Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 9:13 pm
Time: 9:13 pm
Results for offender management
26 results foundAuthor: McNeill, Fergus Title: Changing Lives? Desistance Research and Offender Management Summary: This report provides a literature review on desistance from crime which explores the purposes of offender management; understanding and supporting desistance; desistance and the process of offender management; desistance and compliance with offender management; and, desistance and the credibility of offender management. Details: Edinburgh: Scottish Centre for Crime & Justice Research, 2010. 77p. Source: Internet Resource; Report No.03/2010 Year: 2010 Country: International URL: Shelf Number: 118820 Keywords: Desistance from CrimeOffender ManagementRecidivismRehabilitation |
Author: Pew Center on the States Title: Risk/Needs Assessment 101: Science Reveals New Tools to Manage Offenders Summary: Over the past few decades, experts have developed and refined risk/needs instruments to measure the likelihood of an individual returning to crime, violence or drug use. These tools can help officials to better identify offenders at a high risk of reoffending, while also pinpointing the types of supervision and services that are most likely to prevent future criminal behavior and slow the revolving door of America’s prisons. Key Findings: • Risk/needs instruments measure an individual’s risk of reoffending and identify the specific risk factors that, if addressed, can reduce the likelihood of future criminal behavior. • Risk/needs assessment tools are used at many points in the corrections process by courts, probation and parole agencies, prison and jail systems and parole boards to inform decisions about offender management. • Differentiating offenders by risk level is important—intensive programming can work well with higher-risk offenders but can actually increase recidivism rates among lower-risk offenders. • Research has shown that a comprehensive evidence-based approach—assessing risk, matching supervision and treatment to an offender’s risk level and targeting criminal risk factors with proven programs—reduces recidivism. Details: Washington, DC: Pew Center on the States, 2011. 8p. Source: Internet Resource: Issue Brief: Accessed November 1, 2011 at: http://www.pewcenteronthestates.org/uploadedFiles/Pew_Risk_Assessment_brief.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.pewcenteronthestates.org/uploadedFiles/Pew_Risk_Assessment_brief.pdf Shelf Number: 123198 Keywords: Classification of OffendersNeeds AssessmentOffender ManagementPrisonersRisk Assessment |
Author: Iganski, Paul Title: Rehabilitation of hate crime offenders Summary: In October 2010 the Equality Act came into force which, among the new general duties it places on public bodies, requires public authorities to take action to “promote understanding” and “tackle prejudice”. The duty on a public body to reduce prejudice can be seen to include working with those people in the community whose prejudice has an impact both on them and the people around them and therefore applies to the area of criminal justice and ‘hate crime’ offenders. However, despite the growing attention and interest in hate crime, there is a clear need for a shared learning about how to effectively manage offenders. This report aims to provide a contribution to that learning by presenting a research review of some of the initiatives that have been established. The aims of the research were to: identify, from an international search, programmes designed for the rehabilitation of hate crime offenders; determine the transferability of programmes, or elements of them, for practice learning in the UK; make recommendations for the design and delivery of rehabilitative programmes for hate crime offenders in the UK. The research drew on international knowledge and expertise to look for relevant programmes in North America, Australia and New Zealand, and Europe, as well as in the UK, and, when programmes were identified, sought more information wherever possible by visits and telephone contacts with those responsible for the programmes. No programmes were found in Australia, New Zealand or Canada. The programmes identified in the United States, most of which were aimed at young offenders, had mostly ceased to function, usually because of problems of funding. Programmes were, however, identified in Germany and Sweden, which – unlike programmes identified in the United Kingdom – are intended specifically for offenders who have or have had some contact with far-right racist groups. The UK programmes identified share with those in Europe a commitment to the acceptance and understanding, rather than the rejection and condemnation, of racially motivated offenders, and have shown that it is possible to work with them constructively while firmly conveying that racist attitudes and behaviour are not acceptable. On the basis of the research findings, and in the context of the 2010 Equality Act, a number of recommendations are made for the design and delivery of programmes for the rehabilitation of hate crime offenders in the UK. Details: Scotland: Equality and Human Rights Commission, 2011. 56p. Source: Research Report. Internet Resource: Accessed on January 26, 2012 at http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/uploaded_files/Scotland/Research/rehabilitation_of_hate_crime_offenders_report_word_for_web_2_.doc Year: 2011 Country: International URL: http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/uploaded_files/Scotland/Research/rehabilitation_of_hate_crime_offenders_report_word_for_web_2_.doc Shelf Number: 123773 Keywords: Bias CrimeHate CrimeHomophobiaOffender ManagementRacismRehabilitation |
Author: Brooker, Charlie Title: A Health Needs Assessment of Offenders on Probation Caseloads in Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire - Report of a Pilot Study Summary: This study was commissioned by the Care Services Improvement Partnership (CSIP) in the East Midlands to investigate the health needs of a sample group offenders managed by The Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire Probation Services. This study has shown that offenders have significantly worse health than the general population and that their health needs are different, in a number of respects, to those of prisoners. It also shows that offenders will consent to a health assessment and that this sort of assessment could be fitted into face-to-face contact with offenders on probation. The key finding to emerge from the study, perhaps, is that whilst community-based offenders seem to access healthcare at the same rate as the general population their health needs are likely to be significantly higher. Thus, supply is much lower than this needs assessment would indicate is appropriate. A much more rigorous research study should be undertaken that: Assesses the validity of offenders’ self-report of access to health services; obtains a representative sample; examines prospectively the relationship between health status, health care and reoffending; estimates the cost of healthcare to community-based offenders and the possible tradeoff obtained in reducing the costs of re-offending. Details: Lincoln, United Kingdom: Center for Clinical and Academic Workforce Innovation, University of Lincoln, 2008. 80p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed on January 26, 2012 at http://eprints.lincoln.ac.uk/2534/1/Probation_HNA.pdf Year: 2008 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://eprints.lincoln.ac.uk/2534/1/Probation_HNA.pdf Shelf Number: 123777 Keywords: Health CareNeeds AssessmentOffender ManagementProbationers(U.K.) |
Author: White, William L. Title: Management of the High-Risk DUI Offender Summary: The state of Illinois invests considerable resources to prevent and contain the threat to public safety posed by alcohol- and other drug-impaired drivers. Those resources have produced significant changes in legislation and a multi-agency system that seeks to further reduce impaired driving and to respond aggressively to contain, rehabilitate and monitor those convicted of driving under the influence (DUI). Between 1982 and 2001, the efforts of these agencies have reduced the alcohol-related fatalities per 100 million miles of travel in Illinois by more than 60 percent (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 2002). One important initiative has been the design and delivery of DUI-related training by the Illinois Department of Human Services Office of Alcoholism and Substance Abuse, the Administrative Office of the Illinois Courts, the Secretary of State, and the Illinois Department of Transportation. For the past fourteen years, the author has worked with these agencies to update judges, prosecutors, evaluators, probation officers, treatment personnel, and administrative hearing officers on the latest findings about what we are learning about impaired driving, the profile of the DUI offender and the most effective approaches to prevention, rehabilitation and containment. The purpose of this monograph is to capture the information provided through that training in writing so that it may reach a larger audience. It is hoped this information will help orient new personnel filling these roles and aid in the development of new trainers who will continue this work in the future. This monograph has been written with six specific audiences in mind: state’s attorney staff who prosecute DUI cases, judges who hear DUI cases, the evaluators who assess DUI offenders and report their findings to the courts, the probation officers who monitor and supervise DUI offenders, the treatment personnel called upon to counsel DUI offenders, and the Secretary of State administrative hearing officers who decide if and when to reinstate driving privileges for persons convicted of DUI. The monograph will cover the following content areas: Substance use trends and their implication for public safety; The changing perception of the DUI offender; Subpopulations of DUI offenders; The high risk DUI offender profile; The role of addiction treatment and mutual aid resources in managing and rehabilitating the DUI offender; and, Principles and strategies for managing the DUI offender in the local community. Details: Springfield, IL: University of Illinois at Springfield Institute for Legal, Administrative and Policy Studies, 2003. 135p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 20, 2012 at http://cspl.uis.edu/ILLAPS/Research/documents/Management_of_the_High_Risk_DUI_Offender2003.pdf Year: 2003 Country: United States URL: http://cspl.uis.edu/ILLAPS/Research/documents/Management_of_the_High_Risk_DUI_Offender2003.pdf Shelf Number: 126387 Keywords: Driving Under the Influence (DUI)Offender ManagementRecidivismRepeat Offenders |
Author: Tabachnick, Joan Title: A Reasoned Approach: Reshaping Sex Offender Policy to Prevent Child Sexual Abuse Summary: It is only in the last 30 years that society has begun to fully recognize child sexual abuse as the devastating problem that it is, to portray the trauma of sexual abuse in the media, and to seek ways to prevent and eliminate sexual violence. As communities have begun to demand a response to sexual abuse, legislators have passed an increasing number of policies directed at the people who sexually abuse. In 2007 and 2008 alone, more than 1500 sex offender-related bills were proposed in state legislatures and over 275 new laws were enacted. Nearly all of these laws and policies follow two key trends: 1) they increase the length of sex offender incarceration and 2) they monitor, track, and restrict individuals convicted of sexual offenses upon their return to communities. While the intent of these laws is to protect communities from those who abuse, to improve responses to allegations of abuse, and to prevent child sexual abuse, the broad application of these laws has unintended consequences which may make our children and communities less safe. Research from the last decade has highlighted some of the unintended negative impacts these laws may be having on our ability to prevent sexual abuse before it is perpetrated and to prevent re-offense by individuals returning to communities. When a convicted abuser returns to a community, current sex offender management policy may cause the offender to face housing, employment, and financial instability, as well as social isolation and despair — all risk factors for re-offense. The resulting instability may also reduce the ability of law enforcement and probation and parole systems to supervise the offender and ensure that s/he has access to the specialized treatment and services necessary for full accountability. In creating a legislative policy environment that may inhibit the willingness of individuals, families, and communities to face, prevent, and respond to child sexual abuse, our society does a disservice to its children. If no hopeful, rehabilitative solutions are available and made publicly known, people who witness signs of risk for victimization and/or perpetration may be less motivated to take the steps necessary to prevent child sexual abuse, intervene in situations of risk, and come forward when a child is sexually abused. Experts agree that a criminal justice response alone cannot prevent sexual abuse or keep communities safe. Yet, tougher sentencing and increased monitoring of sex offenders are fully funded in many states, while victim services and prevention programs are woefully underfunded. Furthermore, with the majority of child sexual abuse unreported (report rates are as low as 12 percent), laws and policies are unable to ensure accountability for those who abuse or to address the needs of victims. Even with these concerns there is reason for hope. Emerging research about people who sexually abuse has begun to inform new policies. Innovative state-based policies, and policies and programs within organizations and communities, are taking a comprehensive approach toward safety by focusing on the prevention of the perpetration of child sexual abuse, encouraging a range of options for holding abusers accountable, and offering incentives for abusers and families to reach out for help. And new collaborative models encourage cross-disciplinary professional partners to work together to craft new policies that prevent abuse before it is perpetrated and re-offense. Details: Beaverton, OR: Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers, 2011. 58p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 7, 2012 at http://www.atsa.com/sites/default/files/ppReasonedApproach.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.atsa.com/sites/default/files/ppReasonedApproach.pdf Shelf Number: 126572 Keywords: Child Sexual AbuseCrime PreventionCriminal Justice PolicyLegislationOffender ManagementSex Offenders |
Author: Warwick, Kevin Title: Case Management Strategies for Successful Jail Reentry Summary: In 2007, the National Institute of Corrections partnered with the Urban Institute to develop and test a comprehensive Transition from Jail to Community (TJC) model for effective jail-to-community transition. The TJC model and initiative advance systems-level change and local reentry through collaborative, coordinated jail-community partnerships. This brief presents the TJC Initiative’s approach to case planning and community handoff, drawing upon the implementation experiences of six TJC learning sites, all of which implemented elements of the TJC case management process and were continuing to work toward a more seamless and integrated process at the close of the TJC technical assistance period. Details: Washington, DC: Urban Institute; National Institute of Corrections, 2012. 10p. Source: Transition from Jail to Community Initiative Practice Brief: Internet Resource: Accessed October 7, 2012 at http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/412671-Case-Management-Strategies-for-Successful-Jail-Reentry.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/412671-Case-Management-Strategies-for-Successful-Jail-Reentry.pdf Shelf Number: 126575 Keywords: JailsOffender ManagementOffender ReintegrationPrisoner ReentryReentry |
Author: Great Britain. HM Inspectorate of Probation Title: Aggregate Report: Offender Management Inspection 2009-2012 Summary: • This report provides aggregate findings across the nine English Regions and Wales from HMI Probation’s second round of Offender Management Inspections (OMI 2) which was completed in November 2012. The findings in this report cover the 36 Probation Trust areas1 inspected in the programme and are based on close scrutiny of representative samples of cases in each area. • Overall, these findings indicate that a great deal of good work is being undertaken with adult offenders, but that there remains scope for further improvement in specific aspects. • On the main “headline” elements of work inspected in OMI 2: o on average, HMI Probation judged that 75% of work to keep each offender’s risk of harm to others to a minimum was of a sufficiently high level of quality o on average, HMI Probation judged that 74% of work to make each individual less likely to reoffend was of a sufficiently high level of quality o on average, HMI Probation judged that 79% of compliance and enforcement work (aimed at ensuring that each individual offender serves their sentence) was of a sufficiently high level of quality For each of these elements there were considerable gaps between the highest and lowest scores between individual Trust areas, but no Trust received a score which required a reinspection. • In 74% of all cases (and in 79% of high risk of harm cases) all reasonable action was taken to keep risk of harm to others to a minimum. • In 66% of all cases (but in 79% of high risk of harm cases), risk of harm to identifiable, or potentially identifiable, victims was effectively managed. • In only 51% of all cases (but in 71% of high risk of harm cases) was there management involvement in child safeguarding issues. • In 81% of all cases, interventions were delivered according to the requirements of the sentence. • In 76% of all cases, constructive interventions encouraged and challenged the offender to take responsibility for their actions and decisions related to offending, while in the community. • In 85% of all cases, effective action had, where necessary, been taken to secure compliance with all interventions. • In 76% of all cases (and in 84% of high risk of harm cases), breach action or recall was instigated on all occasions when required. • In general, the quality of work with cases assessed as high risk of harm was better than that for all cases as a whole. • When analysed by diversity characteristics, there was no evidence of any major difference in quality of work by gender, ethnicity, or reported disability. However, where there were differences, in respect of age, there was evidence that some aspects of work were done sufficiently well with older offenders somewhat more often than with younger adult offenders. Details: London: HM IOnspectorate of Probation, 2013. 74p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 26, 2013 at: http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/publications/inspectorate-reports/hmiprobation/adult-inspection-reports/omi2/omi2-aggregate-findings-feb-2013.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/publications/inspectorate-reports/hmiprobation/adult-inspection-reports/omi2/omi2-aggregate-findings-feb-2013.pdf Shelf Number: 127718 Keywords: Offender ManagementOffender SupervisionProbation Supervision (U.K.)Probationers |
Author: Clinks Title: Integrated Offender Management Cymru All Wales Youth to Adult Transition Model Summary: This report summarises the views of criminal justice and Voluntary, Community and Social Enterprise (VCSE) Sector practitioners working in Wales. These stakeholders were asked about their views in relation to service provision for young adults (16-25 year olds) in the Criminal Justice System (CJS), and specifically how Integrated Offender Management (IOM) could be utilised to support a new approach. The IOM Cymru board initiated this work to establish how an all-Wales IOM strategy could support young adults (16-25 years old) in the CJS. Young adults were recognized by IOM Cymru as a priority group within the system, with distinct needs, for whom a number of gaps exist between youth and adult services. This report has been written by Clinks (www.clinks.org) and is supported by Transitions to Adulthood Alliance (www.t2a.org.uk), a broad coalition of organisations and individuals that promotes the need for a distinct and radically different approach to young adults in the CJS. The views and opinions represented are that of practitioners from across Sectors who work with young adults in the CJS. Over 200 practitioners attended three events, as well as three separate online surveys targeted at different stakeholders providing a further 48 responses. The responses from practitioners and service managers provided us with two broad strands of information: - an overview of young adult services, and - the role of IOM in supporting young adults. These two strands have provided Clinks and IOM Cymru with a wide range of existing good practice, some clearly identified development needs, a view on the role IOM Cymru could play in designing services, and how IOM could practically deliver targeted services for young adults. We have supplied 17 recommendations as a result of the consultation exercise. These represent an opportunity to improve services for young people in their transition to adulthood, hopefully diverting them away from crime and helping them to positively contribute to their communities and wider society. There is overwhelming support from practitioners for a new approach that recognises young adults as an important and distinct service user group. Much can be achieved without the need for legislative change and without the need for large-scale investment in new services. They look at an approach which is about inter-agency cooperation, better service design, responsive approaches, a better understanding of maturity and how to support clients transitioning from youth to adult services which so often radically differ from one another. It is also clear that IOM is seen as a good vehicle through which to implement a different, multi-agency, and more coherent approach to supporting young adults in the CJS. The recommendations in this report are intended to spur on change in Wales. We recommend that stakeholders with an interest in the young adult agenda consider their priorities in relation to this report's recommendations and assign appropriate resources to assist in the undertaking of these activities. This will require human resources to take forward, and if possible should not be left to chance but should invest in the development of better services at this early stage in the development of IOM services for young adults so as to ensure the best possible outcome. Details: London: Clinks, 2013. 21p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 31, 2014 at: http://www.t2a.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Clinks_2013_IOM__young-adults-in-Wales_CONSULTATION.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.t2a.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Clinks_2013_IOM__young-adults-in-Wales_CONSULTATION.pdf Shelf Number: 131817 Keywords: Offender ManagementOffender RehabilitationYoung Adult Offenders |
Author: Clancy, Anna Title: Defining and Profiling Serial Domestic Abuse Perpetrators: An All-Wales Feasibility Review. Interim Report Summary: The Integrated Offender Management (IOM) Cymru partnership commissioned this research to investigate the feasibility of developing a shared definition and common multi-agency recording process for serial domestic abuse perpetrators across Wales. This report sets out findings from phase one of the research which included a qualitative mapping exercise (interviews with Police, Probation, and third sector agency representatives) along with a quantitative analysis of n=6642 anonymised domestic abuse perpetrator records provided by Wales Probation Trust. The qualitative evidence obtained for this report indicated substantial variability within and across agencies, which undoubtedly impacts upon the way in which serial abusers are identified, targeted and managed across Wales: - The four Welsh police forces have a definition of serial domestic abuse in place, but each varies slightly, as do their recording systems and reporting processes. - The data currently held by Probation do not enable 'serial perpetrators' to be easily identified, and the two IT systems used by Wales Probation Trust to manage information about domestic abuse perpetrators are not used consistently across Wales. - There is not currently a systematic process in place to ensure serial perpetrators are routinely identified and flagged across all relevant third sector agencies. The quantitative case files analysis indicated the following: - Roughly three-quarters of perpetrators fell into the 'medium' risk category (as defined in OASys or SARA). - MAPPA arrangements were in place for only a small proportion (17.5%). - Analysis of the risk judgments indicated significant variation across Wales (e.g., some regions had twice as many perpetrators deemed to be at 'high' risk). It is not possible to ascertain whether this reflects a true difference in the risk profile of perpetrators, or different assessment practices amongst Offender Managers across the regions, or a combination of these. Both the qualitative and the quantitative findings have implications for the feasibility of implementing a system for the routine identification of 'serial' domestic abuse perpetrators across Wales. The main recommendation arising from this research is that Police, National Offender Management Service (NOMS) in Wales, and third sector partners should work towards a commonly agreed definition of 'serial domestic abuse' and amend their recording systems so that these individuals may be easily identified (a full set of recommendations is provided at the end of this report). By developing an agreed profile and a shared definition of serial domestic abuse perpetrators, interventions and services can be targeted more effectively to reduce re-offending and protect victims. Details: Cardiff: Cardiff University, 2014. 51p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 16, 2014 at: http://orca.cf.ac.uk/63750/1/Clancy%20Robinson%20%26%20Hanks%20%282014%29%20Defining%20serial%20perpetrators%20report.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://orca.cf.ac.uk/63750/1/Clancy%20Robinson%20%26%20Hanks%20%282014%29%20Defining%20serial%20perpetrators%20report.pdf Shelf Number: 133959 Keywords: Domestic AbuseDomestic Violence (Wales)Family ViolenceOffender ManagementOffender ProfilingViolence Against Women |
Author: Western Australia. Office of the Auditor General Title: Implementing and Managing Community Based Sentences Summary: Background Community Based Orders and Intensive Supervision Orders are available to the courts for sentencing convicted off enders and are served in the community. They were established as part of a sentencing hierarchy by the Sentencing Act 1995. They are a low cost sentencing option, currently costing the State $12 per day per off ender as compared to $180 per day for imprisonment. They were expected to contribute to reducing imprisonment rates and to enable the punitive and rehabilitative aspects of sentences to be more effective. In 2000 nearly 4000 such sentences were issued to both first time offenders and repeat offenders who had been convicted of a variety of offences from robbery to drink driving offences. What the examination found... Western Australia's imprisonment rate continues to be higher than that of most States and Territories. About 60 per cent of Community Based Orders and about 50 per cent of Intensive Supervision Orders issued each year are completed. These completion rates are lower than those for most other states and territories. Off enders assessed as having a high risk of re-off ending have a lower completion rate (42 per cent) than other off enders (70 per cent). The Ministry of Justice does not have a comprehensive strategy for rehabilitating off enders and the rehabilitative effects of the sentences are not known. The management of treatment programs, the main ingredient for rehabilitating off enders is ad hoc and inconsistent with little or no coordination of the internal and external program providers. Case management is not achieving its objective of being an integrated process for managing offenders. Although the Ministry collects a variety of information about offenders this information is not always analysed and utilized in planning services to enable more targeted service provision. Both the overall number of offenders on these orders, as well as the proportion of high-risk offenders, has increased since the Sentencing Act was implemented without any review of resourcing. Managing offenders is a specialised function that requires considerable experience for effective service provision. Many Community Corrections Officers employed on short-term contracts, are inexperienced and carry heavy caseloads. There is a risk that inexperienced staff can make poor judgements, which could impact negatively on the off ender and the community. While there are a plethora of processes, practices and programs in the management of offenders, the Ministry does not regularly evaluate them. Therefore, it is not known whether these processes, practices and programs benefit or hinder their management. What the examination recommended... Major recommendations made in the report are that: The Ministry of Justice should: Systematically collect and evaluate information about the characteristics of offenders to enable more informed planning. Develop a comprehensive rehabilitation strategy for offenders in the community. Define the aims of rehabilitation and develop and implement appropriate performance indicators to assess the rehabilitative benefits of orders. Regularly review resource allocations in relation to the demands presented by the changing characteristics of offenders. Evaluate their services regularly with a view to ensuring their appropriateness and effectiveness. -- Develop and implement a human resource management plan that ensures a stable and well-trained workforce. Identify and endorse appropriate benchmarks for the workloads of Community Correction Officers and other staff to enable meaningful development performance measures for their work. Details: Perth: Western Australia Auditor General, 2001. 56p. Source: Internet Resource: Report No. 3: Accessed August 26, 2015 at: https://audit.wa.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/report2001_03.pdf Year: 2001 Country: Australia URL: https://audit.wa.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/report2001_03.pdf Shelf Number: 136591 Keywords: Community Based CorrectionsCommunity CorrectionsCosts of CorrectionsIntensive SupervisionOffender ManagementOffender Supervision |
Author: Great Britain. Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Probation Title: Quality & Impact inspection: The effectiveness of probation work in the north of London Summary: This is our first inspection of adult probation services in the capital for some time. It is not yet comprehensive – in that on this occasion we inspected in eight boroughs in the north of London, and will return to inspect other London quadrants next year and beyond. Meanwhile we hope that our findings are of value to those responsible for probation services throughout the city. Delivering probation services in the capital is particularly challenging. The city has a diverse, mobile and relatively young population, living in 32 boroughs that each differ in the way they work with offenders. The work is unrelenting, with some 17% of all those under probation supervision nationally living in London . Probation services in London have long struggled with high workloads, and workload pressures have been a regular feature in the most notorious of cases where a supervised individual has committed a Serious Further Offence. We found the quality of work by the Community Rehabilitation Company (CRC) poor. There was some welcome good practice by individual officers and first-line managers but generally, practice was well below standard, with the public exposed unduly to the risk of harm in some cases despite lessons from the past. That is plainly not acceptable. A combination of unmanageable caseloads, inexperienced officers, extremely poor oversight and a lack of senior management focus and control meant some service users were not seen for weeks or months, and some were lost in the system altogether – something we alerted managers to early on in our inspection. This simple lack of management attention to basic attendance and supervision was the most striking and surprising finding, and again, not acceptable. Sadly and despite the heroic efforts of some staff, we found that there had been little or no likely impact on reducing reoffending. Staff were sometimes working long hours and were often 'fire-fighting' rather than enabled to deliver a professional service consistently or sufficiently well. We found the National Probation Service (NPS) delivering services better, but with plenty of room for improvement. The quality of work was mixed, but we were pleased to find that public protection work was satisfactory overall. The delivery of court services has been a rubbing point in the 'new world', and we found it stubbornly problematic here. Managers must resolve tensions between the two organisations, to improve court services. Details: Manchester: HM Inspectorate of Probation, 2016. 65p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 20, 2016 at: https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprobation/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2016/12/North-of-London-QI-Report.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprobation/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2016/12/North-of-London-QI-Report.pdf Shelf Number: 147781 Keywords: Offender ManagementProbationProbation CaseloadsProbation OfficersProbationers |
Author: Great Britain. Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Probation Title: Quality & Impact inspection: The effectiveness of probation work in York & North Yorkshire Summary: This inspection was the second in our new Quality & Impact inspection programme, designed to assess the effectiveness of work undertaken locally by probation services with people who have offended, to implement orders of the court, reduce reoffending, protect the public and safeguard the vulnerable. We found much to be commended and, indeed, it is a pleasure to present this report. Both the local Community Rehabilitation Company (CRC) and the National Probation Service (NPS) region had gone through significant change as a consequence of the government's national Transforming Rehabilitation programme. Nonetheless, staff had maintained a pragmatic approach to the day-to-day work, focusing on responding to risks of harm posed and supporting individuals to change their lives for the better. In effect, we saw 'business as usual', with less obvious evidence of the dissonance we have seen elsewhere. That said, there was also a real sense of innovation evident across both organisations. Staff showed initiative and persistence, with the CRC introducing new innovations to aid their working practice and extend available services for offenders. Managers were frustrated, however, by not being able to judge whether probation work was making a difference, since local reoffending data was not yet available to them, albeit the quality of work we saw boded well for successful outcomes. The organisations were working well together in the face of the long-standing challenge of delivering services across a large geographical area. Working arrangements between both organisations were generally effective, supported by open and cooperative relationships between staff at all levels of both organisations. The quality of much of the work we saw was good, save that the CRC's work to manage risk of harm was not sufficiently focused, in part due to the lack of routine management oversight of practitioners' work. In contrast, the NPS was managing risk of harm with rigour. The presence of a very large army barracks at Catterick created an unusual offender group of serving and former military personnel and their families. Although probation staff were experienced in managing such cases, poor information provision by the army to probation staff in cases led to confusion as to any interventions delivered by the army, and ongoing risks. We were surprised to find no formal communications process, given that the garrison was longstanding Details: Manchester: The Inspectorate, 2016. 64p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 20, 2016 at: https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprobation/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2016/08/York-North-Yorkshire-QI-170816.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprobation/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2016/08/York-North-Yorkshire-QI-170816.pdf Shelf Number: 146001 Keywords: Offender Management Probation Probation CaseloadsProbation Officers Probationers |
Author: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General, Audit Division Title: Audit of the Federal Bureau of Prisons' Management of Inmate Placements in Residential Reentry Centers and Home Confinement Summary: The Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) provides a variety of reentry programming to help incarcerated inmates successfully transition back into society. As part of its release preparation, BOP has the authority to place inmates in residential reentry centers (RRC), also known as halfway houses, and/or home confinement while serving the remainder of their sentences. BOP may determine that an inmate should not be placed into either an RRC or home confinement because, for example, the inmate poses a significant threat to the community. An inmate placed in an RRC and/or home confinement remains in BOP custody. RRCs provide a supervised environment that support inmates in finding employment and housing, completing necessary programming such as drug abuse treatment, participating in counseling, and strengthening ties to family and friends. Home confinement provides similar opportunities, but is used for inmates BOP believes do not need the structure provided by RRCs. Inmates placed in home confinement are monitored and are required to remain at home when not working or participating in release programing and other approved activities. Pursuant to the Second Chance Act of 2007, all federal inmates are eligible for RRC and home confinement placement. However, BOP's placement decisions are supposed to be driven by an individual assessment weighing an inmate's need for reentry services against the risk to the community. Inmates can be placed in RRCs for up to 12 months but can only spend a maximum of 6 months, or 10 percent of the term of imprisonment, whichever is shorter, in home confinement. In fiscal year 2015, the BOP spent $360 million on RRC and home confinement costs and, as of September 2016, BOP reported having 181 RRCs operated by 103 different contractors. The Office of the Inspector General assessed BOP’s RRC and home confinement programs, including its placement policy and practices, program capacity planning and management, and strategic planning and performance management. The audit covers inmates released from BOP custody from October 2013 through April 2016, either directly from BOP institutions, RRCs, or home confinement. Based on our analysis, we found that 94,252 inmates released from BOP custody during the scope of our audit were eligible for placement in an RRC and/or home confinement. BOP placed 79 percent of these eligible inmates into RRCs and/or home confinement - 75 percent were initially placed in RRCs and only 4 percent went directly into home confinement. The remaining 21 percent were released directly from a BOP institution. Our audit found that BOP's RRC and home confinement placement policies and guidance, which are designed to identify individual inmate risks and needs while simultaneously weighing these against the safety of the community and available resources, appear reasonable. In our judgment, the inmate's security level at the time of placement is the best indicator of inmate risk and need for transitional services because it incorporates key recidivism risk factors, as well the inmate's behavior during incarceration. As a result, we analyzed BOP’s RRC and home confinement placement practices based on the exit security level of inmates released from BOP custody during the scope of our audit. Our analysis determined that, contrary to BOP policy, BOP guidance, and relevant research, BOP's RRC and home confinement placement decisions are not based on inmate risk for recidivism or need for transitional services. Rather, we found that BOP is placing the great majority of eligible inmates into RRCs regardless of inmate risk for recidivism or need for transitional services, unless the inmate is deemed not suitable for such placement because the inmate poses a significant threat to the community. As a result, low-risk, low-need inmates are far more likely to be placed in RRCs than high-risk, high-need inmates. Specifically, we found that of the 94,252 inmates released between October 2013 and April 23, 2016, 90 percent of minimum security and 75 percent of low security inmates are placed in RRCs and/or home confinement. However, only 58 percent of high security level inmates were transitioned into the community through RRCs, while 42 percent were released into the community directly from a BOP institution. We recognize this may be a result of the fact that many of the high security inmates were considered a public safety risk. Nonetheless, at the time they would be placed in an RRC, on average these inmates are within 4 months of being released into the community upon completion of their sentence. Thus BOP must weigh the immediate risk of placing high-risk inmates in RRCs against the risk of releasing them back into society directly from BOP institutions without transitional reentry programming. It also appears that BOP is underutilizing direct home confinement placement as an alternative to RRC placement for transitioning low-risk, low-need inmates back into society. This underutilization of direct home confinement placement was evident when we reviewed data on placement of minimum and low security inmates and found that BOP placed only 6 percent of even those lower risk inmates directly into home confinement, despite BOP policy and guidance stating that direct home confinement placement is the preferred placement for low-risk, low-need inmates. This is particularly concerning given that BOP guidance, as well as the research cited in the guidance, indicates that low-risk inmates do not benefit from and may in fact be harmed by RRC placement because, among other things, of their exposure to high-risk offenders in those facilities. Moreover, the underutilization of direct home confinement for low-risk, low need inmates results in fewer RRC resources being available for high-risk, high-need inmates since the RRC inmate population is already at or in excess of BOP’s contracted capacity. In addition, this practice may also further strain high security BOP institutions that are already well above capacity. We found that, from October 2013 through March 2016, the RRC population has remained at about 101 percent of contracted capacity, while the home confinement population averaged nearly 159 percent of contracted monitoring capacity, despite BOP’s apparent underutilization of it as an alternative to RRC placement. The home confinement capacity issues resulted, at least in part, from BOP’s policy to aggressively pursue transitioning inmates from RRCs to home confinement as soon as possible in an effort to increase RRC capacity. This reduces the capacity for direct home confinement placements and, additionally, may result in inmates being transitioned from RRCs to home confinement too early, as evidenced by the fact that 17 percent of inmates were placed back into RRCs for violating home confinement program rules. We also found that BOP lacks adequate performance measures to evaluate the success of its RRC and home confinement programming. Although BOP has RRC and home confinement placement targets, these targets do not measure the effectiveness of RRC and home confinement programs. Additionally, the placement targets – 85 percent from minimum, 75 percent from low, 70 percent from medium, and 65 percent from high security level institutions – appear to encourage institutions to maximize the number of inmates placed in RRCs or home confinement, regardless of transitional need. In fact, the issues we identified with BOP’s current placement practices may be driven, in part, by its RRC and home confinement placement targets. The success of BOP’s RRC and home confinement programs relies on the quality of programming provided by its RRC contractors, all of whom also provide services to and monitor inmates in home confinement. However, we found that BOP’s policy for monitoring its RRC contractors focuses on assessing compliance with the contractual Statements of Work, rather than assessing the quality of services provided by the RRC contractors. Specifically, we did not identify any requirement that RRC contractors or BOP collect, retain, and report any statistics pertaining to RRC or home confinement program performance or success or failure rates. If these measures were available, BOP could then incorporate these figures into its strategic planning, which might assist it in assessing its programs and RRC contractors based on measurable qualitative achievements as opposed to simply trying to meet numerical quotas. Our report makes five recommendations to improve BOP’s management of inmate placements in RRCs and home confinement. Details: Washington, DC: Office of the Inspector General, 2016. 56p. Source: Internet Resource: Audit Division 17-01: Accessed December 21, 2016 at: https://oig.justice.gov/reports/2016/a1701.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: https://oig.justice.gov/reports/2016/a1701.pdf Shelf Number: 147774 Keywords: Federal Bureau of PrisonsHalfway HousesHome ConfinementOffender ManagementPrisoner ReentryResidential Facilities |
Author: Great Britain. Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Probation Title: Quality & Impact Inspection: The effectiveness of probation work in Kent Summary: In our March 2014 inspection of Kent we found much room for improvement in certain areas of practice, most notably assessment. Within the CRC in this inspection, we saw clear signs of improvement in some of the areas we had identified in the former Probation Trust as weak. The quality of practice overall was encouraging and (with the exception of the delivery of unpaid work) progress was noteworthy. In contrast, the quality of NPS work was mixed. Court work was being delivered to an acceptable standard, and court staff and sentencers we spoke with were content with the services being delivered. Despite this, we found an unacceptable level of cases being misallocated, meaning that offenders were too often supervised by the wrong organisation. The quality of assessments within the NPS was generally good, although subsequent work was too often insufficiently focused on addressing factors linked to risk of harm issues, and so risks to the public were not sufficiently well managed. Protecting the public CRC effectiveness We found that the assessment of the risk of serious harm individuals posed to others was generally undertaken to an acceptable standard. We found, however, that some staff managing cases that had the potential to cause significant harm did not have sufficient experience, training or managerial oversight. There had been severe and unacceptable delays in the delivery of some interventions, including the Building Better Relationships programme, designed to tackle domestic abuse. As a result, too many service users did not have an effective challenge to their behaviour quickly enough, to reduce promptly the risk of harm they posed. The situation was improving. NPS effectiveness At the pre-sentence stage, cases were generally assessed to an acceptable standard, with no noticeable difference between cases to be managed by the CRC or the NPS. There were clearly many staff with the necessary skills to work with the risk of harm NPS offenders posed, although not all staff were sufficiently alert to or focused on managing risk of harm. Nearly half of the responsible officers we interviewed felt that they had not had sufficient training to manage the cases for which they were responsible. We thought this proportion too high. Shortages in first-line managers compounded the problem, as responsible officers were not always receiving sufficient guidance or support. The CRC and NPS working together The CRC and NPS were generally working together well. There was a danger, however, that information was being lost due to insufficient NPS recording and/or onward communication of relevant information from court reports, particularly oral reports. Reducing reoffending CRC effectiveness Assessments of service users’ needs in relation to their offending behaviour were delivered to an acceptable standard in a high proportion of cases. Planning to address these needs was also sufficient in most cases. The CRC’s performance in reviewing cases, however, was poor. The organisation’s operating model necessitated the transfer of service users between two teams: the assessment team and the rehabilitation team. This could, in certain circumstances, have acted as a barrier to rehabilitation although staff were generally working hard to mitigate this possibility. Conversely, within resettlement teams the same teams of officers maintained contact with service users as they moved from custody into the community. Despite the fact there is no hard evidence of effectiveness as yet, we thought this practice looked promising. We found that there had been sufficient progress in delivering the necessary interventions within the first six months of the order in approximately half of the cases we inspected. The CRC acknowledged that not enough staff were trained to deliver programmes, and we found examples of unacceptably long waiting times for some programmes. Waiting times had reduced significantly in recent months. Substance misuse services in the county were in a state of flux at the time of the inspection. For the sample of cases we inspected, most individuals with drug or alcohol misuse needs could access an effective service. There were reasonable concerns, however, that this might not be so in future. NPS effectiveness Most pre-sentence reports were of an acceptable standard, although the lack of suitable IT equipment hindered the development of efficient practices. Feedback from sentencers and court staff indicated that those NPS staff working in courts were held in high regard. There was a problem, however, with the allocation of cases. We found several examples where staff had either not understood the complexities of the allocation procedure, or for some other reason had made errors of judgement. Overall, for cases managed by the NPS, we found that the assessment of individual offending-related needs was acceptable in a reasonable proportion of cases. Plans to tackle offending were usually sufficient. The delivery of interventions was more problematic; too many cases were being transferred between insufficiently trained temporary or inexperienced staff. This problem was compounded by a lack of oversight from middle managers who were themselves overstretched. The CRC and NPS working together Working relationships between CRC and NPS staff were generally positive. The CRC had produced high quality information leaflets about their services for courts, although NPS staff felt that there was a need for a more dynamic approach to the provision of information, so as to keep them abreast of developments within the CRC. Abiding by the sentence CRC effectiveness CRC effectiveness was mixed, but improving. The CRC had impressive arrangements to make sure that they listened to the needs of service users, captured their views and took seriously the feedback they received. There was also evidence that in most cases responsible officers had taken the time to engage offenders carefully, to establish what they wanted to achieve from probation, and to deliver interventions in ways that met their diverse individual needs. There was still work to be done, however, to better understand and deliver rehabilitation activity requirement days as intended by legislation, a common issue nationally. Most significantly, we found very poor performance with regard to the delivery of unpaid work. Despite the efforts that had been made, there had been insufficient progress on the recruitment of supervisors, leading to a totally unacceptable rate of ‘stand downs’. Consequently, offenders were sometimes prevented from abiding by the requirements of their sentence. As mentioned earlier, there were also delays in starting accredited programmes. NPS effectiveness NPS performance was acceptable. Assessments and plans drawn up by responsible officers were usually done in consultation with offenders and took account of their diverse needs. In most cases, there were good levels of contact offered and, where problems with compliance arose, these were usually dealt with effectively. The CRC and NPS working together Working relationships between CRC and NPS staff were generally positive. There was good communication between staff, and swift action taken to resolve any difficulties. Practitioners from both organisations worked together to solve problems, for example, in relation to the quality of breach reports. The problems the CRC had delivering unpaid work caused some tensions, as did the ‘fee for service’ arrangements where the CRC delivered interventions for NPS cases. Recommendations The Community Rehabilitation Company and National Probation Service should: 1. improve the exchange of information about sentencing options by supplementing the high quality information leaflets produced with other methods agreed locally 2. prepare a joint response to the health service commissioners of substance misuse services on the impact of changes in treatment opportunities. The Community Rehabilitation Company should: 3. make sure that the rate at which service users are ‘stood down’ from unpaid work placements is significantly reduced 4. monitor the waiting list for access to accredited programmes and make further progress in reducing waiting times 5. improve the availability of specialist provision for enhancing the educational, training and employment opportunities for service users 6. increase the management oversight of probation services officers, particularly during their initial training, so as to support their management of service users posing a medium risk of harm to others. The National Probation Service should: 7. seek a solution to the problems of the insufficient staff complement, recruitment and retention issues in Kent 8. make sure that the level of mis-allocations is reduced significantly 9. improve the quality of IT equipment available for use by court staff, and provide computer hardware and software that enables local staff to more easily access national online training packages 10. make sure that all new staff, whether employed directly or via an agency, have access to sufficient training to enable them to undertake the work they are given. Details: Manchester: The Inspectorate, 2016. 63p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed December 21, 2016 at: https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprobation/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2016/10/Kent-QI.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprobation/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2016/10/Kent-QI.pdf Shelf Number: 147794 Keywords: Offender Management Probation Probation CaseloadsProbation Officers Probationers |
Author: Great Britain. HM Chief Inspector of Prisons Title: Report on an unannounced inspection of HMP Exeter Summary: HMP Exeter is a category B local prison that accepts all adult and young offenders committed to prison by the courts in Devon, Cornwall and Somerset. Prisoners are also sent to Exeter from further afield, and at the time of this inspection there were 490 being held there. This inspection found that there had been a clear decline in outcomes for prisoners in three of the four healthy prison tests. The symptoms of this decline were clear to see. The number of violent incidents was far higher than at other local prisons and than at the time of our previous inspection. Too many prisoners felt unsafe in the prison, there were high levels of self-harm and there were serious concerns about some aspects of health care provision. Prisoners spent too much time locked in their cells, so that too few managed to take part in activities, and there were some real weaknesses in offender management. Nevertheless, we were impressed by the determination of the management team to lead the staff in delivering a service to prisoners in what were undoubtedly challenging circumstances. It was clear that the biggest challenge facing the prison was that at the time of the inspection there were insufficient staff to run a predictable and resilient regime. We were told that the prison was suffering a shortfall of 13 prison officers and that on the penultimate day of the inspection there were only 29 officers on duty. This situation was apparently exacerbated by the long recruitment process for new staff, which far exceeds the notice period for departing members and means that there is no prospect of immediate respite. Both the governor and chair of the IMB separately expressed frustration at the delays caused by the recruitment process. The prison had also lost staff to other local employers, including Devon and Cornwall Constabulary. The line between what was safe for prisoners and staff and what would be unsafe was a narrow one, and the management team at Exeter had to make fine judgements around this on a daily basis. The inspection found that the staff shortage was having a tangible effect on outcomes for prisoners, with too many unable to attend education or activities. We carefully considered whether the management team could have done more to mitigate the impact of staff shortages, and although there were some issues that were not directly related to this matter and could be addressed, it was difficult to see how outcomes could have been significantly better given the staffing shortfalls. If the shortage of staff provided the backdrop to the difficulties at HMP Exeter, the foreground was filled by the challenges of drugs, violence and prisoners suffering from mental health issues. These were, of course, intertwined, and each in their own way was exacerbated by the impact of staff shortages. Despite all these difficulties, the details of which are set out in the body of this report, it is notable that prisoners told us that the staff treated them with respect, and it was clear to us that the relationship between prisoners and staff was fundamentally sound. It was to the enormous credit of senior managers and staff alike that they were persisting in their determination to do what they could to provide a decent and respectful environment for the men in their care. However, there was a real and troubling concern that the situation at HMP Exeter was fragile. The reality was that outcomes for prisoners had declined markedly since the previous inspection. Unless the regime at the establishment could be improved, violence reduced and the prevalence of drugs and other contraband addressed, further declines would be almost inevitable. Details: London: HM Chief Inspector of Prisons, 2017. 121p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 6, 2017 at: https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprisons/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2017/01/Exeter-Web-2016.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprisons/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2017/01/Exeter-Web-2016.pdf Shelf Number: 140835 Keywords: Correctional Administration Offender ManagementPrison Administration Prison Conditions Prison Health Prison Violence Prisons |
Author: Great Britain. Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Probation Title: Quality & Impact inspection: The effectiveness of probation work in Greater Manchester Summary: The two organisations providing probation services in Greater Manchester were working well in some respects, but needed to do more to reduce reoffending, said Dame Glenys Stacey, HM Chief Inspector of Probation. The Community Rehabilitation Company (CRC) also needed to do more to protect the public, she added. Today she published the report of a recent inspection of probation work in Greater Manchester. The inspection looked at the quality of probation work carried out by the CRC and the National Probation Service (NPS) and assessed the effectiveness of work undertaken locally with people who have offended. Overall, the quality of the Cheshire and Greater Manchester's CRC's work was mixed. The CRC is applying the same innovative way of working in each of the five CRCs it owns, based on solid research into what makes people turn away from crime. Despite this, leaders were finding it hard to embed in practice. Public protection work was not good enough because policies and procedures, though commendable, were not being applied consistently enough by frontline staff to protect actual or potential victims from the risk of harm. Sickness absence rates were high in the CRC and individual caseloads had been large in the months before the inspection. This led to cases moving from one Responsible Officer to another, making it difficult to keep hold of the meaningful relationships so central to good rehabilitative work and reducing reoffending. Extra staff had recently been recruited, which should improve the quality of work and staff morale. The CRC was delivering impressive services for women, supported by additional funding from the Police and Crime Commissioner. In common with other regions, the NPS had experienced less change and was more settled. Staff morale was relatively high and good core work to protect the public was carried out, though there was more to do on delivering rehabilitation work consistently. Inspectors made recommendations which included the NPS accessing the range of accredited and non-accredited programmes and services on offer from the CRC to reduce reoffending, and the CRC providing all staff, and especially new staff, with regular supervision and training. The CRC should also improve the effectiveness of the management of unpaid work. Details: Manchester, UK: HM Inspectorate of Probation, 2016. 77p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 16, 2017 at: https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprobation/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2017/02/Greater-Manchester-QI-report-final2.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprobation/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2017/02/Greater-Manchester-QI-report-final2.pdf Shelf Number: 146276 Keywords: Offender Management Probation Probation CaseloadsProbation Officers Probationers |
Author: Jackman, Ralph Title: Measuring harm in a cohort of sex offenders in Norfolk Summary: The study aims to describe the characteristics of sex offenders living in the community in Norfolk, examine the offences they have committed and the harm they have caused. Existing methods of establishing the risks posed by sex offenders and the match between these and offender harm are critically evaluated with a view to providing insights into how the management of such offenders may be improved. It is based on police records and data from the national Sex Offender Register for a sample of 1098 sex offenders registered in Norfolk Constabulary jurisdiction during April 2014. The number of days each offender was sentenced to imprisonment is used to provide measures of cumulative harm and of average harm per offence. Most offenders had committed offences classified as causing low or medium levels of harm. However, a third had a history of serious sex offending, and were responsible for inflicting 80% of the combined harm through prior sex offending. These offenders were more versatile in terms of offending, committing a wider range of crimes, both sexual and non-sexual offences. In addition, the more harmful offenders were those who offended against all categories of victim; adult, victim and image related offending. Those who committed less serious offences, such as indecent exposure were less versatile. While twice as many serious sex offenders are imprisoned as are living in the community, the latter represent over an eighth of the sex offender sample living at home and are the responsibility of Norfolk Constabulary Offender Managers. Tools that predict risk of reconviction, rather than harm, are currently used in Norfolk, as in other UK police jurisdictions, for determining the minimum number of visits received by sex offenders living in the community. Offenders who have committed serious offences and caused greater harm receive fewer visits because they are assessed as having lower risks of reconviction than those who have committed less harmful, minor sex offences. The study examines the evidence and rationale for using the harm offenders have caused as well as reconviction risk to guide offender management regimes. Details: Cambridge, UK: Fitzwilliam College, 2015. 132p. Source: Internet Resource: Thesis: Accessed April 7, 2017 at: http://www.crim.cam.ac.uk/alumni/theses/Ralph%20Jackman.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.crim.cam.ac.uk/alumni/theses/Ralph%20Jackman.pdf Shelf Number: 144740 Keywords: Offender ManagementRecidivism Reconviction Sex Crimes Sex Offenders |
Author: Great Britain. Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Probation Title: The Implementation and Delivery of Rehabilitation Activity Requirements Summary: When making a community or suspended sentence order, a court may include a rehabilitation activity requirement - that is, a requirement that the defendant participates in activity to reduce the prospect of reoffending. Rehabilitation activity requirements are commonly known as RARs. RARs were introduced in 2015. Formerly, court orders used to specify both the nature of an activity to be undertaken and the number of days, but now only the maximum number of days of activity need be specified. This allows for the precise activity to be determined following a more in-depth assessment after sentence and allocation to probation services, and amended subsequently if needs be. An activity day can be of any duration, from less than an hour up to one day, according to the length of the session. The considerations the court should take into account in deciding the maximum number of RAR days for any individual are not set out in legislation, but the enabling Act2 makes clear that the primary purpose of RARs is rehabilitation. The court should also take into account the nature of the offending, as RARs can have functions other than rehabilitation, and indeed the order can also include other punitive requirements (for example unpaid work). In legislating for RARs, the government aimed to ensure flexible and efficient use of sentencing so as to reduce reoffending, as it sought to encourage innovative work under new arrangements for delivering probation services, introduced at about the same time. RARs in practice RARs have taken centre stage in community sentencing for rehabilitation, and having superseded supervision and activity requirements, as intended, they are now the vehicle for most rehabilitative activity. Orders requiring specific programmes of intervention (known as accredited programmes, deemed to be effective in reducing the likelihood of reoffending) and also alcohol, drug and mental health treatments are much less common. As RARs were introduced, established Probation Trusts were disbanded and new organisations - Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRCs) and a National Probation Service (NPS) - created to deliver probation services. The transition has been challenging, and performance so far is variable. In our routine inspections we are finding the quality of NPS work acceptable by and large (but there are notable exceptions and shortfalls) whereas CRCs are often struggling to deliver quality work consistently well. Generally, we are finding CRCs with high, variable or changing caseloads for some professional staff, and insufficient attention given so far to staff supervision and quality assurance. Other common shortcomings include inadequate assessment or subsequent management of the risk of harm to others, inadequate or inconsistent supervision of service users, and - of particular relevance here - insufficient purposeful intervention likely to reduce an individual's likelihood of reoffending. The change to new arrangements has been very demanding, and to compound matters, workload shortfalls have led to financial constraints and uncertainties for CRCs and a reluctance to commit to the settled arrangements with other providers needed to support RAR and other delivery. Information is not collected on the distribution of RAR orders (as between CRCs and the NPS) but the CRCs carry the bulk of these cases. This is the context for our inspection of RARs. Details: London: HMIP, 2017. 58p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 6, 2017 at: https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprobation/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2017/02/Report-Rehabilitation-Activity-Requirement-Thematic-final.pdf Year: 2017 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprobation/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2017/02/Report-Rehabilitation-Activity-Requirement-Thematic-final.pdf Shelf Number: 145339 Keywords: Offender ManagementOffender RehabilitationProbationProbationers |
Author: Stewart, Lynn Title: Reliability and Validity of the Dynamic Factors Identification and Analysis-Revised Summary: In the Correctional Service of Canada (CSC) the Dynamic Factors Identification and Analysis-Revised (DFIA-R) component of the Offender Intake Assessment (OIA) assesses the criminogenic needs of all offenders on seven key domains. Research has demonstrated that the former version of this tool (the DFIA) reliably predicted outcomes for men, women, and Indigenous offenders (Brown & Motiuk, 2005). This report describes the psychometric properties of the revised version of the tool. The population of federal offenders with at least one DFIA-R assessment was obtained through the Offender Management System (24,798 men (23% Indigenous) and 1,368 women (37% Indigenous)). Of this group, 16,743 men and 992 women were released and had follow-up data allowing examination of the relationship of the ratings with community outcomes. Analyses of the overall DFIA-R need rating included the assessment of the internal consistency of the measure, the prevalence of the ratings across group, the extent to which the domain ratings changed over time, which indicators and domains were most strongly related to the overall ratings, and the relationship of overall need rating, the domain ratings, and indicators with revocation. Analyses were disaggregated by gender and Indigenous ancestry when possible. Results indicated that the majority of men and women were rated as having high overall needs (64% of men and 59% of women) with more Indigenous men and women assessed as high needs. The domains with the highest ratings across groups were Substance Abuse, Personal/Emotional, and, for non-Indigenous men, the Attitudes domain. The internal consistency of all the DFIA-R indicators was high on all seven domains meaning the indicators are related within each domain. Many of DFIA-R indicators had moderate to strong associations with the overall DFIA-R need rating for all offender groups. In particular, indicators relating to anger, aggression, and frustration were strongly related to the overall need rating. The Attitude, Personal/Emotional, and Substance Abuse domains were most influential in producing a high overall need rating for all groups. In addition, the Employment/Education domain was influential for women. Increases in the overall DFIA-R need rating were associated with higher rates of revocations and, for men, with higher rates of revocations with an offence. When comparing the predictive ability of the overall DFIA-R need rating to the overall static risk rating, the DFIA-R proved to be a stronger predictor of both revocations and revocations with an offence. All individual domain ratings were related to any revocation for all groups. Some domains were more dynamic than others; for example, while ratings for Substance Abuse and Associates changed over the period of incarceration with most offenders whose ratings changed being reassessed at a lower need, the Community Functioning domain ratings were largely stable. Together, these results confirm that the DFIA-R is useful both as a case management tool that profiles the needs of individual offenders and the population as a whole, and as a risk prediction tool for men, women, and Indigenous offenders. Details: Ottawa: Correctional Service Canada, 2017. 165p. Source: Internet Resource: 2017 No. R-395: Accessed November 17, 2017 at: http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2017/scc-csc/PS83-3-395-eng.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Cameroon URL: http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2017/scc-csc/PS83-3-395-eng.pdf Shelf Number: 148208 Keywords: Aboriginal Offenders Female Offenders Offender ManagementRevocation Risk Assessment Women Offender |
Author: MacDonald, Shanna Farrell Title: Patterns of Suspension Warrants Summary: The successful reintegration of offenders into the community and public safety remain top priorities for correctional staff, researchers, and policy makers alike. Currently, there is a large amount of research that has focused on the identification of offender characteristics related to success or failure within the community. However, little research has examined the temporary suspension of community supervision and why some supervision periods are reinstated while others are revoked. The present study aims to contribute to an improved understanding of the reasons behind suspensions, as well as their final outcomes. This study included all supervision suspension warrants for federal offenders that occurred between April 1, 2009 and March 31, 2014. In total, 29,388 suspension warrants were identified, representing 16,032 distinct offenders. The rate of suspension was 1.3 suspensions per offender. Most suspension warrants were issued for men while one-quarter were issued for Aboriginal offenders. All data were obtained from the Correctional Service of Canada's (CSC) administrative database - the Offender Management System. Information concerning the final outcome of the suspension, the reasons for issuing the suspension warrant, the frequency of contact between the offender and the community parole officer at the time of the suspension, and the types of parole conditions in place at the time of the suspension were explored. In addition, patterns across fiscal years and regions were examined, and findings were disaggregated by gender and Aboriginal ancestry. During the study period, the rate of suspension was 755 suspensions per 1,000 offenders under supervision (CSC, 2015). Almost half (48%) of suspension warrants resulted in a revocation of the offender's release, while 29% were cancelled by CSC and 22% were cancelled by the PBC.1 On average, suspension warrants were resolved in 68 days, although there was variation by suspension outcome (18 days to 97 days). Overall, almost two-thirds (59%) of warrants were issued due to the breach of the terms of the offender's supervision period; about half were due to a breach of specific release conditions (26%) or failing to report (23%). Distinct patterns across fiscal year and by region, gender, and Aboriginal ancestry were evident. The current study provides an examination of the patterns and outcomes of supervision period suspensions among federal offenders. A better understanding of the current patterns of suspension warrants may inform case management and community planning strategies as well as inform population management initiatives both in custody and in the community. Future research could examine the characteristics of offenders and behavioural indicators that lead to suspensions and the various suspension outcomes. As well, future research examining the use of alternatives to suspensions would be beneficial. Details: Ottawa: Correctional Service of Canada, 2015. 30p. Source: Internet Resource: 2015 No. R-368: Accessed November 17, 2017 at: http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2017/scc-csc/PS83-3-368-eng.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Canada URL: http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2017/scc-csc/PS83-3-368-eng.pdf Shelf Number: 148209 Keywords: Community SupervisionConditional ReleaseOffender ManagementOffender SupervisionRevocationSuspension Warrants |
Author: Keown, Leslie-Anne Title: Ethnocultural Offenders: An Initial Investigation of Social History Variables at Intake Summary: Little research specific to federally-sentenced ethnocultural offenders exists and, of what does exist, none has focused on offenders' social history. Social history - which refers to experiences of the individual, family, or community, and can also include intergenerational impacts of earlier experiences - has been recognized as important in judicial and correctional decision-making and offender management. The current study aimed to begin to explore the issue of social history among ethnocultural offenders by leveraging readily-available data on life experiences and pre-incarceration background collected as part of the offender intake process. Data were available for 725 ethnocultural offenders in eight areas: criminal history, community functioning, education and employment, attitudes, associates, substance use, marital and family, and personal/emotional. Of the ethnocultural offenders, about half were Black and the remainder were categorized as East / South East Asian, Arab / West Asian, Hispanic / Latin, South Asian, and "other". In order to contextualize findings specific to ethnocultural offenders, results were also provided for 2,643 White and 945 Aboriginal offenders. Results were also presented by ethnocultural subgroup. In situating findings, it is important to note that there was as much variability within the ethnocultural population as across groups. That said, differences did emerge between the groups. In particular, ethnocultural offenders had less extensive prior criminal histories and were much less likely to be identified as having problematic substance use patterns than White and Aboriginal offenders. Taken together with results from previous research that ethnocultural offenders tend to be assessed as presenting lower levels of risk and criminogenic need, these results suggest that ethnocultural offenders may have less established criminality than their White and Aboriginal counterparts. Results also suggested that the areas where ethnocultural offenders might most benefit from intervention may differ from those most pertinent for White and Aboriginal offenders. For instance, the rate of suspected gang affiliation among ethnocultural offenders was about twice that of White offenders while, as mentioned, rates of problematic substance were much lower among ethnocultural offenders. Overall, the present study was among only a handful to-date to examine ethnocultural federally-sentenced offenders, and was perhaps the first to comprehensively examine previous life experiences and pre-incarceration background. As such, it contributes importantly to our understanding of this population and to our understanding of the possible role of social history factors in ethnocultural offenders' criminal offending. In addition to simply increasing knowledge, the study may also act as a spring-board in eliciting discussions and information sharing regarding both individual offenders' life experiences and possible reasons for the differences between ethnocultural, White, and Aboriginal offenders. Details: Ottawa: Correctional Service of Canada, 2015. 43p. Source: Internet Resource: 2015 No. R-362: Accessed November 17, 2017 at: http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2017/scc-csc/PS83-3-362-eng.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Canada URL: http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2017/scc-csc/PS83-3-362-eng.pdf Shelf Number: 148212 Keywords: Aboriginal OffendersEthnic MinoritiesLife HistoriesMinority OffendersOffender ManagementOffender Supervision |
Author: Bartels, Lorana Title: Swift, Certain and Fair: Does Project HOPE Provide a Therapeutic Paradigm for Managing Offenders? Summary: This book presents a detailed analysis of Hawaii's Opportunity Probation with Enforcement (HOPE) program. Developed by Judge Steven Alm in Hawaii in 2004, this model of 'swift, certain and fair' justice has been widely adopted across the United States. The book argues that although HOPE has principally been viewed in terms of its deterrent impact, it is in fact best understood through the lens of therapeutic jurisprudence and solution-focused courts, especially drug courts. Bartels presents a detailed overview of HOPE's operation, as well as a critical assessment of the evaluation findings of HOPE and other programs based on this model. Crucially, the book draws on observational research to demonstrate that much of the commentary on HOPE has been based on misunderstandings about the program, and Bartels ultimately provides much-needed in-depth analysis of critiques of the HOPE model. A rigorous study which concludes by identifying key issues for jurisdictions considering implementing the model and areas for future research, this book will be of special interest to scholars of criminal justice, recidivism and drug-related issues. Details: Cham, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017.237p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 17, 2018 at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3125644 Year: 2017 Country: United States URL: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3125644 Shelf Number: 150250 Keywords: Offender ManagementOffender RehabilitationOffender SupervisionProbationProject HOPE |
Author: Padfield, Nicola Title: Understanding Recall 2011 Summary: The primary aim of this small project was to increase understanding of the prisoner recall process. The two specific research questions were: 1) Are the reasons for recall clearly understood (both by prisoners and those who work in the criminal justice system)?; 2) What can be done to reduce the number of prisoners recalled to prison? Forty-six prisoners (36 men and 10 women) were interviewed in two local prisons about their experience of being recalled to prison. These prisoners were serving a wide variety of sentences, from life (3), extended sentences (9), to less than 2 years (10). At the same time, a wider 'snap-shot' of recall was obtained by a review of 129 prisoners' files, and context-setting interviews were held with a number of probation and NOMS staff Details: Cambridge, UK: Institute of Criminology; University of Cambridge - Faculty of Law, 2013. 55p. Source: Internet Resource: University of Cambridge Faculty of Law Research Paper No. 2/2013: Accessed June 21, 2018 at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2201039 Year: 2013 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2201039 Shelf Number: 150620 Keywords: Conditional Release Offender ManagementPrisoner Recall Probation Revocations |
Author: Valentine, Erin Jacobs Title: Implementing the Next Generation of Parole Supervision: Findings from the Changing Attitudes and Motivation in Parolees Pilot Study Summary: One strategy for addressing persistently high recidivism rates among individuals leaving prison is to incorporate interventions into the parole supervision process. This paper presents findings from the Changing Attitudes and Motivation in Parolees (CHAMPS) study, which examined the implementation of a pilot of one parole-based intervention, known as the Next Generation of Parole Supervision (NG), in three sites: Dallas, Denver, and Des Moines. NG is intended to improve parolee outcomes by enhancing parole officers' knowledge and the strategies they use during their regular supervision meetings with parolees. The study uses a range of qualitative and quantitative data, including assessments of the knowledge and skills of parole officers who were trained in NG and a second group of officers who represented business-as-usual supervision, to assess the implementation of NG. Results from the study show that, while there was some variation across sites, parole officers in the CHAMPS sites generally already knew many of the concepts that were part of NG, and changes to officers' supervision practices were limited. Only in Dallas did NG-trained parole officers exhibit practices that were substantially different from those observed among untrained officers, perhaps because the Dallas parole agency's supervision culture and parole officer training started out least aligned with NG, allowing more room for change. The results in Dallas also suggest that coaching may be important to successfully implementing an intervention that involves changing parole officers' skills and practices. While NG-trained parole officers exhibited small changes in their supervision practices early in the study period, there were more noticeable changes once coaching was introduced. However, despite coaching for the entire study period in Des Moines and Denver, little change was observed there, suggesting that the presence of a coach is not sufficient to lead to change. Overall, this study shows that parole officers are amenable to training and coaching to help them improve their supervision practices, but that consistent implementation can be challenging. Details: New York: MDRC, 2018. 45p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 21, 2018 at: https://www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/CHAMPS_full%20report_FINAL_0.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/CHAMPS_full%20report_FINAL_0.pdf Shelf Number: 150630 Keywords: Offender ManagementParole Officer TrainingParole SupervisionParoleesPrisoner ReentryRecidivism |
Author: McGuire, James Title: Understanding Prison Violence: A Rapid Evidence Assessment Summary: The occurrence of violent assault in prison is a challenging problem. This Analytical Summary reports the findings of a rapid evidence assessment (REA) into the causes of physically violent assaults by male adult prisoners. The REA reviewed 97 research studies published since 1st January 2000. Key findings - Most of the published research is focused on imported characteristics - the personal characteristics of men who are violent in prison - and attempts to predict who they will be. Imported characteristics associated with prison violence include youth, history of earlier violence in prison or with violent convictions, membership of gangs, low self-control, anger, temper, mental health problems, and antisocial attitudes and personality. - The prison environment also plays a considerable role in how prisoners behave. Physically poor conditions, highly controlling regimes, or by contrast circumstances in which rules are unevenly applied or not adhered to or where prisoners do not experience staff decisions as fair or legitimate, can each heighten tensions and induce stresses potentially giving rise to conflict and assault. - Perhaps surprisingly, evidence that crowding in and of itself was a direct cause of violence was fairly weak. Research suggested that the effects of crowding are mediated through staff-prisoner interactions and that the crucial factor in maintaining order is the availability and the skills of unit staff. - Some features of prison activity make violence less likely. Places within a prison where prisoners are engaged in purposeful activities they consider valuable, such as workshops and education, are less prone to be sites of aggression. Violence is more likely to occur in places that offer less purpose, have fewer formal ground-rules, and lower staff oversight, such as cells. - A policy designed to reduce violence could be oriented towards situational control aspects of day-to-day prison management. That would require staff training in the use of styles and patterns of interaction that wield authority alongside instilling respect. Details: London: HM Prison and Probation Service: 2018. 9p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 7, 2018 at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/737956/understanding-prison-violence.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/737956/understanding-prison-violence.pdf Shelf Number: 151429 Keywords: Correctional Administration Offender ManagementPrison Administration Prison Conditions Prison Health Prison Violence Prisons |