliance is feasible.

Further information required?

In an Activity Requirement the offender must present himself to a person or persons specified at a place or places specified, and/or participate in activities specified, as instructed by the responsible officer. In practice each attendance on a separate date will count as one ‘day� for the purposes of the number of days completed (but multiple attending on the same date will count as one ‘day�). The places specified must be a community rehabilitation centre or a place approved by the Local Probation Board as providing suitable facilities for an Activity Requirement. The offender can also be required to attend and participate in activities elsewhere under the instruction or authority of the person in charge of a community rehabilitation centre. An Activity Requirement can be used for a wide range of activities, from day centre attendance to education and reparation to victims or persons affected by the offending. Potential activities include: • • • Employment, Training and Education – e.g. provided through a local college Counselling in debt and financial management – e.g. provided through a local Citizens� Advice Bureau Mediation between the offender and the victim or persons affected by the offending, if a thorough risk assessment indicates that this would be appropriate.

Where a specialised assessment is required to determine the precise programme of work to be undertaken by the offender, this can be provided and undertaken within the arrangements for the delivery of the Activity Requirement. The NPS can advise the court on a case by case basis. Where the development of Employment, Training and Education interventions is identified as being strongly linked to the prospects of reducing further offending, an Activity Requirement could be included in the order, to permit the offender to undertake appropriate

13

Chapter 3 - The Order The Community Community Order

assessment and training, and receive related support and advice. This may be usefully coupled with an Unpaid Work Requirement where the main purpose of the order is punishment, as outlined in the section on Unpaid Work. It is anticipated that a major use of Activity Requirements will be for the delivery of education and basic skills assessment and training. Where a period of mentoring (by a person other than the responsible officer) is to form a specific part of a complex rehabilitation package of intervention, as distinct from contact under a Supervision Requirement which has a more general focus and runs throughout the order, an Activity Requirement could be used for this purpose.

14

Chapter 3 - The Community Order Chapter 3

Programme
Main purpose: Seriousness levels: How is it expressed? Rehabilitation Medium – High (likely NPS recommendation) Normally in terms of the number of sessions. Where possible the court will be advised of the length and number of sessions per week and the overall duration (e.g. two sessions of three hours per week for 11 weeks) The court cannot include a programme in an order unless the PSR recommends it as suitable for the offender and available.

Further Information required?

A programme will normally be combined with a Supervision Requirement to provide additional support. The programme must be accredited by the Correctional Services Accreditation Panel, and the wording of Programme Requirements must specify the title of the programme, the venue and, if appropriate, the number of sessions. Most offending behaviour programmes are accredited on the basis that pre and post programme work is undertaken. However, this is often individual work, and does not form a part of the main programme of sessions. This will ideally be undertaken within a parallel Supervision Requirement which would normally be proposed for inclusion in the order. Multiple Programme Requirements These can be made by inserting a separate Requirement for each programme into the order, for example, a Requirement for a General Offending Behaviour Programme (GOBP) followed by an offence-specific programme. However, where offenders are unable to undertake a second Programme Requirement, perhaps because they have failed to complete a first GOBP, it will be necessary for the order to be amended and the second Requirement deleted. For this reason sentencers may wish to consider whether multiple Programme Requirements should be considered only in exceptional circumstances. In all cases, where more than one Programme Requirement is proposed sentencers will wish to ensure that the overall level of intervention is commensurate with the seriousness of the offending, notwithstanding the level of offending-related needs which could be successfully addressed. For full details of accredited programmes, please refer to Page 58.

15

Chapter 3 - The Order The Community Community Order

Prohibited Activity
Main purposes: Seriousness levels: How is it expressed? Punishment + Protection Low – Medium – High (low and medium range recommended by SGC) To refrain from a specified activity on a day or days, or during a period specified up to 36 months (24 months for a Suspended Sentence Order) The court must consult the Probation Service before making such a Requirement.

Further information required?

A Prohibited Activity Requirement proscribes a particular behaviour in contrast to an Exclusion Requirement which proscribes presence at a particular place. A Prohibited Activity Requirement may therefore be used to prohibit behaviour which could occur at a wide range of places. Examples of situations where a Prohibited Activity Requirement might be used include: • • • • • • Drink related offending linked to pubs in general – prohibition from entering any public house or licensed premises Prohibition from association with named individual(s) (with whom the offender might have committed offences) Stalking or sex offending – prohibition from approaching or communicating with (victim and/or family members) without the approval of the case manager (and/ or local authority Social Services Department) Sex offender – prohibition from taking work or any other organised activity, which will involve a person under the relevant age, either on a professional or voluntary basis Sex offender – prohibition from approaching or communicating with any child under the relevant age without the approval of the case manager (and/or LA Social Services Department) Sex offender – prohibition from residing (or staying for even one night) in the same household as any child under the relevant age.

The examples given above demonstrate the range of possible measures, particularly in relation to inter-agency communication, which might be used to monitor compliance with the prohibition. The Requirement should not be used to prohibit behaviour which is illegal, but can be used to provide additional public protection. For example, prohibition of a sex offender from staying the night in a house where there are children might only be enforced in the breach, where the offender�s presence comes to the attention of the police, but it would allow action to be taken even if no other offence had been committed on that occasion. Where appropriate, a Prohibited Activity can be used with a Supervision Requirement to support and reinforce desired changes in behaviour.

16

Chapter 3 - The Community Order Chapter 3

Curfew
Main purposes: Seriousness levels: Punishment + Protection Low = a few weeks Medium = two – three months High = four – six months (based on SGC Guideline) Expressed in hours between two and 12 in any one day, and limited to operate within six months of the order being made. The curfew can be at different places and/or for different periods on different days. The court must consider information about the place of curfew, including information about the attitude of persons likely to be affected by the enforced presence of the offender.

How is it expressed?

Further information required?

The Curfew Requirement must be electronically monitored unless this facility is not available, ‘any necessary consent for monitoring has not been given� or the court considers it inappropriate. A single Requirement of an electronically monitored Curfew can be used as a simple punishment. Curfews may also be considered alongside a long Unpaid Work Requirement in cases with a low level of offending-related need and risk of harm, but where the level of seriousness is very high or above the custody threshold. Curfews can also be used as part of a complex package of interventions in cases with high levels of offending-related need and/or risk of harm and where the level of seriousness is very high or above the custody threshold.

1

Chapter 3 - The Order The Community Community Order

Exclusion
Main purposes Seriousness levels: Punishment + Protection Low = a few months Medium = about six months High = about 12 months (based on SGC Guideline) Exclusion from a place or area for a specified period up to two years. The exclusion can be limited to particular specified periods, and at different places for different periods or days Report is clearly advisable in cases where a significant risk of harm is identified. Please check with the Probation Service whether electronic monitoring is available in your area.

How is it expressed?

Further information required?

An Exclusion Requirement precludes the offender�s presence from a particular place or area. If the court�s intention is to prohibit behaviour which could occur at a range of places too wide to define or to determine in advance, a Prohibited Activity Requirement may be suitable, but may be harder to monitor and enforce. Examples of situations where an Exclusion Requirement might be used include: • • • • • • • Drink-related, public order or violent offences associated with particular public house(s) – exclusion from named public houses Public order offences committed in particular area of town – exclusion from that area Stalking – exclusion from area of victim�s home or workplace Sex offender excluded from named swimming pool, leisure centre, playground etc or from (e.g.) a half-mile radius of named schools Burglary where a particular area or estate appears to have been targeted – exclusion from that area Persistent shop theft – exclusion from a named store or shopping area Domestic violence cases – exclusion from the victim�s home and environs

The court is required to impose electronic monitoring unless this facility is not available, any consent necessary for the monitoring has not been given, or the court considers it inappropriate. Exclusions can also be monitored where appropriate inter-agency communication is put in place. For example, where a shopping centre is the subject of the exclusion, agencies will have an interest in putting arrangements in place to ensure entry of the offender into the place is detected and action is taken. Where appropriate, an Exclusion Requirement can be used with a Supervision Requirement to support and reinforce desired changes in behaviour.

1

Chapter 3 - The Community Order Chapter 3

Residence
Main purposes: Seriousness levels: How is it expressed? Further information required? Rehabilitation + Protection Medium – High (likely NPS recommendation) In months or years up to 36 months (max of 24 months for a Suspended Sentence Order) Residence in a hostel or institution must be proposed by the Probation Service. The court must consider the home surroundings of the offender.

Residence can be at approved premises or a private address. Residence at an approved hostel or other institution will normally be accompanied by a proposal for a Supervision Requirement to ensure support and contact after moving to next-stage accommodation. Residence at an approved hostel automatically includes a personally supervised curfew. It is important to note the distinction between making a Residence Requirement at the offender�s home, and the use of a Curfew Requirement. The former might be imposed where the court wishes to ensure that the offender lives at a specific location (or with certain other people) and not at an alternative address which for some reason would be unsuitable. This Requirement does not require the offender to be at home at any particular time. If the concern of the court is primarily to confine the offender to his or her residence at particular times, then a Curfew Requirement would be more appropriate. The order must specify the place of residence, but if so worded it may allow the offender to reside at a place other than that specified in the order, with the prior approval of the responsible officer.

1

Chapter 3 - The Order The Community Community Order

Mental Health Treatment
Main purpose: Seriousness levels: How is it expressed? Further information required? Rehabilitation Medium – High (likely NPS recommendation) In months or years between six and 36 months (max of 24 months for a Suspended Sentence Order) The court must be satisfied that: • on the evidence of a registered medical practitioner, the mental condition of the offender is such as requires and may be susceptible to treatment, but does not warrant the making of a Hospital or Guardianship Order • treatment has been or can be arranged • the offender is willing to comply with the Requirement.

The offender is required to submit to treatment by or under the direction of a medical practitioner and/or a chartered psychologist with a view to the improvement of the offender�s mental condition. Treatment may be as a resident patient of a care home or hospital (but not in hospital premises where ‘high security� psychiatric services are provided), a non– resident patient of such an institution, or under the direction of a medical practitioner and/or a chartered psychologist. The offender will need to keep the appointments which have been made in pursuance of the treatment by the medical specialist and to agree to take any medication that is necessary. Should the medical specialist confirm that the offender is not keeping to any necessary care plan for his or her mental health treatment, then the responsible officer should take the offender back to court as being in breach of the Mental Health Treatment Requirement within the order. A Supervision Requirement will normally be proposed to provide additional support. However, where treatment is residential then a Supervision Requirement would normally not be necessary and the role of the responsible officer would be limited to that of case manager. A separate Residence Requirement would also not be necessary Full details of work with Mentally Disordered Offenders are contained in chapter 6.

20

Chapter 3 - The Community Order Chapter 3

Drug Rehabilitation
Main purpose: Seriousness levels: Rehabilitation Low = six months Medium = six – 12 months High = 12 – 36 months (max of 24 months for SSO) (likely NPS recommendation) In months or years between six – 36 months (max of 24 months for an SSO) The court cannot impose a Drug Rehabilitation Requirement (DRR) unless the NPS has recommended it as suitable for the offender. The court must also be satisfied that: • the offender is dependent on, or has a propensity to misuse drugs, and that this is susceptible to treatment • treatment has been or can be arranged • the offender is willing to comply with the Requirement

How is it expressed? Further information required?

Drug Rehabilitation includes testing, but sentencers may wish to consider whether the use of an accredited substance misuse programme should be undertaken through a separate Programme Requirement. Progress reviews by the court are optional for Requirements of 12 months or less and mandatory where over 12 months. For cases at the low level of seriousness a single Requirement will usually be appropriate. Therefore, where a DRR is necessary to address substance misuse then an additional, supporting Supervision Requirement will not normally be necessary. In these instances, the support required by the offender would be provided through the single DRR. However, in cases at the medium or high level of seriousness, a DRR would normally be combined with a proposal for a Supervision Requirement to support rehabilitation.

21

Chapter 3 - The Order The Community Community Order

Alcohol Treatment
Main purpose: Seriousness levels: Rehabilitation Low = six months Medium = six – 12 months High = 12 – 36 months (max of 24 months for SSO) (likely NPS recommendation) In months or years between six – 36 months (max of 24 months for SSO) The court must be satisfied that: • the offender is dependent on alcohol, requires, and may be susceptible to treatment • treatment has been or can be arranged • the offender is willing to comply with the Requirement.

How is it expressed? Further information required?

The offender is required to submit to treatment by or under the direction of a specified person having the necessary qualifications or experience with a view to the reduction or elimination of the offender�s dependency on alcohol. Where attendance on an accredited substance misuse or the Drink Impaired Drivers programme is necessary, this would be specified in a separate Programme Requirement. For cases at the low level of seriousness a single Requirement will usually be appropriate. Where an Alcohol Treatment Requirement is necessary then an additional, supporting Supervision Requirement will not normally be necessary. In these instances, all the support required by the offender would be provided through the single Alcohol Treatment Requirement. However, in cases at the medium or high level of seriousness, an Alcohol Treatment would normally be combined with a Supervision Requirement to support treatment.

22

Chapter 3 - The Community Order Chapter 3

Supervision
Main purpose: Seriousness levels: Rehabilitation Low = up to 12 months Medium = 12 – 18 months High = 12 – 36 months (max of 24 months for SSO) (likely NPS recommendation) In months or years, and if included in an order is always the same as the relevant period for the order. That is: • Community Order = the length of the order • Suspended Sentence Order = the supervision period No specific information is required but there should be a clear expectation between the court and the offender about what work is to be undertaken and what this will involve.

How is it expressed?

Further information required?

To enable the court to have regard to the overall restriction on liberty the Probation Service will indicate initial frequency of contact. The purpose of Supervision is more than contact to monitor and manage compliance with any other Requirements. Supervision is defined in the Act as attending appointments with the responsible officer, or another person determined by the responsible officer, to promote the offender�s rehabilitation. Typically Supervision can involve contact to: • • • • • • • • undertake work to promote personal and behavioural change monitor and review patterns of behaviour and personal activity undertake work to increase motivation and provide practical support to increase compliance with other Requirements deliver pre and post programme work for accredited programmes support and reinforce learning being undertaken as part of a Programme or Activity Requirement deliver individual counselling form and maintain working alliances to help support the offender through other Requirements in the order model pro-social behaviour.

While normally the contact would be individual, the Act does not preclude carrying out these activities within small informal groups if this is appropriate. Orders with a single Supervision Requirement may be used in low seriousness cases to provide a basic level of support and referral to other agencies for assistance with practical or personal problems related to the person�s offending. However, for cases of medium or high seriousness some combinations of Requirements are usefully supported by a Supervision

23

Chapter 3 - The Order The Community Community Order

Requirement. This support is particularly important when imposing a Programme Requirement. The general principle of the Act is that specific interventions should be itemised within the order and delivered within appropriate and separate Requirements. For Community Orders the court must set the length of a Supervision Requirement to be at least that of any other Requirement imposed, that is, to be the overall period for which the order is in force. For Suspended Sentence Orders, the Supervision Requirement operates for the same time as the Supervision Period. This automatically ensures that Supervision will be available to provide the functions indicated above throughout the duration of any other Requirement. However, in proposing the use of a Programme Requirement, the Probation Service will also propose that the length of the order and any supporting Supervision Requirement is long enough to extend beyond the likely completion date of the programme.

24

Chapter 3 - The Community Order Chapter 3

Attendance Centre
Main purpose: Seriousness level: How is it expressed? Further information required? Punishment Low (based on SGC Guideline) In hours between 12 and 36, with a maximum of three hours per attendance and one attendance per day The court must be satisfied that a centre is available and is accessible to the offender

Attendance Centre Requirement is only available for adults aged 18 to 24. Where an Attendance Centre Requirement is the only Requirement in an order then the responsible officer will be the officer in charge of the centre. The centre must be specified in the order.

25

Chapter 3 - The Order The Community Community Order

Enforcement of Community Orders Breach of Requirements Warnings The Act sets out the regime for warning and enforcement in the event of a failure to comply with a Community or Suspended Sentence Order and this is reflected in probation National Standards. The responsible officer has a duty to give a warning to the offender if he or she considers that the offender has failed without reasonable excuse to comply with one or more of the Requirements of the order. Alternatively, breach proceedings can be initiated immediately in certain circumstances, and must be initiated if a warning has already been previously given within the previous twelve months. Community Orders Following a breach of a Community Order the court must either: • amend the order to make it more onerous, for example by adding a Requirement (but not beyond the limits that apply to the Requirement nor beyond the specified period of the order imposed. There is a maximum three-year limit of a Community Order); revoke the order and re-sentence the offender as if he/she had just been convicted if the original offence was not punishable with imprisonment but the offender has willfully and persistently failed to comply with the order, revoke the order and sentence the offender to a custodial order.

• •

The court is not able to: • take no action • issue a warning • impose a fine and allow the order to continue unamended General considerations If in dealing with a breach the court wishes to make a new Drug Rehabilitation, or Alcohol or Mental Health Treatment Requirement the consent of the offender and the other limitations on making these Requirements still apply. Where the court wishes to deal with a breach by adding a further Requirement as a punishment, the use of Unpaid Work may be appropriate. However, the court will be subject to the same 40 hours minimum as at the time of the original sentence, and sentencers may consider that in many cases this will represent too severe a penalty. In this situation a very short curfew might be more commensurate with the seriousness of the breach. Where a Community or Suspended Sentence Order already contains an Unpaid Work Requirement there is no minimum number of hours which may be added, but the total on aggregate must not exceed 300 hours. If the court decides to revoke a Community Order and pass a new sentence, it must have regard to the degree to which the offender has complied with the order and the extent to which the Requirements have been completed.
26

Chapter 3 - The Community Order

In general, in re-sentencing for the original offence(s) the court will have regard to the seriousness of the original offending. If the original offending was below the custody threshold then a custodial sentence would not normally be imposed on breach of the order since the court is constrained by the requirement to deal with the offence in any way which was possible at the time the order was made. However, if the offender has wilfully and persistently refused to comply with the Requirements of the order and is aged 18 or over the court can impose a custodial sentence irrespective of the seriousness of the original offence(s). Reviews of Orders Currently, reviews of orders are only available when imposing a Suspended Sentence Order or a Drug Rehabilitation Requirement (DRR) as part of a Community Order. At a review without a hearing the court considers a report submitted by the responsible officer. Alternatively, the court can conduct the review at a review hearing, and in this case the responsible officer submits a report to the court in advance and the offender is required to attend the hearing. If, at a review without a hearing, the court considers that the offender�s progress is unsatisfactory, it may arrange a hearing and order the offender to attend. At that review hearing the court may then amend the order so that subsequent reviews are made at a review hearing, with or without the offender. If, at a review hearing, the court considers the offender has without reasonable excuse failed to comply with the order the court may adjourn the hearing for the purpose of dealing with the offender under enforcement proceedings. A review or review hearing cannot be used to deal with a breach of the order. The adjournment to a subsequent hearing allows the offender to seek legal advice and representation. If, on receipt of the responsible officer’s report prior to a review hearing, the court considers that the offender�s progress is satisfactory the court may dispense with the review hearing. It may also amend the order so that each subsequent review is held without a hearing. The arrangements for reviews are not intended as an alternative for dealing with enforcement. Any failure to comply with an order must be dealt with immediately through the arrangements for breach of Requirements. Reviews are optional for DRRs of up to a year and for Suspended Sentence Orders where there is not a DRR. Reviews are mandatory where the DRR is longer than a year, and at least the first review must be a review hearing. Reviews may be held at any interval of a month of more. The report from the responsible officer must include drug testing results and the views of the treatment provider as to the treatment and testing of the offender. The court may amend the order in relation to the DRR providing: • • the Requirement is not reduced below the minimum length of six months the offender consents to the amendment

If the offender refuses to consent to the proposed amendment, the court may revoke the order and deal with the offender in any way which was possible at the time the order was made, including imposing a custodial sentence where the original offence was punishable
2

Chapter 3 - The Community Order

with imprisonment. When re-sentencing the court must take into account the extent to which the offender has complied with the Requirements of the order. The court can cancel (and if necessary, subsequently reinstate) the DRR for future review hearings, but cannot cancel the future reviews themselves. However, the court could set a lengthy interval between subsequent reviews. Frequency and suitability for reviews The statutory background for reviews is set out above, and within those limits courts are free to provide for reviews and at whatever frequency they consider appropriate. However, where the court intends to include reviews in an order the Probation Service would suggest the following frequency for the hearings: Orders with a Drug Rehabilitation Requirement: • • at four-weekly intervals for the first 16 weeks, then at 16-weekly intervals thereafter

Suspended Sentence Orders without a Drug Rehabilitation Requirement: • at 16 weekly intervals.

Breach of Anti-Social Behaviour Orders (ASBOs) There is a range of disposals available for those people who breach the conditions of their ASBOs. These range from fines to the Community Order and custody. The maximum sentence for breach of an ASBO is five years’ imprisonment for an adult. If the court requests a PSR in cases where an ASBO has been breached, the sentencing proposal given will be proportionate and reflect the impact of the anti-social behaviour. PSRs and the assessment process will be conducted in the same way as they would for any other criminal offence

2

Chapter 3 - The Community Order

Prolific and Priority Offenders (PPOs) All probation and police areas in England and Wales are committed to the PPO strategy. Its central aim is to reduce crime and re-offending by targeting the small group of offenders who commit the most crime or create the maximum disorder. Each PPO scheme is managed by the local Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership (CDRP) which ensures a joined-up approach by all local agencies involved, including police, probation, prisons, Crown Prosecution Service, local authorities, courts service, drug action teams and Jobcentre Plus. Each local scheme identifies the individuals who are responsible for the most crime and disorder. CDRPs ensure that all agencies prioritise their resources on these offenders, with the explicit aim of putting an end to their offending. The number of offenders involved in each CDRP area varies from a minimum of 15 to 20 to between 60 and 100 in big cities such as Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds. The PPO strategy has three strands: Prevent and Deter - This aims to prevent young people from becoming offenders or persistent offenders by a range of interventions aimed to divert them from criminal activity. Catch and Convict - This is aimed at preventing PPOs from repeat offending through swift apprehension and enforcement. Rehabilitate and Resettle - This is aimed at the rehabilitation of PPOs who are in custody or serving sentences in the community through closer working between all relevant agencies. PPOs will be prioritised for interventions which aim to reduce their offending. The strategy is seen as a coherent model, with the primary aim of moving offenders of all ages away from committing further crime. Pre-sentence Reports Where appropriate, Probation will recommend Community Orders for offenders at risk of receiving a short-term custodial sentence and specify their suitability for intensive interventions. Local communication with the courts is an important part of the scheme. Chief Officers will work with the Local Criminal Justice Board to ensure that sentencers are aware of the parameters and objectives of the PPO scheme.

2

Chapter 4 - Electronic Monitoring

ELECTRONC MONTORNG
Introduction Electronic monitoring is a form of remote surveillance which is used to monitor a person�s compliance with a range of requirements imposed by a court. The service is delivered by the private sector under contract to the Ministry of Justice. Electronic monitoring has been available throughout England and Wales since 1999. At any one time, about 15,000 people are actively being monitored, making this the largest programme of its kind in the world outside the USA. Background Electronic monitoring may be imposed either at the pre-trial stage or as a part of a Community Order or Suspended Sentence Order. It is available for both adult and young offenders, although some of the provisions differ. (1) Pre-trial s.3AA of the Bail Act 1976 and s.23AA of the Children and Young Persons Act 1969 enable the court to impose electronic monitoring on defendants aged 12–17 who are remanded on bail or to local authority accommodation, if certain conditions are satisfied. These are that: (a) (b) (c) the child or young person is charged with or convicted of a violent or sexual offence, or an offence punishable by a sentence of imprisonment of 14 years or more; and the current offence amounts or would amount to a recent history of repeatedly committing imprisonable offences while remanded to bail or local authority accommodation; and the court has been notified by the Secretary of State that electronic monitoring arrangements are available in the relevant area, and is satisfied that the necessary provision for dealing with the child or young person can be made under those arrangements; and a youth offending team has told the court that it believes that an electronic monitoring requirement will be suitable for that person.

(d)

The Bail Act 1976 was amended to make it clear when juveniles (under 17 year olds, for these purposes) may be made subject to electronic monitoring, and provision to electronically monitor 17 year olds on bail was rolled out nationally in January 2004. In practice, this is normally in circumstances where the court would otherwise have remanded the defendant into custody. The Government�s current intention is to legislate to restrict the availability of tagging on bail for adults to those circumstances where the Court would otherwise remand into custody. However, as noted in Chapter 1, it is now being widely used for adults. The Bail Act permits a court to grant bail with such conditions as appear to be necessary to ensure that he or she surrenders to custody, does not commit an offence while on bail, does not interfere with witnesses or otherwise obstruct the course of justice, is available for reports or enquiries, attends the next appointment with his or her legal representative, and also for the defendant�s own protection or welfare. Courts should consider routinely whether
30

Chapter 4 - Electronic Monitoring

the possibility of imposing a curfew backed by electronic monitoring on a defendant has any implications for their decision about whether or not it would be appropriate to grant bail in a case where they were considering a custodial remand. The resources are available for a greater use of tagging on bail should courts choose to use this option. It goes without saying that this represents a more limited restriction of liberty than custody and it is also significantly less expensive. Home Office Circular 25/2006 which sets out the procedures to be followed by courts, the Electronic Monitoring suppliers and the police when the court decides that a curfew is to be monitored electronically with a tag. None of the provisions relating to electronic monitoring on bail specify any minimum or maximum periods of time during which the electronic monitoring is to operate, although typically they are 12 hours or less over night. Curfew times can be arranged to facilitate employment or other commitments None of the provisions relating to electronic monitoring on bail specify any minimum or maximum periods of time during which the electronic monitoring is to operate. (2) As a Requirement of a Community Order or Suspended Sentence Order There are separate legal provisions for electronic monitoring as part of a community sentence in the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 and the Criminal Justice Act 2003. The provisions in the 2000 Act apply where the offence was committed before 4 April 2005. The provisions in the 2003 Act apply where the offence was committed on or after 4 April 2005. s.36B of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 enables the court to include electronic monitoring in a community sentence for the purpose of monitoring the offender�s compliance with any other requirements imposed by the court. In practice, electronic monitoring has been used in connection with a Curfew Order (s.37), an Exclusion Order (s.40A), or a curfew requirement of a Community Rehabilitation Order (Schedule 2, paragraph 7). Certain conditions must be satisfied before the court can impose electronic monitoring: (a) (b) it has been notified by the Secretary of State that electronic monitoring arrangements are available in the relevant area, and is satisfied that the necessary provision can be made under those arrangements; and in relation to exclusion orders, if there is a person whose co-operation is necessary for the electronic monitoring to be practicable, that person must have consented to the imposition of electronic monitoring. (In practice, the Probation Service or youth offending team will provide this information to the court.)

In respect of offences committed on or after 4 April 2005, s.215 and s.218 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 make the same provision as above except that the consent requirement at (b) applies to the electronic monitoring of any Requirement and is not limited to Exclusion Requirements. Under s.177 of the 2003 Act, there is a presumption of electronic monitoring to monitor compliance with Curfew and Exclusion Requirements unless electronic monitoring is not available in the relevant area, or if someone else whose consent is required withholds it, or the court decides that electronic monitoring is inappropriate in the particular case.

31

Chapter 4 - Electronic Monitoring

Availability of electronic monitoring arrangements All court use of electronic monitoring is dependent upon a notification by the Secretary of State that arrangements for electronic monitoring are available in the relevant area. For Curfew Orders and Requirements with electronic monitoring, notification has been given in respect of the whole of England and Wales. For Exclusion Orders and Requirements with electronic monitoring, notification was given only in respect of the areas of Greater Manchester, Hampshire and the West Midlands, where satellite tracking technology was being piloted (see the section below on satellite tracking). These arrangements were withdrawn at the end of June 2006. Responsible officers In respect of all court orders and Requirements with electronic monitoring, there must be a person responsible for the monitoring, and that person must be of a description specified in an order made by the Secretary of State. With effect from 1 April 2005, the specified person is an employee of either Serco Home Affairs (formerly Premier Monitoring Services Ltd) or Group4Securicor (formerly Securicor Justice Services Ltd). From that date, these two companies provide electronic monitoring services in five regions covering the whole of England and Wales. At the end of this chapter is a list of the criminal justice areas covered by each company, and a map showing the coverage. These companies provide a complete service. They supply and install electronic monitoring equipment, monitor those on the programme, follow up violations, and either return the subject to court themselves or report the violation to another agency for enforcement action. Rules for regulating electronic monitoring The legislation enables the Secretary of State to make rules regulating the provision of electronic monitoring. No such rules have yet been made. Instead, detailed requirements for the provision of electronic monitoring are contained in the contracts awarded to each private sector supplier. The assessment process The assessment of a person�s suitability for electronic monitoring is done by a probation officer or youth offending team. In respect of curfews with electronic monitoring, this will usually require a home visit to check the suitability of the premises and to check that other family members are content for the person being curfewed to reside at the premises. The curfew address must have an electricity supply connected to the mains. It must also support the installation and use of a dedicated telephone line, or monitoring equipment incorporating mobile phone technology. Electronic monitoring equipment Curfew Orders or Requirements The equipment uses radio frequency transmissions. It consists of a transmitter, which is usually worn round the ankle, and a receiver unit which is either connected to a landline
32

Chapter 4 - Electronic Monitoring

telephone or which incorporates mobile phone technology. The receiver unit communicates with a central computer system at the contractor�s monitoring centre. The transmitter sends signals to the receiver at regular intervals and these are sent on to the central computer. The signal strength of the transmitter is calibrated to the receiver so that if the person being monitored goes out of range (generally this means outside the building where the receiver is located), there is a break in signal and this is also registered by the central computer which generates follow-up action. The transmitter can be removed only by breaking its strap. This interferes with the fibre-optic circuitry inside the strap and is immediately registered as a tamper, also generating followup action. Voice verification to monitor attendance Voice verification technology operates in a different way. The equipment registers the voiceprint of the person being monitored and this is stored centrally. When the person is supposed to be attending a programme or to be at a specified address, he or she can be prompted to telephone the monitoring centre at random intervals and answer a number of computer-generated questions. The voiceprint is checked against the record so that the person’s identity can be confirmed or denied. In this way his or her attendance at school or on a programme can be verified and timed with a record produced by the supplier for the probation officer or youth offending team. Satellite tracking Satellite tracking technology was used between September 2004 and June 2006 to monitor compliance with Exclusion Orders or Requirements imposed by a court. The technology was piloted in three areas (Greater Manchester, Hampshire and West Midlands) with sex offenders, violent offenders, prolific offenders and domestic violence offenders. The offender was required to wear a portable tracking device which received signals from a number of satellites and used these to calculate its location. The location data was transmitted to a control centre either in real time or retrospectively. The pilots have now ended and are being reviewed.

33

Chapter 4 - Electronic Monitoring

Serco Home Affairs Ltd Group 4 Securicor

(Group 4 Securicor)

(Group 4 Securicor)

(Serco)

(Serco)

(Group 4 Securicor)

34

Chapter 4 - Electronic Monitoring

Allocation of Criminal Justice Areas to Electronic Monitoring Suppliers Region North East and North West Group 4 Securicor Criminal Justice Areas Covered Cheshire Cleveland Cumbria Durham Greater Manchester Lancashire Merseyside Northumbria Derbyshire Humberside Leicestershire Lincolnshire North Yorkshire Northamptonshire Nottinghamshire South Yorkshire West Yorkshire Dyfed-Powys Gwent North Wales South Wales Staffordshire Warwickshire West Mercia West Midlands Bedfordshire Cambridgeshire Essex Hertfordshire Metropolitan Norfolk Suffolk Avon and Somerset Devon and Cornwall Dorset Gloucestershire Hampshire Kent Surrey Sussex Thames Valley Wiltshire

East Midlands, Yorkshire and Humberside Group 4 Securicor

West Midlands and Wales Serco Home Affairs Ltd

London and Eastern Serco Home Affairs Ltd

South East and South West Group 4 Securicor

35

Chapter 5 - Custodial Sentences

CUSTODAL SENTENCES (ncluding Licence Arrangements)
Custody Plus Custody Plus is not available. In its place, sentences of less than 12 months available under the 1991 Act continue to be available to the courts. There is no probation supervision on release. Intermittent Custody This sentence was been piloted but is now withdrawn. The Suspended Sentence Order The new Suspended Sentence Order is, in essence, a sentence of under 12 months� custody, suspended for a period ranging from six months to two years, during which the court must impose one or more Community Requirements from the same options as are available for the Community Order (see chapter 3). The Probation Service will supervise the offender in a similar way to the Community Order. A breach will result in a return to court for all or part of the original custodial sentence to be imposed or, in some cases, the Suspended Sentence Order to be continued but the Requirements made more onerous. See the section on breach in chapter 3 page 26. The Sentencing Guidelines Council says that “the presumption is that the suspended prison sentence will be activated (either with its original custodial term or a lesser term) unless the court takes the view that this would, in all circumstances, be unjust. In reaching that decision, the court may take into account both the extent to which the offender has complied with the Requirements and the facts of the new offence.” The SGC also says that: “Because of the very clear deterrent threat involved in a suspended sentence, Requirements imposed as part of that sentence should generally be less onerous than those imposed as part of a community sentence. A court wishing to impose onerous or intensive Requirements on an offender should reconsider its decision to suspend sentence and consider whether a community sentence might be more appropriate.” Prison Sentences of 12 Months or Longer: Sections 284 to 293 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 provide for various increases in maximum penalties for serious offences, in respect of certain drug-related offences; driving and road traffic offences; firearms offences; and also for minimum mandatory sentences in relation to firearms offences. Standard Determinate Sentences Background These sentences replace the previous legislation relating to custodial sentences of 12
36

Chapter 5 - Custodial Sentences

months or more. Under previous legislation, adult offenders sentenced to between one and four years in custody were automatically released at the halfway point and supervised up to the three-quarters point. Adult offenders sentenced to four years or more were released between the halfway and the two-thirds point and supervised to the three-quarters point. Offenders sentenced to 12 months or more under the new regime of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 will be released from prison at the halfway point and will remain subject to postrelease supervision by the NPS under licence for the whole second half of the sentence. Conditions may be added to the licence by the governor of the prison, on behalf of the Secretary of State and on the advice of the NPS, and on occasion according to the recommendations of the court. The SGC guideline says that courts should only make specific recommendations about the Requirements to be used on licence when announcing short sentences and where it is reasonable to anticipate their relevance at point of release. The Governor and Probation Service can review such recommendations in the light of changed circumstances. Conditions of licence will last until the end of the sentence. Breach of these conditions could result in the offender being returned to custody and this risk continues until the end of sentence under the new legislation (under the previous legislation the offender was not subject to conditions after the three-quarter point). As a result of these changes the SGC Guideline says that “courts should consider reducing the overall length of the sentence that would have been imposed under the current provisions by in the region of 15%.” The new determinate sentence, with automatic halfway release, applies to those offenders who are not found by the court to meet the assessment of dangerousness as set out by S.229 of the 2003 Act. For such offenders, new provisions apply and are described below. Detention in a Young Offender Institution (DYOI) Adult Young Offenders (18-20) receive DYOI sentences where older adults would receive imprisonment. References to adult sentences of imprisonment can be read as DYOI or detention for life in the case of persons aged 18 to 20. Public Protection Sentences There are two new sentences designed for offenders assessed as dangerous and who present a significant risk to the public – an indeterminate sentence of imprisonment for public protection and the determinate extended sentence. The NPS will identify cases where the offender is eligible for the consideration of a public protection sentence, and prepare a Standard Delivery PSR for the court where required. Where the NPS is asked to provide a PSR on an offender convicted of an offence in Schedule 15 of the Act, it will help to inform the sentencer�s decision through the provision of an assessment of risk of harm. The PSR will identify and assess: • the likely victim(s)
3

Chapter 5 - Custodial Sentences

• •

the likelihood of any further offending the nature and seriousness of the potential impact of that offending

Extended Sentence for Public Protection (EPP) The Parole Board�s decision to release the offender at the halfway point of the custodial part of the sentence will be based on their assessment of the risks posed by the offender and whether these are manageable in the community. The Parole Board�s decision is informed by a report prepared by the NPS containing an up-to-date risk assessment and a risk management and re-settlement plan. The work undertaken in custody by prison and probation staff to reduce the risks presented by offenders will be continued on release through the licence and any additional conditions necessary to achieve successful re-settlement and risk management. Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) The offender sentenced to an IPP will be managed in the same way as an individual sentenced to a life sentence (see below). Where the minimum custodial term is relatively short (as with the previous automatic life sentence) assessment and intervention need to be undertaken in as timely a fashion as possible. As with the life sentence, the Parole Board decide on whether to release the offender on the basis of reports prepared for it by the NPS and HMPS. This will be based around a release plan prepared by the NPS which sets out how it would manage the risks posed by the offender if he/she were released into the community. It will also take into account the impact on victims. Just as he/she may be detained for an indeterminate period based on the risk he/she poses, an offender sentenced to IPP will be subject to licence supervision by the NPS following his/her release for as long as the Parole Board considers it to be necessary (see below – Release on Licence). After 10 years the offender (or the NPS) may apply to the Parole Board for the licence to be revoked. Again, the Parole Board�s decisions will be based on a report prepared by the NPS. Life sentences The role of the NPS in relation to life sentence prisoners (lifers) begins wherever possible pre-sentence and continues post-release to the suspension of the supervision element of the licence (where appropriate). The NPS maintains its own records about lifers often from the very beginning of the process, opening a ‘home-life� and enabling valuable information about victim issues and the nature of the risks posed by the offender, which may later inform consideration of his/her suitability for release, to be recorded. In particular, a pre-sentence report, where requested, will incorporate an assessment of the offender�s risk of harm (including to self), risk of reconviction and the factors or offending-related needs relevant to the offence. Again before sentence, if the offence for which an individual has been convicted carries the possibility of a life sentence, probation officers seconded to prisons contribute to the initiation of a Life Sentence Plan (LSP) – a single document which follows a lifer throughout his/her sentence. The LSP will contain all the necessary information about the offender and
3

Chapter 5 - Custodial Sentences

his/her offence(s), the risks he/she poses and, in due course, sentence plan information, records of his/her time in prison and the reports prepared by the NPS about his/her suitability for release. All of this information will prove useful post-sentence, when the NPS is required to allocate the lifer to a ‘home’ probation officer, who must complete a Lifer Post-Sentence Report (LPSR) within four months of the offender�s conviction. For mandatory lifers, the Prison Service will convene a Multi-Agency Lifer Risk Assessment Panel (MALRAP) bringing together the home probation officer, the investigating Police Officer and Prison Service staff. The MALRAP receives information from all agencies and is used by the Prison Service to complete the first part of the LSP. This includes a detailed account of the offence, a risk assessment, and a note of the victim impact and other relevant issues. It is essential, due to the potential length of custody, that such issues are recorded accurately and in detail. The NPS plays an active role in planning for the lifer�s release, becoming more actively involved at or shortly before the stage when he/she moves to open prison conditions. Preparation for release will include: • • • • Referral to MAPPA (see below); Liaison with the Victim Liaison Officer; Prison visits; Preparation of release plans, including a home visit, an updated risk assessment, setting objectives for supervision on release, and consideration of the need for nonstandard licence conditions.

After release, the lifer remains subject to licence conditions for his/her entire life; he/she may be recalled to prison at any time. The supervision of lifers in the community demands effective case management practice, which incorporates offence-focused work with the offender. Although on release lifers do not pose a high risk, there are almost certainly issues of disclosure to be considered, for example, in relation to employment and victims, which would normally be considered within level one of MAPPA. In most instances, where progress in reintegrating into the community has followed a normal pattern, the licensee has complied with supervision and not committed an offence, the support of the Probation Service is no longer needed, and there are no risk concerns to address, the supervising officer can apply to the Lifer Review and Recall Section of the Home Office for permission to dispense with regular supervision. Generally, supervision can be lifted after a period of not less than four years; this period is normally longer for offenders convicted of sexual offences.

3

Chapter 5 - Custodial Sentences

Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) are a set of statutory arrangements operated by criminal justice and social care agencies. There is a duty on the police, probation and prison service as the ‘responsible authority� in each of the 42 Areas of England and Wales to establish arrangements for the assessment and management of risk posed by certain sexual and violent offenders. MAPPA were introduced in April 2001. The responsible authority is required to review and monitor the operation of the arrangements and publish an annual report about their effectiveness. The Criminal Justice Act 2003 introduced a number of additional MAPPA provisions. These included the imposition of a duty to co-operate with the responsible authority on certain other agencies (e.g. local education authorities, youth offending teams), the recruitment of lay advisers to the strategic board responsible for reviewing local arrangements and the inclusion of the prison service in the responsible authority. National MAPPA Guidance indicates the use of 3 levels of management: Level 1: Level 2: Involves ordinary agency management Referred to as local inter-agency management, where the active involvement of more than one agency is required to manage the offender. Most offenders assessed as high or very high risk of serious harm can be managed at Level 2 where the management plans do not require the attendance and commitment of resources at a senior level. Level 3 activity meetings are known in all Areas as the Multi-Agency Public Protection Panels (or MAPPPs). The few cases referred to MAPPPs are those of offenders whose management is so problematic that multi-agency co-operation and oversight at a senior level is required, together with the authority to commit exceptional resources to stregnthen the risk management plan.

Level 3:

Offenders will be managed under MAPPA if they fall into one of three categories as defined by the Criminal Justice Act 2003: 1. Registered sex offenders are those offenders who are required by the nature of their sexual offence and, in certain cases the severity of their sentence, to meet the notification requirements set out in the Sexual Offences Act 2003. These notification requirements include an expectation upon offenders to register their place of residence within three days of their release from custody or any subsequent changes of address. 2. Violent and other sex offenders are generally those offenders who have committed a violent offence (and certain sexual offences that do not require registration) under schedule 15 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 and who have received a sentence of imprisonment of more than 12 months. However, the legislation is considerably more complex than this and it also includes those detained under Hospital or Guardianship Orders and those who have committed specific offences against children. 3. Other offenders are those offenders who do not qualify for MAPPA through either
40

Chapter 5 - Custodial Sentences

of the first two categories but who are still considered to represent some risk of causing serious harm by the agency that refers them. This risk of harm must relate in some way to the offence that has brought them under consideration and must be considered to merit active involvement by more than one agency (i.e. they can only be managed at levels 2 or 3).

41

Chapter 5 - Custodial Sentences

Work With Victims National Probation Service statutory duty The National Probation Service�s work with victims was placed on a statutory footing by Section 69 of the Criminal Justice and Court Services Act 2000. This legislation was repealed and replaced in Sections 35-44 of the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims (DVCV) Act 2004, which replicated the current duty and extended it to the victims of mentally disordered offenders in certain cases. The probation service�s duties apply to victims of: Offenders who are convicted of a sexual or violent offence: 1) 2) 3) and who receive a determinate custodial sentence of 12 months or more; or who receive an indeterminate public protection sentence; or who are then made the subject of a hospital order with a restriction order

Or those found unfit to plead and to have done the act and charged, or found not guilty by reason of insanity under the Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964 as amended by the DVCV Act 2004 in respect of a sexual or violent offence and then made subject to a hospital order with restrictions; 1) 2) or who are then made the subject of a hospital direction and limitation direction; or who are transferred from prison to hospital under a transfer direction and restriction direction.

Under the DVCV Act a victim is “a person who appears to the (probation) board to be the victim of the offender or to act for the victim of the offence.” This includes the victim�s family where the offence resulted in the victim�s death, or parents and carers of children who are victims. Where it is ascertained that a victim wishes to receive information, the Probation Service must take all reasonable steps: (a) (b) to inform that person whether or not the offender is to be subject to any conditions or requirements on his/ her release, if the offender is to be subject to any such conditions or requirements, to provide that person with details of any conditions or requirements which relate to contact with the victim

or his or her family, and (c) to provide that person with such other information as is considered by that Local Probation Board to be appropriate in all the circumstances of the case.

This duty reflects the growing priority attached to the role and rights of victims in the criminal justice process and the work of the probation service. How are victims traced and contacted? Victim Liaison Officers are required to make an initial offer of contact to the victim within
42

Chapter 5 - Custodial Sentences

eight weeks of the offender being sentenced. The victim may not want contact with the Probation Service initially but is able to take up the offer of contact at any point during the offender�s sentence. Under the Code of Practice for Victims of Crime, Witness Care Units will identify cases in which the statutory duty applies and advise victims of their entitlement to receive services from the probation service. Unless the victim declines contact, their details will be passed to the probation service who will write to or telephone the victim offering him/her further information about the service provided as well as a firm appointment to meet and discuss the Victim Contact Scheme. What information can victims receive? When a victim accepts an offer to meet the contact officer, he/she is offered: • • A point of contact with the Probation Service through which he/she will be able to express any concerns or anxieties about the offender General information about the custodial process for the offender and supervision after release, including the likely timescales for considering release on licence or temporary licence The opportunity of being contacted at key stages when the offender is in custody. Such key stages may include an offender appealing against sentence, applying for release on temporary licence, absconding from prison, and the outcome of a parole review. Victims may also be informed if an offender, who is released on licence, is recalled to custody. The opportunity to express views, via a written report from the Victim Liaison Officer, on the offender�s conditions of release. (These arrangements may forbid contact with the victim, members of his/her family or other named individuals, or may prevent the offender entering a specified geographical area).

When are victims’ views sought? Victims are not consulted on their views about whether an offender should be released. Victim Liaison Officers consult the victim and offer an opportunity to make representations about licence conditions. In automatic conditional release cases, where the governor makes decisions about licence conditions, the offender’s supervising officer will incorporate the victim’s views (obtained via the Victim Liaison Officer) in the report to the governor. In cases considered by the Parole Board, victims� views about licence conditions may be expressed via a written report which forms part of the parole dossier. This dossier is disclosed to the prisoner, although the Victim Liaison Officer can apply to the governor for non-disclosure of the victim�s views. The Parole Board requires all papers to be submitted in the parole dossier prepared by the prison. For offenders sentenced under the Criminal Justice Act 2003 Victim Liaison Officers will continue to consult victims and offer them an opportunity to make representations about licence conditions. This will be done by passing a written report to the Governor who sets
43

Chapter 5 - Custodial Sentences

the licence conditions. In addition, where an offender is recalled to custody, the victim will be consulted about licence conditions again, prior to any subsequent decision to re-release the offender. Through effective liaison with the responsible officer, victim contact staff are aware of likely time-scales for parole or final release in any individual case, particularly in life sentence cases. This enables them to anticipate the need to initiate contact with a victim and ensure that, where appropriate, the information is made available to decision makers. Victims of Young Offenders Section 69 of the Criminal Justice and Court Services Act 2000 also places a duty on the Probation Service to contact the victims of young offenders who have been sentenced to a custodial period of 12 months or over for a sexual or violent offence. This requires probation victim contact staff to liaise with Youth Offending Teams to obtain information about the offender�s progress in custody and prior to release. Youth Offending Teams also give victims an opportunity to become involved in restorative justice processes, where it is deemed appropriate to the victim�s needs and wishes.

44

Mentally Chapter 6Disordered Offenders

Chapter 6 - Mentally Disordered Chapter 6 Offenders

MENTALLY DSORDERED OFFENDERS
Statutory Background The principal legislation setting out how the criminal courts deal with mentally disordered offenders is in part III of the Mental Health Act 1983. Key provisions are detailed below. Provisions governing unfitness to plead and insanity are found in the Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964 as amended by the Criminal Procedure (Insanity and Unfitness to Plead) Act 1991. The latter provisions have been further amended by the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004. Full details of the amendments are given in Home Office Circular 24/2005 issued in April 2005 which may be found on the Home Office website (www.circulars.homeoffice.gov.uk) but the new Supervision Order is described in more detail below. Provisions relating to the new Community Order with a Mental Health Treatment Requirement are set out in sections 207-8 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, and are described below. The Mental Health Bill The government has announced plans to introduce a Mental Health Bill to amend the 1983 Act. The Bill will preserve the main provisions of the current legislation, but will make a number of changes. These include introducing a single definition of mental disorder as opposed to the four categories that are currently in place; amending the criteria for detention, and introducing supervised community treatment to ensure that unrestricted patients continue with their treatment once they leave hospital. More up-to-date information can be obtained from the Department of Health website, under Mental Health, including briefing sheets on the new proposals. Role of the Probation Service The role of the Probation Service in relation to mentally disordered offenders is to provide information to the court for the sentencing decision (see below), and to supervise offenders in the community subject to Community Orders or on licence (see below). Where there is local provision, the Probation Service will also provide information to the Crown Prosecution Service in connection with bail information schemes. It may make referrals to approved premises with defendants assessed as Medium, High or Very High risk of harm, where the placement is necessary for public protection and/or to enable specialist assessments (e.g. psychiatric or psychological assessments) to be undertaken. Dealing with mentally disordered offenders Mentally disordered offenders are not a homogeneous group, and range from those with very low levels of disorder to those requiring long-term high security treatment regimes. The Mental Health Act 1983 classifies mental disorder into four categories: • • • • mental illness mental impairment severe mental impairment psychopathic disorder

45

45

45

Chapter - Mentally Disordered Mentally 6Disordered Offenders Offenders

Mentally Disordered Chapter 6 Offenders

These legal classifications are not diagnoses. Most legislation refers to the requirement for offenders to be suffering from ‘mental disorder� (or one or more of the four categories) before the legislation applies. For all legislation the mental disorder must be confirmed by a doctor approved under Sect.12(2) Mental Health Act 1983 as having special experience in the diagnosis or treatment of mental disorder. It is important that the court has assistance in exploring the relationship between offence and disorder and it can be useful to think of mental disorder in three sub-classifications: • offenders who are ill and offend within the context of their illness, for example, patients who fail to take their medication and whose symptoms return, precipitating an offence. With this group one might assume that if the illness is treated, so is the offending behaviour; offenders who become ill but who continue to offend when well and whose offending behaviour needs to be addressed in addition to any treatment; offenders who are classified as personality disordered and for whom offending behaviour is integral to their diagnosis.

• •

General sentencing provisions These are set out in part 12 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 and there are specific provisions for dealing with mentally disordered offenders. By virtue of section 157, unless the court is of the opinion that it is unnecessary to do so, it must obtain and consider a medical report before passing a custodial sentence (other than one fixed by law) in any case where the offender is, or appears to be, mentally disordered. Before passing a custodial sentence (other than one fixed by law) the court must consider any information before it which relates to the offender�s mental condition, and must also consider the likely effects of that sentence on the mental condition and on any treatments that may be available for it. The new public protection sentences introduced by the Criminal Justice Act 2003 are not sentences “fixed by law”. Section 166 deals with mitigating sentences and makes clear that: a) where there is relevant mitigation the court is not prevented from passing a community sentence even where the offence(s) would normally have justified a custodial penalty; and nothing in the general provisions in Part 12 on imposing community or custodial penalties and fixing fines should be taken as restricting the court from using any power (whether under the Mental Health Act or otherwise) to deal with a mentally disordered offender in the manner which it considers to be most appropriate in all the circumstances.

b)

Psychiatric reports to the court Psychiatrists reporting to the court should be approved by the Secretary of State under section 12 of the Mental Health Act 1983 by virtue of their special experience in the diagnosis and treatment of mental disorder. Approval is not limited to consultants, nor to psychiatrists; some GPs may be s.12 approved. The court will best be served if the report is provided by a general or forensic psychiatrist.
46 46

Mentally Disordered Offenders

Chapter 6 - Mentally Disordered Chapter 6 Offenders

It is always helpful if the court specifies what is required in any psychiatric report, for example the existence of a mental disorder, the relationship between the disorder and offending behaviour, any risk the offender poses to self or others and opinion on what disposals would both address the offender�s disorder and reduce offending. If a custodial sentence is being considered it would help if the court specifically asked the psychiatrist to address the impact of a custodial sentence on the disorder and any available treatments. If the offence is a specified violent or sexual offence which might attract one of the new public protection sentences (see chapter 5), and the offender�s mental state is at issue, it would be very useful if the court could consider requiring the psychiatric report to include an assessment of the risk to members of the public of serious harm by the commission by the offender of further such offences. Clinical opinion is important in assisting the court in determining the sentence to be passed. The Code of Practice to the Mental Health Act 1983 (DoH & Welsh Office 1999) states that psychiatric reports should include: • • • • • • • the data on which the report is based; how this relates to the opinion given; factors relating to presence of mental disorder that may affect the risk the offender poses to himself/herself or others; factors relating to the presence of mental disorder that may affect the risk of reoffending; where relevant, how the opinion may relate to any medical condition, defence or other trial issues; if admission to hospital is recommended, what, if any, special treatment or security is required and how this would be addressed; where no medical proposal is made, advice on management may be appropriate.

Commissioning Psychiatric Reports Best results will generally be obtained from commissioning reports from the offender�s catchment area services. This allows resources to be matched to proposals and ensures delivery of the service is the responsibility of the reporting doctor. It is not uncommon, if the defence is arranging for this report to be prepared out of catchment area, that difficulties arise in attempting to realise the proposal. Difficulties may also arise in commissioning reports as there is currently no clear guidance. Funding is available for psychiatric reports in the Magistrates� Courts (but not in the Crown Court) and for remands on bail, the Probation Service will act as commissioning agents for the psychiatric report on behalf of the court. For those in custody, including cases in the Crown Court, the prison will be responsible for arranging the report. The NHS is now responsible for health care centres in prisons, and arrangements will be in place to assess and report on offenders remanded in custody. The court must send a clear instruction to the prison that a report has been ordered. Pre-Sentence Reports For a mentally disordered offender the PSR should address the following: Culpability: How does the mental disorder bear upon the offender�s personal responsibility for his/her conduct?
4 4

Chapter - Mentally Disordered Mentally 6Disordered Offenders Offenders

Chapter 6

Risk: Does the disorder make further offending more likely? Does the disorder increase any risk to self or others? What can be done to minimise any risk identified? Feasibility: Does the disorder make it unlikely that the offender would be able to comply with the Requirements of a Community Order? What would be the implications of a custodial sentence? Supervision: What work would be undertaken in the course of a Community Order? Is the offender able to participate in an accredited programme? Would the psychiatric services be involved? How would liaison with mental health services take place under the Care Programme Approach? Can the order be supervised to National Standards?

4

4

Mentally Disordered Offenders

Chapter 6 - Mentally Disordered Chapter 6 Offenders

Community Order with a Mental Health Treatment Requirement For further detail, please see chapter 3. Purpose This is to allow the offender to be dealt with by way of a Community Order and provide access to treatment where issues other than mental disorder contribute to offending but the mental condition does not require a Hospital or Guardianship Order. Pre-conditions There is a need for written or oral evidence of one s.12 approved doctor (see above) that the offender�s mental condition requires, and may be susceptible to treatment. A doctor must also provide evidence that treatment is appropriate and available. The offence must be serious enough for a Community Order. The offender must agree to comply with the Requirement. A s.12 approved doctor�s evidence is required even when it is intended that any treatment under this requirement is delivered by a chartered psychologist. Limits The Mental Health Treatment Requirement under the direction of a psychiatrist or chartered psychologist, or both, may be for all or any part of the order as specified by the court up to the maximum of three years. Treatment can be as an in-patient or out-patient and this must be stated in the order. No further specific definition of the treatment should appear on the order. The Responsible Medical Officer agreeing to treat the offender should be named on the order. Ancillary A Mental Health Treatment Requirement is likely to be appropriate in the medium to high seriousness bands and PSR writers have been asked to recommend its use in conjunction with a Supervision Requirement. It might also be proposed in a low seriousness case but the court might equally be asked to consider imposing a Supervision Requirement alone, to allow for a basic level of support and referral to other agencies for assistance with practical or personal problems related to the person�s offending. National Standards for the supervision of a Community Order apply and the order must be enforced to these standards. The Care Programme Approach (see page 51) applies, which should provide the framework for co-ordination between the health and probation services. The Community Order with the Treatment Requirement is likely to address “help and change”. How this is to be achieved should be clear from the report available to the court. Where a recommendation for a Community Order with a Treatment Requirement is being considered, probation officers have been advised that the following questions should be addressed: •
4

Is there a medical condition, which is susceptible to treatment?
4

Chapter - Mentally Disordered Mentally 6Disordered Offenders Offenders

Chapter 6

• • • • • • •

• •

Is the offender able and prepared to comply with all the Requirements of the order? Is there a need for probation intervention, rather than just medical intervention? What requirements are necessary to deliver this? Is the client�s offending related to his/her medical condition? Can probation intervention reduce the risks of such re-offending? Are systems in place for regular liaison between medical and probation staff? Is the restriction of liberty involved in such an order commensurate with the seriousness of the offence? Is the offence(s) under consideration non-imprisonable? Is the community sentence appropriate since failure to comply could result in a custodial sentence? What impact would a custodial sentence have on the offender�s mental health condition or his/her access to available treatments? Would failure to co-operate with psychiatric treatment increase the risk of re-offending? Would it lead automatically to breach proceedings? Will the treatment be provided by the NHS? If not, which authority is financially responsible?

Inappropriate Use of a Condition of Treatment It is not appropriate for a psychiatrist to recommend to the court that a Community Order could be made to ensure that an offender takes his/her medication. Medication is a clinical treatment issue, and in mental health legislation safeguards exist to review the appropriateness of treatment through Mental Health Review Tribunals. Attempts to enforce the taking of medication through conditions in a Community Order may be seen as an avoidance of these safeguards. Nor is it possible to breach an offender simply for failing to take medication. Breach of the Community Order For full details, please see the section on enforcement in chapter 3. Mentally disordered offenders are subject to the same breach regime as other offenders. One of the options open to the court is to revoke the order and deal with the offender in any way which would be available to it if the offender was appearing for sentence for that offence for the first time, including imprisonment or relevant disposals under the Mental Health Act 1983. When considering any breach of a mentally disordered offender subject to community supervision by the Probation Service, the vulnerability and any risk posed by offenders to themselves and/or others, together with the impact of breach action on any available or potential treatments are key considerations, particularly when considering imprisonment. In any case where offenders have refused to undergo treatment they should not be treated as having breached the order simply by virtue of this refusal, if the court considers that their refusal is reasonable in the circumstances. The process of breach can be used positively to divert offenders away from the criminal justice process, or at least, the penal system. If breach is unavoidable the court can consider what is the least restrictive/damaging outcome to a potentially vulnerable offender, consistent with the risk assessment. Breach Reports Where there are issues of mental disorder PSR breach reports should address the following:
50 50

Mentally Disordered Offenders

Chapter 6 - Mentally Disordered Chapter 6 Offenders

• • • • • • • •

up-to-date assessment of risk capacity of the offender to undertake an accredited programme; how does the disorder impact on this? likely impact on current or potential medical or psychological treatments available to this offender if a custodial sentence is likely, the effect of dislocation from community services including accommodation impact of possible outcomes in terms of increase/decrease of risk to self or others assessment of current mental state by any other mental health professionals involved whether or not further assessment is required at this stage and what assessment, why and by whom possible alternatives to continued criminal justice/penal system involvement e.g. Guardianship or Hospital Order Sect.37 (MHA ‘83) or civil admission to hospital Sect.3 (MHA 1983). If so, the probation officer must have consulted with the Community Mental Health Team (CMHT) and, in the case of Guardianship, have made the necessary referral to the local authority.

Diversion to Health Care It remains the government�s policy to divert mentally disordered persons from the Criminal Justice System (CJS) in cases where the public interest does not require their prosecution and to find suitable non-penal disposals wherever appropriate. A number of services are available in police stations and Magistrates� Courts, to assess mentally disordered offenders and advise on their diversion from the CJS. The purpose of this activity is to ensure that such offenders receive appropriate care and treatment from health and social care provision. These projects are designed to ensure that an opportunity exists for early identification and filtering of mentally disordered offenders out of the CJS and is aimed at those who have committed minor offences. This diversion from the CJS is applicable at all points in the court process and is not confined to pre-sentence activity. The court may use sections of the Mental Health Act to dispose of the case, for example a Hospital or Guardianship Order. Alternatively, the court may consider a less severe sentence, such as a fine or a discharge, if this is combined with an admission to hospital under a civil section, for example, s.3 of the Mental Health Act 1983. If the disorder does not meet the conditions for a Mental Health Order, a Community Order with a Mental Health Treatment Requirement may be more appropriate. The Care Programme Approach (CPA) For any disposal of the court that includes psychiatric or psychological treatment from the specialist psychiatric services, the CPA will apply during community supervision. It is intended to provide a framework for the delivery of care to all adults with mental health
51 51

Chapter - Mentally Disordered Mentally 6Disordered Offenders Offenders

Chapter 6

problems in contact with mental health services, whether on discharge from hospital, in residential care, in the community or in prison. The CPA intends to ensure the delivery of appropriate levels of care to a patient and to minimise the risk that the patient will lose contact with services. CPA provides the framework for the management of mental health service users. The key elements of CPA are: • • • • • an assessment of health and social care needs and a risk assessment a written Care Plan which addresses those needs involvement of the service user in the drawing up of the Care Plan regular reviews and modifications to the Care Plan appointment of a mental health worker as Care Co-ordinator to keep in close touch with the user and monitor care.

Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) Mentally disordered offenders subject to criminal justice orders or licences are subject to MAPPA, dependent on the risk they pose, in the same manner as any other offender. Patients subject to Hospital or Guardianship Orders, qualify for inclusion in MAPPA if they have a history of sexual or violent offending.

52

Appendix 1 - Offender Assessment Appendices

APPENDCES
Appendix 1: Offender Assessment OASys: What is it and what is it designed to do? OASys is short for Offender Assessment System. It is a national system that was developed jointly by the Probation Service and Prison Service and is now in use in its electronic version in all 42 probation areas. Courts will find that many PSRs they receive will have been written following an OASys assessment. New guidance to the Probation Service on the court report framework that operates under the Criminal Justice Act 2003 makes clear that OASys is the cornerstone of probation�s work with offenders. However, an OASys assessment will not be completed at pre-sentence stage in the more straightforward cases. OASys enables the probation officer conducting the assessment to understand: • • • the offender�s likelihood of reconviction (low, medium or high) the risk of harm he or she represents (low, medium, high or very high) and the factors that must be addressed, such as drug misuse, if the offender�s criminality is to be tackled.

The sentence plan that will determine the way the offender will be managed after sentence derives from OASys. The sentence plan and the OASys assessment will be reviewed and updated periodically throughout the sentence. Components of OASys The main body of OASys consists of 12 sections which help probation staff to understand the offender�s likelihood of reconviction and the so-called “criminogenic factors” which need to be tackled. The 12 sections are: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10) 11) 12) Offending information Analysis of offences Accommodation Education, training and employability Financial management and income Relationships Lifestyle and associates Drug misuse Alcohol misuse Emotional well-being Thinking and behaviour Attitudes

Each of these carries a numerical weighting dependant upon the research evidence as to its predictiveness of re-conviction. Completing all 12 sections will generate a numerical score (though this will not be shared with the court). Also contributing to the overall assessment
53

Appendix 1 - Offender Offender Assessment Assessment

is an optional self-assessment form which can be valuable in providing the offender�s perspective on his or her criminal behaviour. The OASys Data Evaluation and Analysis Team (ODEAT) conducts research on the reliability and validity of OASys assessments. This includes analysis to determine how strongly each section is associated with further offending and how well OASys predicts future re-offending, of a violent and non-violent nature. In more detail, the 12 sections cover the following ground: The offending information section examines current and previous offences. Research studies show that criminal history is the best predictor of future conviction. Current offence(s) are further detailed in the analysis of offences section which helps to identify risk of serious harm, risks to the individual and other risks. The accommodation section looks at whether accommodation is available, the quality of accommodation and whether its location encourages re-offending or creates a risk of harm. Research demonstrates that offenders are generally less well educated and trained than other groups in society. They are more likely to be unemployed, have a poor history of employment and express a dislike of work. Lack of employment or skills could contribute to the likelihood of re-offending. Conversely, stable employment would usually be considered a protective factor in reducing the likelihood of re-offending. The education, training and employability section indicates whether or not there are problems in this area. The financial management and income section highlights any evidential link between the inability to copy with financial difficulties and reconviction. The relationships section assesses whether the offender�s satisfaction with relationships and the stability of those relationships has a link to his or her offending behaviour. This section also seeks evidence of domestic abuse, either as a perpetrator or victim. The lifestyle and associates section examines aspects of the offender�s current lifestyle. A clear link exists between how offenders spend their time, the people they mix with and the likelihood of reconviction. The drug misuse section identifies the extent and type of drug misuse and its effects on an offender�s life. Research consistently links misuse of drugs with re-offending. The next section considers whether alcohol misuse is a significant factor in previous or current offending. This is often linked with risk of harm. The emotional well-being section examines the extent to which emotional problems interfere with the offender�s functioning or are associated with a risk of harm to self or others. Mental health problems such as anxiety and depression relate to offending for certain groups. The thinking and behaviour section assesses the offender�s application of reasoning, especially to social problems. Research indicates that offenders tend not to think things through, plan, or consider the consequences of their behaviour and do not see things from other people’s perspective. Those with a number of such cognitive deficits will be more likely to re-offend.
54

Appendix 1 - Offender Assessment Appendix 1

The attitudes section considers the offender�s attitude towards offending and supervision. A growing body of research demonstrates that pro-criminal attitudes are predictive of reconviction. Addressing attitudes can reduce the likelihood of reconviction. A final health and other considerations section does not contribute to assessing risk of reconviction or harm. However, assessors use this section when considering suitability for community sentences (which may involve physical work), electronic monitoring and programmes. This information will mainly be used by the Probation Service but also helps the Prison Service determine suitable allocations to work and in sentence planning. Additional Assessments As the probation officer works through OASys he or she may be alerted to the need for other assessments. These include: Sex offender assessment Violent offender assessment Basic Skills assessment Drug assessment Alcohol assessment Mental health assessment Dangerous and Severe Personality Disorder assessment Domestic violence assessment Analysis of the Risk of Harm, Risks to the Individual and Other Risks OASys contains a comprehensive risk of serious harm analysis and assessment. This includes: • • • A screening section A full analysis section A harm summary section which includes a risk of harm management plan for use when required.

The risk of serious harm sections draw together information from earlier sections of OASys in a comprehensive and systematic way so that the assessor can make an informed judgement on issues of risk and harm under various headings. The following risks are addressed: • • • • • • • Harm to the public To known adults To staff To prisoners To children To the individual (suicide, self-harm, coping in custody or hostel setting, vulnerability) Other risks (escape/abscond, control issues, breach of trust)

Levels of risk of serious harm used in OASys: Low: no significant, current indicators of risk of serious harm

55

Appendices - Offender Assessment Appendix 1 Offender Assessment

Medium: High: Very High:

identifiable indicators of risk of serious harm. Potential to cause harm but unlikely to do so unless there is a change in circumstances. identifiable indicators of risk of serious harm. Potential event could happen at any time and impact would be serious. imminent risk of serious harm. Potential event is more likely than not to happen imminently. The impact would be serious.

A risk management plan will be drawn up for Medium level risk and above, appropriate to the assessed level of risk of serious harm. The plan will link to other risk management frameworks such as child protection procedures and the Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) that exist across the country. Under MAPPA, more than one agency is likely to be actively involved with the Probation Service in managing the risk in High and Very High risk of serious harm cases. Supervision and Sentence Planning This section is made up of: • • • An outline plan, for use with pre-sentence reports An initial plan at the start of sentence A review plan, including transfer and termination

Integrating sentence planning into the overall assessment process enables practitioners to draw together and manage information systematically and measure offender progress and change throughout the sentence. Through improved sentence plans OASys helps ensure that offenders receive the right programmes and other interventions. Better targeting of interventions improves their effectiveness and contributes to reduced re-offending and improved public protection.

56 56

Offender Management

Appendix 2 - Offender Management

Appendix 2:

Offender Management

Offender Management is a term introduced by the Correctional Services Review of 2003. It refers to the universal underlying process of assessment, planning, implementation and review which is expected to take place for all supervised offenders, whatever their sentence, both in custody and in the community. OASys provides a consistent national format for assessment, planning and review. An Offender Manager is appointed for each offender, who, as far as possible, remains responsible for that offender as he/she moves from one phase of a sentence to another, or one sentence to another. Offender Managers are probation staff; in the main, Probation Officers deal with the more complex, risky cases, while Probation Service Officers deal with the remainder. The Offender Manager is required to broker the specific interventions which satisfy the requirements of the sentence, meet the needs of the offender as they relate to his/ her likelihood of re-offending, and attend to the risks posed. These may be punitive, rehabilitative or restrictive in nature. The Offender Manager�s role is to motivate, secure compliance, co-ordinate, integrate and, if necessary, enforce. Four different approaches to this have been identified – called for simplicity PUNISH, HELP, CHANGE and CONTROL – one of which is matched to each offender, and each of which attracts different resource levels and requires different skills. While an offender is in custody the day-to-day motivational and co-ordinating work is undertaken by an Offender Supervisor, working to the plan prepared by the Offender Manager. The different contributions by different staff are integrated through an explicit teamwork approach, within which the Offender Manager acts as the team leader. This will, in due course, be underpinned by a single electronic case record – accessible to probation staff, prison staff and the providers of the main interventions, like drug treatment and unpaid work. This is called C-NOMIS. The installation commenced in 2007, initially to prisons, and is scheduled to complete in 2009. Though a simple enough idea, Offender Management breaks with the tradition in which different tasks (e.g. assessment, induction, enforcement) or different stages (e.g. presentence reporting, community supervision, custody) are dealt with by different staff or, indeed, different organisations. It is offender-focussed rather than task-focussed, and well grounded in evidence. It will take some time to implement completely. The first phase of implementation covered community orders, from April 2005 onward; high risk custody cases are the focus of the second phase, from November 2006 with the remaining custody cases scheduled for 2007/8. Further details of the NOMS Offender Management Model can be obtained from the document of the same name at www.NOMS.homeoffice.gov.uk under Offender Management/New Publications/Offender Management Model V 1.1

5

Offending Behaviour Programmes Programmes Appendix 3 - Offending Behaviour

Appendix 3: Offending Behaviour Programmes Offending Behaviour Programmes, both groupwork and individual, are an integral part of the work carried out by the National Probation Service (NPS). They are accredited by the Home Office and run to strict National Standards. Programmes fall into five categories: General offending Violence Sex offending Substance misuse Domestic violence

Programmes serve all of our aims: To protect the public To reduce re-offending The proper punishment of offenders To ensure offenders� awareness of the effects of crime on victims and the public The rehabilitation of offenders The NPS offers a total of 15 programmes: • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Enhanced Thinking Skills Think First One to One Women�s Programme Aggression Replacement Training (ART) Controlling Anger and Learning to Manage it (CALM) Community – Sex Offender Groupwork Programme (C-SOGP) Thames-Valley – Sex Offender Groupwork Programme (TV-SOGP) Northumbria – Sex Offender Group Programme (N-SOGP) Internet Sex Offender Programme Drink Impaired Drivers (DIDs) Addressing Substance Related Offending (ASRO) Offender Substance Abuse Programme (OSAP) Personal Reduction in Substance Misuse (PRISM) Community Domestic Violence Programme (CDVP) Integrated Domestic Abuse Programme (IDAP)

Details of all 15 programmes are given in this manual. To verify which programmes are offered locally please refer to specific information provided by the local probation area. Attendance on any of these programmes can be a Requirement of a Community Order. When a court sentences an offender to attend a programme, the Requirement should read: “To attend (programme name) as directed by the responsible officer and comply with the rules of attendance of the programme.”

5

Appendix 3 - Offending Behaviour Programmes Appendix 3

The Accreditation Process The Correctional Services Accreditation Panel (CSAP) is currently designated by Statutory Instrument as the accrediting body for these purposes. Programmes are an integral part of the National Offender Management Service�s strategy to reduce re-offending. They are delivered to prisoners and those on licence as well as to those subject to an accredited programme Requirement as part of a Community Order. The CSAP is an advisory non-departmental public body which accredits interventions (usually programmes) for delivery to offenders in custody or in the community. Accreditation is awarded only when the CSAP is persuaded that the intervention has been designed consistently with the evidence about what is likely to be effective in reducing re-offending. This body of evidence is often referred to within the correctional services and beyond, both in England and Wales and internationally, as “What Works”. The CSAP considers interventions for accreditation by scoring applications against a set of criteria drawn from the “What Works” evidence. An application to the CSAP for accreditation consists of a submission addressing the accreditation criteria, together with a number of separate manuals for use by practitioners detailing: • • • • • the programme�s theoretical basis; its content and how it should be delivered; how it should be managed; the selection and training of tutors/facilitators; the assessment of offenders who might be suitable to undertake the programme and evaluation of progress of those who do so.

The CSAP consists of eminent psychologists and criminologists from the UK, Germany, Canada and the USA, with theoretical (often research-focused) and operational expertise in various areas of offender treatment.

5

Offending Behaviour Programmes Programmes Appendix 3 - Offending Behaviour

Enhanced Thinking Skills Programme aims: • To change offenders� thinking and behaviour, to reduce the likelihood of re-offending.

Who is suitable? Offenders, both men and women, who: • • • • pose a medium to high risk of re-offending have poor problem-solving skills do not think through the consequences of their actions are assessed as suitable in a PSR

Who is not suitable? • • • • • People whose offending is not linked to poor cognitive skills Offenders with serious mental health problems Offenders who cannot learn in a group setting Current sex offenders Domestic violence offenders who have not completed a domestic violence programme

The programme involves: • • 20 sessions lasting between two and two-and-a-half hours A sequenced series of structured exercises designed to teach inter-personal problemsolving skills

60

Appendix 3 - Offending Behaviour Programmes Appendix 3

Think First Programme aims: • To teach problem-solving skills and apply these skills to offending behaviour, in order to help offenders stop offending

Who is suitable? Offenders, both men and women, who: • • • • • pose a medium to high risk of re-offending are impulsive and/or rigid thinkers do not think through the consequences of their actions fail to consider the effects of their behaviour on victims or others are assessed as suitable in a PSR

Who is not suitable? • • • • • People whose offending is not linked to poor cognitive skills Offenders with serious mental health problems Offenders who cannot learn in a group setting Current sex offenders Domestic violence offenders

The programme involves: • • Four pre-programme sessions, both one-to-one and in a group 22 group sessions of between two and two-and-a-half hours. These focus on skills to change behaviour such as problem-solving, anti-social attitudes, tackling pressures to offend, victim awareness, moral reasoning, self-management and social interaction. These are then applied to aspects of offences and situations in which they occur. Seven post-programme sessions on an individual basis

61

Offending Behaviour Programmes Programmes Appendix 3 - Offending Behaviour

One to One Programme aims: • To enable offenders to develop a range of problem-solving skills in order to change behaviour and the underpinning thought, values and attitudes related to offending

Who is suitable? Offenders who: • • • • • • • pose a medium to medium high risk of re-offending have poor problem-solving skills are impulsive and/or rigid thinkers do not think through the consequences of their actions have personal circumstances or long and/or difficult journey times which would make attendance at a group programme difficult have a complex pattern of personal problems and characteristics which would make it difficult for them to learn in a group setting are assessed as suitable in a PSR

Who is not suitable? • • • Offenders with serious mental health problems Offenders who would not meet the learning outcomes because of severe drug dependency Offenders with learning difficulties where this inhibits understanding of the materials. This does not necessarily include those with literacy difficulties

The programme involves: • • One pre-programme motivational session 21 one-to-one programme sessions of between one and one-and-a-half hours. These focus on skills to change behaviour such as problem solving, anti-social attitudes, tackling pressures to offend, victim awareness, moral reasoning and self-awareness.

62

Appendix 3 - Offending Behaviour Programmes Appendix 3

Women’s Programme Programme aims: To help women to change their behaviour, to reduce the risk of re-offending Who is suitable? Women offenders: • • • • • • who have a current conviction for an offence of an acquisitive nature or where there is a pattern of previous offending motivated by financial gain or the current offence has an underlying motivation of an acquisitive nature who have poor problem-solving skills who do not think through the consequences of their actions who are assessed as suitable for the programme in a PSR

Who is not suitable? • • • Women whose offending is not linked to poor cognitive skills Women with serious mental health problems Women who cannot learn in a group setting

The programme involves: • 31 sessions of two hours each. Additional work will be needed for the high risk women or those with greater need. The programme is based on motivational interviewing techniques with an emphasis on emotional management and building healthy relationships.

63

Offending Behaviour Programmes Programmes Appendix 3 - Offending Behaviour

Aggression Replacement Training (ART) Programme aims: • • To reduce aggressive behaviour through teaching social skills, anger management techniques and improved moral reasoning Who is suitable?

Offenders, both men and women, who: • • • • pose a medium to high risk of re-offending or medium to high risk of harm have a conviction for assault, a public order offence or criminal damage have a current aggressive offence and an established pattern of violent or aggressive behaviour are assessed as suitable for the programme in a PSR

Who is not suitable? • • • • • Current sex offenders Domestic violence offenders Offenders who primarily commit forms of instrumental violence such as robbery or making threats to kill Offenders with learning difficulties People with mental health problems or suffering severe alcohol or drug abuse

The programme involves: • • • Five structured individual sessions on risk assessment and group preparation 18 groupwork sessions. These focus on reducing violent behaviour through teaching social skills, anger management techniques and improved moral reasoning Five post-programme individual, structured evaluation and relapse prevention sessions

64

Appendix 3 - Offending Behaviour Programmes Appendix 3

Controlling Anger and Learning to Manage it (CALM) Programme aims: • To reduce aggressive and offending behaviour related to poor emotional management through teaching social skills, emotional management and cognitive techniques

Who is suitable? Male offenders who: • • • • pose a medium to high risk of re-offending or medium to high risk of harm have been convicted of any offence in which anger or other uncontrolled emotion has played a significant part, or have a history of violent, aggressive or emotionally uncontrolled behaviour have problems of emotional management especially anger management have been assessed as suitable in a PSR

Who is not suitable? • • • • • Offenders with serious mental health problems Offenders who cannot learn in a group setting Current sex offenders Domestic violence offenders Offenders who primarily commit forms of instrumental violence such as robbery or making threats to kill

The programme involves: • 24 groupwork sessions of between two and two-and-a-half hours. Offenders learn to control their emotional arousal, they learn skills to resolve conflict, and learn how to deal with relapse.

65

Offending Behaviour Programmes Programmes Appendix 3 - Offending Behaviour

Community - Sex Offender Group Programme (C-SOGP) Programme aims: • To reduce offending by adult male sex offenders

Who is suitable? • • Adult males within the normal IQ range who commit any type of sexual offence. Offenders who are assessed as suitable in a PSR

Who is not suitable? • • • • • Female sexual offenders Sex offenders with an IQ of less than 80 Men with severe drug/alcohol misuse behaviour Men with current mental health problems Men assessed as psychopathic

The programme involves: • • • 50-hour induction module. Low risk/low deviancy men then go directly to a 50-hour Relapse Prevention Programme High risk/high deviancy men undertake the full 250-hour programme consisting of six modules. Men can join at the beginning of any module Men who have successfully completed a Prison sex offender treatment programme can go directly to the Relapse Prevention Programme

66

Appendix 3 - Offending Behaviour Programmes Appendix 3

Thames Valley – Sex Offender Groupwork Programme (TV-SOGP) Programme aims: • To reduce the risk of future sexual offending by adult male sex offenders

Who is suitable? Male sex offenders who: • • • • are convicted of any sexual offence or sexually-motivated offence, including noncontact sexual offences are aged 21 or over are within the normal IQ range are assessed as suitable for the programme in a PSR

Who is not suitable? • • • • • • Female sexual offenders Sex offenders with an IQ of less than 80 Men with severe drug/alcohol misuse behaviour Men with current mental health problems Men assessed as psychopathic Men in total denial of their sexual offending

The programme involves: • • Assessment by psychometric measures for deviancy and to determine which blocks of the programme need to be undertaken Structured pre-groupwork to build on an offender�s motivation to follow the programme

The four programme blocks are: • • • • • • Foundation - requires full-time attendance for two consecutive weeks Victim empathy - requires twice-weekly attendance for four weeks Life skills - requires twice-weekly attendance for 10 weeks Relapse prevention - requires weekly attendance for 24 weeks High risk/high deviancy men complete the whole programme. Low risk/low deviancy men can miss out the Life Skills block. Men who have completed a Prison sex offender treatment programme can go directly to the Relapse Prevention Programme

6

Offending Behaviour Programmes Programmes Appendix 3 - Offending Behaviour

Northumbria – Sex Offender Group Programme (N-SOGP) Programme aims: • To reduce sex offending by adult male sex offenders

Who is suitable? Male sex offenders who: • • • are within the normal IQ range commit any type of sexual offence are assessed as suitable in a PSR

Who is not suitable? • • • • • • Female sexual offenders Sex offenders with an IQ of less than 80 Men with severe drug/alcohol misuse behaviour Men with current mental health problems Men assessed as psychopathic Men in total denial of their sexual offending

The programme involves: • • • • • 160 hours of attendance consisting of sessions run for one or two days per week The core programme consists of four modules. Men can attend at the beginning of any module High risk/high deviancy men will attend the core group followed by Relapse Prevention (36 hours) Low risk/low deviancy men will normally complete individual preparation work followed by the Relapse Prevention Programme Offenders released from prison will follow similar routes according to their assessment of risk and deviancy

6

Appendix 3 - Offending Behaviour Programmes Appendix 3

Internet Sex Offender Treatment Programme (i-SOTP) Programme aims: To reduce the risk of future internet sexual offending and risk of progression to contact sexual offending. Who is suitable? The Programme is exclusively for internet-only offenders who are aged over 17 for the one-to-one programme format and over 21 years for the groupwork programme. (The age distinction is to minimise the risk of relatively younger offenders possibly being adversely influenced by working in a group of more mature offenders). Offenders should be in the normal IQ range (80 and over). Offenders will enter the programme as a requirement of a Community Order (usually three years in duration) or as a condition of release from prison. The programme is for low, medium and high-risk and low deviance. It is envisaged that if, in the course of the programme an offender�s treatment needs emerge as greater than is apparent at the pre-sentence assessment, there would be the facility to transfer offenders from the i-SOTP to one of the other accredited sex offender treatment programmes. Who is not suitable? Female sex offenders; men with previous convictions for other types of sexual offences; very high risk/high deviance; men with severe drug/alcohol abuse; men with mental health problems such as psycopathy, schizophrenia, acute depression; offenders who are unable to speak English. The programme involves: It is a cognitive behavioural treatment programme which has the following components:• • • • • • • Motivational work Functional analysis of offence behaviour Enhancing victim awareness Addressing cognitive distortions Relationship and intimacy skills Addressing problematic collecting and compulsivity Relapse prevention

The programme comprises six modules. The group format has 35 sessions of two hours� duration; the one-to-one format has 20 to 30 sessions of 90 minutes (the number of sessions is determined according to treatment need and individual pace). In both formats sessions are supplemented by substantial homework assignments.

6

Offending Behaviour Programmes Programmes Appendix 3 - Offending Behaviour

Drink Impaired Drivers (DIDs) Programme aims: • To reduce the risk of future drink-related driving offences

Who is suitable? Offenders, both men and women who: • • • have up to four previous convictions of any kind are aged 17 and over have been assessed as suitable for the programme in a PSR

Who is not suitable? • • • • First-time offenders, unless there are aggravated circumstances Those with five or more previous convictions for excess alcohol Heavy drinkers unless sequenced with alcohol treatment Problem drinkers until they are stabilised

The programme involves: • • • Four individual structured sessions on risk assessment and group preparation 14 weekly groupwork sessions of two-and-a-half hours focused on structured learning to develop pro-social skills, effective decision making and detailed knowledge about the effects of drinking and driving Six post-programme individual, structured evaluation and relapse prevention sessions 

0

Appendix 3 - Offending Behaviour Programmes Appendix 3

Addressing Substance Related Offending (ASRO) Programme aims: • To teach offenders the skills required to reduce or stop substance misuse

Who is suitable? Offenders: • • who pose a medium to high risk of re-offending whose offending is related to at least one of the following: - substance specific offences (e.g. possession of a Class A drug) - use of drugs or alcohol as a disinhibitor - offences committed as a result of addiction or perceived addiction to alcohol or drugs who are sufficiently stable and motivated to change who are assessed as suitable in a PSR

• •

Who is not suitable? Offenders: • • • with serious mental health problems who cannot learn in a group setting who might be at risk if disclosing offences of a sensitive nature

The programme involves: • • Three optional pre-programme sessions 20 sessions of two-and-a-half hours generally delivered twice a week 

1

Offending Behaviour Programmes Programmes Appendix 3 - Offending Behaviour

Offender Substance Abuse Programme (OSAP) Programme aims: • • To raise awareness of the link between drug and/or alcohol misuse and offending To provide offenders with the skills to enable them to reduce or stop substance misuse, thus reducing offending

Who is suitable? Offenders: • • • • who have been assessed as medium to high risk of re-offending whose offending is linked to at least one of the following: substance specific offences (e.g. possession of a Class A drug) use of drugs or alcohol as a disinhibitor offences committed as a result of addiction or perceived addiction to alcohol or drugs who are sufficiently stable and motivated to change who are assessed as suitable in a PSR

Who is not suitable? • • Offenders with serious mental health problems Offenders who cannot learn in a group setting

The programme involves: • • • Three pre-programme sessions 26 groupwork sessions with a modular structure delivered up to four times a week At least four post-programme maintenance sessions with a case manager 

2

Appendix 3 - Offending Behaviour Programmes Appendix 3

Personal Reduction in Substance Misuse (PRISM) Programme aims: • To enable offenders, in a one-to-one situation, to acquire the skills to reduce or stop substance misuse, thus reducing offending

Who is suitable? Offenders: • • • • • • who have a medium to high risk of re-offending whose offending is related to substance misuse who are sufficiently stable and motivated who would not benefit from, or who are not suitable for, a groupwork setting who have personal circumstances and/or needs that are better met by an individual programme are assessed as suitable in a PSR

Who is not suitable? • • Offenders with serious mental health problems Offenders who cannot learn in a group setting

The programme involves: • • A pre-programme motivational interview 20 sessions from between 45 and 120 minutes. Recommended frequency is: - twice weekly for sessions one to four - weekly for sessions five to 12 - twice weekly or weekly for sessions 13 to 20 

3

Offending Behaviour Programmes Programmes Appendix 3 - Offending Behaviour

Community Domestic Violence Programme The programme includes work with known victims and inter-agency risk management. Programme aims: • • • • • • To reduce the risk of violent crime and abusive behaviour towards women in relationships by helping perpetrators change their attitudes and behaviour To reduce the risk of all violent and abusive behaviour in the family To increase the offender�s ability to respond non-abusively, to change abusive beliefs and empathise with his victim(s) To give offenders a greater sense of personal responsibility for their violence To help offenders accept that they exercise choice in the way they behave To increase the offender�s ability to identify high-risk situations and to effectively manage these in the future

Who is suitable? Male offenders who: • • • • • • are heterosexual have been assessed as a medium to high risk for relationship violence as indicated by severity and/or pattern of abuse using the Spousal Abuse Risk Assessment (SARA) have committed at least one act of violence against an intimate partner have basic literacy, language competency and comprehension skills are willing to sign a consent form which will include the sharing of relevant information with the offender�s spouse/partner are assessed as suitable in a PSR

Who is not suitable? • • • • Female offenders Offenders in same sex relationships Offenders with severe mental health issues Offenders who are judged unable to meet the learning outcomes because of, for example, severe drug dependency

The programme involves: • • • Contact with the victim or current partner by a women�s safety worker Risk management through continual assessment and information sharing with other agencies including the police Groupwork sessions and a minimum of nine individual sessions with the offender: - Three individual pre-programme sessions to enhance motivation - 26 groupwork sessions of two hours. This is sequential and is usually delivered twice a week but can be delivered up to three times per week - A minimum of four relapse prevention sessions 

4

Appendix 3 - Offending Behaviour Programmes Appendix 3

Integrated Domestic Abuse Programme (IDAP) The programme includes work with known victims and inter-agency risk management. Programme aims: • • • • • • To reduce the risk of violent crime and abusive behaviour towards women in relationships by helping perpetrators change their attitudes and behaviour To reduce the risk of all violent and abusive behaviour in the family To increase the offender�s ability to respond non-abusively, to change abusive beliefs and empathise with his victim(s) To give offenders a greater sense of personal responsibility for their violence To help offenders accept that they exercise choice in the way they behave To increase the offender�s ability to identify high-risk situations and to manage effectively these in the future

Who is suitable? Male offenders who: • • • • • • are heterosexual have been assessed as a medium to high risk for relationship violence as indicated by severity and/or pattern of abuse using the Spousal Abuse Risk Assessment (SARA) have committed at least one act of violence against an intimate partner have basic literacy, language competency and comprehension skills are willing to sign a consent form which will include the sharing of relevant information with the offender�s spouse/partner are assessed as suitable in a PSR

Who is not suitable? • • • • Female offenders Offenders in same sex relationships Offenders with serious mental health problems Offenders who are judged unable to meet the learning outcomes because of, for example, severe drug dependency

The Programme involves: • • • Contact with the victim or current partner by a women�s safety worker Risk management through continual assessment and information sharing with other agencies including the police Groupwork and individual sessions with the offender - Four individual pre-programme sessions - A rolling programme of 27 two-hour groupwork sessions and six individual sessions - At least four relapse prevention sessions with the case manager 

5

Conditional Cautions Appendix 4 - Conditional Cautions

Appendix 4:

Conditional Cautions

The Criminal Justice Act provides the relevant authorities with the ability to issue adult offenders with a Conditional Caution, if certain requirements are met. Key Elements A Conditional Caution is a new disposal available for adults (18+) who are willing to admit their guilt. It is not a court order. It is administered by the Police and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). The scheme is aimed at cases where the public interest would be met more effectively by offenders carrying out specific conditions, which are attached to a Caution, rather than being prosecuted. The conditions must either help rehabilitate the offender and/or ensure that he or she makes reparation for the effects of the offence on the victim or the wider community. Offenders who fail to comply with the conditions will usually be prosecuted for the original offence. The basic criteria that must be satisfied before a conditional caution can be considered are: • • • that the offender is 18 or over; that the offender admits the offence to the authorised person in a cautioned interview, and that there is, in the opinion of the relevant prosecutor, evidence sufficient to charge the offender with the offence. (Note that the person to whom the admissions are made may be a police officer, but a decision to issue a Conditional Caution must be taken by a prosecutor)

Aims of the scheme The aims of the scheme are to: • • • • increase flexibility with regard to disposals and diversion from prosecution in appropriate cases improve victim satisfaction contribute to the offences brought to justice target (by freeing up more court time to deal with more complex cases) build on cross-cutting working practices introduced through the joint charging initiative

Benefits of the scheme The following benefits are anticipated: • • • • • Court time freed up so more serious cases can be brought to justice Speedier, more cost-effective resolution of cases Improved victim satisfaction and public confidence Offenders gain access to treatment for drug or alcohol interventions more speedily Increased community participation in the delivery of local justice 

6

Appendix 4 - Conditional Cautions Appendix 4

Approach A phased implementation has taken place in seven sites, including the Community Justice Centre in Liverpool, and planning for staged national roll-out in the remaining police force areas has begun. This has enabled the project to undertake research in order to assess the impact of the scheme on those organisations involved in the implementation and to assess resource and cost implications. National roll-out plans Planning for national roll-out of the scheme is well under way and all areas have appointed a senior responsible officer, with many, particularly those planning to implement earliest, setting up their project teams. A national conditional cautions conference was held in Preston, Lancashire, on 19 June 2006 in co-operation with Lancashire Constabulary, which introduced the scheme to new areas and shared good practice. A new Conditional Cautions Project Board has been established which will hold particular responsibility for national roll-out of the scheme. Conditional Caution project – reparative work pilots Following the implementation of the scheme in seven police force areas it was decided to pilot the use of unpaid work as a condition to a caution. This is known as reparative work. The nature of the reparations should be linked in a direct way to the offence or type of offence for which the Caution is issued. For example, someone who damaged the fittings in a public park might be required to comply with a condition to assist in making good the damage, or generally restoring the appearance of the park. The pilot will be evaluated by the Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Unit. The aims of the this pilot project are: • • • • • to test the feasibility of offering unpaid work as a condition of a caution to establish best practice in the the event of any decision to expand or roll out the pilot to provide evaluation results that facilitate policy making in this area to provide information on the expected costs of offering and running reparative work projects, and to test different models of delivery, to include partnership with the voluntary and community sector

In more general terms, this project shares with the wider conditional cautions project the following aims: 1. 2. To reduce re-offending by imposing more timely and appropriate punishments To increase the efficiency and efficacy of the CJS through good use of the resources of the police, CPS and courts 

Research on the Effectiveness of Sentencing and Interventions Appendix 5 - Research on the Effectiveness of Sentencing and Interventions on the Effectiveness of Sentencing and Research

Appendix 5: Interventions

Research on the Effectiveness of Sentencing and

The Research, Development and Statistics (RDS) Directorate at the Home Office carries out work in two areas likely to be of direct interest to the courts: • • research into the effectiveness of sentences research into the effectiveness of correctional interventions

An immediate difficulty with the first of those tasks is, of course, that sentencing has a variety of aims. Effectiveness tends to be defined and measured as the impact that sentencing has upon offending. That approach is suitable for those sentencing aims which have reduction of re-offending as their goal - rehabilitation or deterrence - but is less so for aims such as punishment and reparation. Most of the evidence here is in the form of aggregate reconviction rates for different sentence types. But the difficulty in interpreting these is that variations in reconviction rates both between and within broad sentence types are difficult to separate out from differences in the particular characteristics of the offenders who receive them. For example, one might expect less serious, lower risk offenders commonly to be fined. That is then likely to result in relatively low reconviction rates for that disposal because that type of offender is less likely to re-offend than higher risk counterparts receiving other sentences. While the evidence for the effectiveness of individual sentences is either sparse or hard to interpret, the research-driven approach to the ‘What works� model of dealing with offenders means that much more is known about the second area, the effects of different correctional interventions (in other words, the means by which sentences are enacted). The recent report, ’The impact of corrections on re-offending’ (Home Office Research Study 291 (2004)), looked in detail at how effective the individual components of different correctional interventions are in reducing re-offending. It identified a broad range of interventions that can reduce reconviction. These include offending behaviour programmes, basic skills education, drug treatment and the custody-to-work programme. Although the evidence base for these is growing in quality and quantity, there are a number of issues the Probation Service needs to address to ensure that good quality research evidence that is needed on effectiveness is produced. It is important to stress that not all research has equal merit. Much research is done using weak or flawed methods. This can significantly undermine the value of the results it produces. Of course, sometimes limitations in the design of a study are unavoidable due to constraints of time or resources. Yet even given these sorts of restrictions, there is usually still scope for researchers to maximise the quality of any study they are undertaking. RDS NOMS has been concentrating on the following issues in efforts to improve both the quality and practical utility of our research on effectiveness: Improving research design The question of whether a particular intervention works can usually only be answered relatively, i.e. works in relation to what? We usually attempt to do this by comparing the outcome(s) of interest for those who have received a particular intervention with another group who have not received it. The latter are usually known as the ‘control� or ‘comparison� group and provide the position against which the effects of the intervention under study can 


Appendix 5

Appendix 5 - Research on the Effectiveness of Sentencing and Interventions Appendix 5

be measured. Without such a comparison, we cannot be sure that any changes in outcome for those receiving the intervention actually arose from the intervention and would not have occurred anyway. To be a true comparison, it must be made on a ‘like for like� basis. Otherwise we will not know whether any observed differences between those offenders who receive the intervention and those receiving a different disposal are really due to the effect of the intervention, as opposed to differences in the characteristics and propensities of the offenders in the two groups. The sophistication with which studies have been able to match the intervention and comparison groups, and thus control the effects of other factors, varies. But limitations on the availability of information to be used for matching means it is rarely done very robustly. Because of this, many studies fail to produce conclusive evidence on effectiveness. The best way of testing the effects of an intervention is by randomly assigning people to either intervention or control group. The process of random assignment minimises the chance that however carefully matched, the control and intervention groups still differ from each other in significant ways. These studies are called ‘Randomised Controlled Trials� (RCTs) and are commonly used in medical research. Using this method we can be truly confident that any differences between the intervention and controls are due to the intervention alone. While RCTs are preferable for research reasons, there may be potential legal, practical and ethical obstacles to their use in many circumstances. Because of these, they have only rarely been used in criminal justice research (although they have been used abroad and the Home Office is currently piloting Restorative Justice (RJ) schemes using an RCT design). However, these challenges are not usually insurmountable and many objections to RCTs can be overcome when stakeholders fully understand the purpose and value of their use. RCTs would only be used where the effect of an intervention is not clearly known and we need to establish not only whether it produces any benefits but also whether it has any harmful or negative effects. This type of evidence is needed to determine what works to reduce re-offending and, in doing so, to drive the most cost-effective use of NOMS interventions. Thus, the RDS NOMS research and evaluation programme is developing the use of RCTs for evaluation of NOMS interventions. In some instances RDS will need the agreement and support of the courts to help them achieve this. Improving the quality of the measures and the data used Using the best-possible research design is not the only important factor in producing better evidence on effectiveness. RDS aim to improve the quality of evidence by: • Ensuring that studies are designed with sufficiently large sample sizes. Insufficient sample size is a major cause of studies producing inconclusive results, as it means that the study will be less likely to detect small effects or the results may not be generalisable to other samples. Improving the use of reconviction data. While it has its limitations, reconviction data is the only systematic, reliable and readily accessible means of measuring offending that exists. We are exploring how we can examine the frequency and severity of reconvictions and not just whether a person was reconvicted 

• 

Appendix on the Effectiveness of Sentencing and Interventions Research 5 - Research on the Effectiveness of Sentencing and Interventions on the Effectiveness of Sentencing and Research

or not. RDS are also supplementing reconviction data with other measures of impact or change, for example, offenders� attitudes, or their use of alcohol or drugs, including OASys data on offenders� needs. • Improving their understanding of how interventions work. Without an understanding of this, they will not be able to explain why interventions produce the outcomes that they do. RDS is planning several longitudinal cohort studies that will look in more detail at the relationships between interventions delivered and reoffending or offending-related outcomes for different types of offenders, this includes OASys data on offenders� needs. 

0 

0

Appendix 6

Appendix 5 - Research on the EffectivenessAppendix 6 - National Standards of Sentencing and Interventions National Standards

Appendix 6:

National Standards

The following is a summary of the National Standards by which the National Probation Service will operate. The full version is available on www.probation.justice.gov.uk 1. The Probation Service will operate to at least the minimum National Standards for service delivery, noting the features, purpose and applicability of the Standards and the expectations placed upon Probation Boards. Where a court requests a report from the Probation Service prior to sentencing, an appropriate assessment will be made of the offender�s risk of harm and the likelihood of re-offending, in order to inform the court of a clear and realistic recommendation for sentence or remand. Sentenced cases should be allocated to an offender manager as soon as practicable after sentence. Offender managers will commence the sentence promptly and induct the offender into the requirements of the sentence and the expectations being placed upon him. A plan for how the sentence will be implemented and who will be required to implement it will be produced as soon as is feasible. The implementation of the punitive requirements of the sentence will be prioritised. The implementation of the restrictive requirements of the sentence will be prioritised. The implementation of the constructive requirements of the sentence will commence as soon as possible following sentence, having regard to the need to integrate with the punitive and restrictive elements. Where the offender fails to comply with the sentence, the offender manager will take steps to enforce the requirements of the sentence promptly. The offender manager will monitor the delivery of the sentence plan, review progress against the plan, revise the plan as necessary and, at the end of the sentence, evaluate the extent to which the plan achieved its objectives. Victims, or their families, in cases involving a serious sexual or violent offence which leads to a custodial sentence of 12 months or more, will be offered contact with the Probation Service. The Probation Service, or its contractor, will operate approved premises, where available with the aim of protecting the public from offenders or bailees posing a high or very high risk of harm.

2.

3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

9. 10.

11.

12. 

1 

1

Appendix 7 - Research on the Effectiveness of Sentencing and Interventions 5 Glossary

Appendix 7

APPENDIX 7 GLOSSARY ACPO ASBO ASRO CALM CDRP CDVP CJA CJCSA 2000 CJS CO CPA CPS CSAP C-SOGP DAT DIDs DPP DRR DYOI EPP GOBP HMCS HMPS IDAP IPP LPSR LSP MALRAP MAPPA NOMS NPS N-SOGP OASys OSAP PPO PRISM PSR RCT RDS RJ SGC TV-SOGP UW YOI Association of Chief Police Officers Anti-Social Behaviour Order Addressing Substance Related Offending Controlling Anger and Learning to Manage it programme Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership Community Domestic Violence Programme Criminal Justice Act 2003 Criminal Justice and Court Services Act 2000 Criminal Justice System Community Order Care Programme Approach Crown Prosecution Service Correctional Services Accreditation Panel Community Sex Offender Groupwork Programme Drug Action Team Drink Impaired Drivers Programme Director of Public Prosecutions Drug Rehabilitation Requirement Detention in a Young Offenders Institution Extended Sentence for Public Protection General Offending Behaviour Programme Her Majesty�s Courts Service Her Majesty�s Prison Service Integrated Domestic Abuse Programme Indeterminate Sentence for Public Protection Lifer Post-Sentence Report Life Sentence Plan Multi-Agency Lifer Risk Assessment Panel Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements National Offender Management Service National Probation Service Northumbria Sex Offender Groupwork Programme Offender Assessment System Offender Substance Abuse Programme Prolific and Priority Offenders Personal Reduction in Substance Misuse programme Pre-sentence report Randomised Controlled Trial Research, Development and Statistics directorate (Home Office) Restorative Justice Sentencing Guidelines Council Thames Valley Sex Offender Groupwork Programme Unpaid Work Requirement Young Offenders Institute 

2 

2 

3 

4

Published by: National Offender Management Service Abell House John Islip Street London SW1P 4LH www.probation.justice.gov.uk

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.