On Being a PQiP

I can't really blame PQIPs for getting their degrees and buggering off. I was bullied in my PQIP, exploited because of too few staff; undertook tasks I was not expected to do, and was told that after the task had been completed. Told continuously about "what happens when you get 50 cases, if you can't handle 35 now"- I dunno, I'll jump out of a window. 

PQIP is hazing- like a fraternity testing your mettle to see if you can cut it so 35-50 cases is normalised not addressed as being too high a workload. Court placements where you're supposed to be protected and then used as auxiliary to paper over chronic staff shortages. Co-working cases that you're exploited to end up doing yourself- to circumvent the high risk cases not being allowed to be in a PQIP's name. 

Probation is it at war with itself let alone the prison service or the civil service. It does itself NO favours having this dire, exploitive work culture normalised by PQIP task setting. Many PQIPs are quite young. They can pick and chose what career path to take. They're clued up not to want to be exploited and bullied and they leave. Improve this culture and the purpose of Probation, which requires canny buy-ins from new recruits and you might have staff retention longer than the training programme or fewer drop outs. 

Probation is its own worst enemy. It's within its gift to improve those aspects of which I've mentioned. Or be dammed and doomed to repeat this cycle, ad infinitum.

*****
Many PQiPs' enter the Probation Service simply to achieve a free degree and then swan off to another role elsewhere. This has to stop. If PQiP's gain their degree, there should be some contractual obligation to stay within the service to recoup their investment or else make them pay for the degree course as they would if they had applied directly to University, via a student loan.

*****
In defence of PQiPs I don’t see them cynically gain their qualification to then swan off. I see people coming into our service, many of whom have high hopes and good hearts but they are seen almost from day one as the cavalry, there to rescue us from our terrible situation. Yet, they have condensed training, no mentors and SPOs/PDU heads pushing to allocate cases before they’ve even had the relevant training. I had a harrowing conversation with one who left with two months to qualify (passing everything, not failing the qualification) seen as a good colleague, she was broken. Went straight back to her old job, I’ve suggested she posts about her experience and wish she would.

*****
I’m amazed HMPPS hasn’t clocked the ‘free degree’ issue yet. They will soon, just as social workers, nurses etc now have student loans it won’t be long for the PQips.

*****
In my experience, PQIPs joined with the intention of probation being a career, not a free degree. That changed after 3 years as a red site with no serious solutions and a huge workload that didn't allow you to do a proper job, driving people out of the service, often to YOTs.

*****
When I questioned the workload I was basically told that it would get much worse and that if I couldn't handle it as a pqip then I should leave. I'm not surprised so many quit.

*****
I found my PQiP period to be absolutely fine, with a great deal of support from both my PTA and SPO. What it didn’t do, however, was prepare me for the onslaught of a WMT over 150% or the pressure of the inevitable SFO’s.

Relationship Theme Continued

I try to keep up, but am continually finding stuff I've somehow missed and never came across my radar at the time. Here's a case in point, an interview with Sonia Flynn the former probation CPO from 12 months ago. The subject of the relationship between probation officer and client is touched upon and I think it deserves a wider audience than the 503 views indicated on the YouTube post:-  

Usually on The Sit Down, we speak to someone who has been inside themselves or is close to someone who has. This episode is a little bit different, as we sit down with the outgoing Chief Probation Officer Sonia Flynn. The CPO is responsible for 18,000 probation workers across England and Wales – a role that Sonia has held since 2017. Here she reflects on her time on the role, answers questions about recall and MAPPA and tells us what she thinks needs to change.

--oo00oo--

I notice the relationship theme was enthusiastically expanded upon by regular contributor 'Getafix yesterday:-  

Everything, and I do mean everything in society is based on relationships. Relationships with family, work, money, food, substance misuse, health, absolutely everything is based on a relationship, and even those that try to withdraw from society are still left with the relationship that exists with themselves.

People are judged, defined, labelled and processed in society on the basis of their relationships with society. We are actually all the same, all that separates us is how society views our relationships with it.

Changing our lives inevitably means changing our relationships with the world, and turning away from the comfort of familiarity. That's as true for someone wanting to walk away from their job in probation as it is for someone wanting to give up drugs or leave a broken relationship.

When someone walks through the doors of probation, it's their relationships with society that's brought them there, and for probation to have any success with that person, they have to focus on how that persons relationship with society needs to change and what society needs to bring to that relationship to enable that change to happen.

I see the role of the probation officer as the arbitrator between the person on probation and society. That has to be a position based on trust and mutual respect. It's a position that requires the arbitrator to be given the autonomy to look for and find the solutions required.
It's a position that at its fundamental basis needs to be based on the relationship.

--oo00oo--

Also from yesterday, the following will be instantly recognisable to officers who joined during the period Sonia Flynn referred to in her early days:-

Qualifying in the early 90s my first job as a PO was in a North Midlands city. I worked in a purpose built Probation office built between the two housing estates we served. I regularly worked with the youth club, police, social care, job centre and Drs surgeries, all having their work places in the same estates. I could do home visits and people would occasionally stop for a chat or just say hello, wanting to introduce family or a friend to me. I worked in the local court once a week and had impromptu ‘one to ones’ as I moved around the building. 

As a team we helped organise a funeral for the partner of one of my cases and we would go to funerals when asked by our cases. I remember assisting a colleague get the bride and bridesmaids to the wedding on time when the groom was on the caseload and plans did not work out. We went white water rafting with younger lads on the caseload after facilitating an offending behaviour group with them the 2 months previously. 

One day I drove a case to a Crown Court 80 miles away as he had breached his order and I was the one breaching him! All he had on him was a shoe box with a toothbrush and toiletries in it. The Judge had me in the box for 1/2 an hour and after that said I should take him back to the independent hostel he lived in. The space was still available and back he came with his shoe box to be welcomed warmly by the staff and residents. He completed his sentence. 

My senior agreed to all of the above. My senior was special to me as a young officer and he was highly respected in the county. One day when I was in supervision and expressing my frustration as I could not get over a hurdle for someone, he told me a simple truth “ Your job is to hold the tension between the client and the community” and to keep going. It struck a chord then and makes perfect sense now.

My senior was also someone who walked the talk and I remember he agreed after some persuasion to visit a dentist near where he lived -to pick up a repaired denture belonging to a case who had been sent to prison, the dentures were really important to him, his identity and self confidence. I class that as “going above and beyond”.

As a PO you have to be part of the community, for me it all feels long gone now and the “tension” for me is a politically built impenetrable wall that judges and vilifies those who offend against their community. Today I wear risk management lenses, I put on my defensible decision hat and clatter away endlessly on a key board pretending I am working for the better of the community. Actually I work for HMPpS and that is utterly constraining and blinkered by the civil service model. I sill do spend quality time completing one to one casework as much as I can.

--oo00oo--

Finally, the following is taken from former probation officer Mike Guilfoyle's LinkedIn page I found myself reading early this morning having heard of his sad passing at the weekend:- 

"As someone who has always aimed to work in a relationship based way and whose interests have embraced the furtherance of humane and progressive Criminal Justice policies and practices."

I met Mike in the very early days of this blog and he remained a constant source of support, encouragement and information ever since. He was a legend in probation and criminal justice circles, a prolific author of insightful book reviews and practice reflections and he will be sadly missed not least for his enthusiastic contributions to the work of Napo, particularly at Conference and AGMs. I have many fond memories of lively conversations held over a shared interest in both good beer and great pubs.  

 

It's The Relationship

Yesterday's viewing figures of 2,741, together with the significant interest being generated on Twitter, confirms to me that we have indeed struck a chord with many people as to the essential essence of probation work, or more correctly what it should be and why it's all gone wrong. It's a big topic, but for me it's about relationships. Searching the archives reveals a rich seam of stuff on the subject, such as this from 18th September 2016:-  

Guest Blog 60

Relationships Matter

I was taken with a comment to one of my posts on this blog. I had suggested that Probation work was complex but would benefit from getting simpler. In reply someone posted that the problem in my statement was how to distil something complex in a simple way. Many a time when I have been asked by a new acquaintance what it is I do for a living and having replied that I am, or until recently was, a Probation Officer this has been met with a number of responses. Puzzlement or uncertainty; they did not really know what a Probation Officer did or if they did often changed the subject or edged away (some were happy to chat about their experiences too). Curiosity; in which case having tried to explain what I did, I soon realised that trying to explain something complex in a simple way did not successfully convey the essence of what I did. Opinionated; many had a view about either Probation or offending and then often did distil this in a simple way but when their views were queried further with counter points or contradiction soon changed the subject or edged away (some were intent on pressing their views further and / or enjoyed a healthy exchange of ideas). In truth there have been many occasions and different responses, more than I can summarise here. Many reading this blog surely will have had similar experiences.

My reflection on all of this is that I cannot hope to convey the work of a Probation Officer in the main, although not exclusively, in a brief conversation. How could I? I have spent years studying and working to develop my experience, knowledge and skills and my naïve expectation was to try and briefly distil this in some way that captured the essence of Probation work. However, there are some things that I do know are fundamental to being a good Probation Officer and as a profession I feel we do need to be able to find a way of communicating this. Some, if not all, of these form my own blue print for a Probation Service to aspire to in the future and I want to set these out for comment and further discussion on this blog.

I feel it is important to be open about my opposition to the large scale privatisation of public services such as the Probation Service. I believe that the fragmentation of Probation was an error. I do not want to expand on my thinking about this in the here and now. However, I do accept that we are where we are and I believe my ideas are important regardless of the current situation or what will be in the future. I have so far referred to the idea of a Probation Officer and this is only because I have been one myself. I believe in the idea of being a Probation Service professional, in whatever role that may encompass, is what is collectively important. I am not overly concerned about names in this piece, Probation or Community Justice Sector, client, offender or service user for example but recognise that they hold different meanings and would beg the reader’s forgiveness in this respect. The content is also necessarily limited given that it is a blog piece and no more than a collection of ideas based on my experiences and personal thoughts. I will be delighted of any supportive comments or critical comments but would ask, based on another personal belief, that you ‘play the ball and not the person’. I am also writing on the basis that the ideas I have will be at least partially understood, by this I mean the wider extrapolation of them will be appreciated by those who read this blog; if not maybe the comments that follow may provide an opportunity to expand on them or even detract possibly.

There are five headings that I want to focus on. The first two expose my thinking that the relationship between Probation Professional and the individual Service User is of key importance. The third and fourth look beyond the first two to the wider Community in which they are situated and the Criminal Justice System which is their starting point of a kind and ongoing interest. The fifth risks being contentious. Over the years, I like many who read this blog, have become aware that crime and criminal justice have been something of a political football, often populist and sound bite, whose kicking then has had real and often unintended consequences. The fifth heading is called the Political Domain.

1. Probation Professional
2. Service User
3. Community
4. Criminal Justice System
5. Political Domain

Probation Professional

The Probation Service has traditionally drawn on a wide cross section of individuals and provided them with a route to qualification as Probation Professionals. The qualifications have been significant, a mixture of practice based and academic assessment. This in my view has provided for a highly skilled workforce and a healthy diversity of person and background. Practitioners and others have then had opportunities to progress their careers in a range of setting with their foundation qualification as an overarching platform on which to base their ongoing learning and development. My experience has been one where there has been plenty of opportunity to access further learning and different positions that have enabled me to become a more rounded and experienced practitioner. This has resulted I believe in enabling practitioners to find greater satisfaction and longevity in their careers as well as provide the employer with a flexible and motivated staff group. If, as I believe, Probation work is complex then I feel that there is much to be lost and little to be gained by failing to continue to invest in practitioner and others development in this way. I would argue that further investment is needed to truly cement probation work as a modern profession and Probation Professionals need to be provided with ease of career mobility. I make the following observations and suggestions.

Since I qualified I have attended many, many further training opportunities but these have been poorly recorded and developed. I have kept a record but the organisations I have worked for have not kept a meaningful record. I have never been sufficiently asked to evidence my continuing professional development or validate my continued professional status. I have been fortunate to have had my work in group programmes and my work in the training room peer and tutor reviewed and feedback for the purposes of professional development provided and it has been in these instances that I have made notable learning and development in my practice. It is plainly wrong in my view that the many years working one to one with service users beyond my initial training and qualification period has never been officially observed, not once. This is a huge missed opportunity for anyone who wants to call themselves a Probation Professional in my view. If like me you hold the belief that the relationship between the Probation Professional and Service User is fundamental to Probation Practice then a mixture of self, peer lead reflection and professional supervision is the answer I would suggest.

I am confident that many will agree with my ideas but equally will quickly point out that the current workload is relentless to allow for such ‘luxuries’ and systematically ‘no one’ really seems interested in meaningful one to one work with our service users. I believe these issues need to be addressed or at the very least clarified.

It has become apparent to me that the split of Probation Services between NPS and CRC has limited Probation Professionals career opportunities in the sense that their career terms and conditions are not as portable. I would suggest that this impacts on retention of Probation Professionals and makes the profession less attractive. I believe this is typically more the case for CRC than NPS staff but in the future there may be new, innovative and exciting ways of working in the CRC that NPS staff may want to access and bring their skills towards. Probation Professionals and Probation as a whole can benefit in my view if there is greater freedom to move between different parts of the Probation set up but I would also say between different parts of the Criminal Justice System. I do not accept that there are insurmountable technical reasons why this cannot be facilitated.

A final point here, Probation Professionals need to have their profession fully represented throughout their organisations and beyond, their expertise and views taken into account. I heard someone once say that the Probation Service has had its head chopped off, the body then disembowelled and hacked apart. A little dramatic maybe, but who are our Probation champions? If these champions are not easily identified what does it say of the profession? Surely a healthy profession has its professionals views represented and enthusiastically received at all levels and across the system.

Service User

In my view a genesis for new growth can arise when there is a working relationship between the Service User and a Probation professional. The Probation professional in my view brings their knowledge, understanding, skill set (based on all the evidence of what works and effective practice) and something else which I will call human compassion and mindfulness to the relationship. And the Service user brings his or her self with all that that entails. If I were tasked with designing a Probation Service and I wanted to have the means to deliver all that a modern Probation Service is tasked to deliver, for all its various stakeholders but very importantly the Service User, this relationship would be at its core and all else would support and connect with it. At the heart of this idea is a focus on the individual needs of the Service User which will necessarily shape the relationship, a working relationship that is not without prescription but equally which is adaptable to the needs of the individual.

Much has been made of the Service User voice, taking their feedback to help us tailor our approach to the work we complete with them. I believe it is an important part of the relationship as is society’s voice which seeks many things but primarily a reduction in the harm that these individuals are causing. The Service User needs a voice alongside others, the relationship between the Probation professional and Service Users can be central to this.

When I referred to making Probation simpler it was essentially about allowing in large part for the relationship between Probation Professional and Service User to be its own unique creation and not necessarily appended with anything else. This is a point I know needs thinking about from the Service User, Probation professional and others viewpoints. I imagine for some it provides for great potential and opportunity and others I imagine will be afraid of its consequences.

Community

The relationship I have referred to is not the only genesis for new growth and should not in my mind be considered as somehow exclusive, ultimately it should seek to support other meaningful and supportive relationships. Many have said something akin to, ‘life or very little of it happens in our offices, it happens out there in our communities in a myriad of ways.’ There is much that can be achieved in our offices, hearing people, engaging them in thoughtful reflection, providing for self - motivation and direction, offering hope, fleshing out ideas, developing new skills, offering insightful challenge, developing perspective and greater understanding about the needs of others, signposting and engaging others in support, addressing risk and matters of public protection and much, much more. That Probation is so poorly understood by the general public is one of our greatest failings, we have very largely failed to engage our communities beyond what might be called the professional communities in our work (and even here?). Restorative Justice seemed to offer much in this respect for victims and others but beyond this how we engage with partners, families, friends and associates, neighbourhoods, the parish council, community centres, faith organisations, employers, the charitable and voluntary sector and more has been poor in my view. The consequences are missed understandings, opportunities and I think a sense that Probation work is remote and, therefore, frankly would not be missed. I believe that one way of addressing this is having Probation professionals allocated to communities and their cases resident in those communities, a Probation patch as I have heard it referred to previously. Again I imagine it needs fleshing out as an idea as some again will be aghast at the notion and others keen to make a start tomorrow.

I also believe that Probation professionals need to be better connected to the Department of Work and Pensions’ organisations in their communities, to Social Services and Family Services, Housing generally, Health Services, Citizen’s Advice and so on. The reason is to better support our Service Users with their needs, to better understand our professional communities and to make better use of our limited resources.

Criminal Justice System

In this blog piece I am essentially asking that the Criminal Justice System and all that that means to puts its faith in the idea of a productive relationship between a Probation professional and the Service User as being something of fundamental value to its aims and ambitions. I have always believed that we need to be accountable in this respect. I believe that when a Court passes such a sentence the challenge for the Service User and Probation professional is to return to the Court (or body of community representatives under the auspices of the Court) periodically across the sentence duration and account for the progress that has been made. I think this idea will promote progress and the relationship. It will develop a dialogue between Probation professionals, Probation professionals and the Service Users, between Probation Professionals and the Courts, and between the Courts and those who come before them around their successes.

Does anyone remember the Carter Report, a decade or more ago at least? Do you remember his sentiment that the silos of Prison and Probation need to be broken? It has not happened has it? At least I do not think that much progress has been made. I think the information flows between Prison and Probation are poor, I very often only had a sense of what someone had or had not done as part of their plan whilst in custody by asking the Service User themselves. Resettlement services often appear as too little, too late. My view is that Prison and Probation services need to co – operate and do better. In finding a Prison Service and Probation Service settlement that works better for Service Users I would ask for ways of enhancing the Probation professional and Service User relationship whilst that Service User is still in custody and long before they are released. The risk otherwise is that we just think of progress as something that commences on release from custody and miss much that has preceded it. We miss out on how the Service Users own community outside has interacted with them during this period and how the Prison community has panned out for them (and much more).

I have enjoyed working with the Police and others on multi – agency teams. The benefits have far outweighed any costs in my view. It is clear that there are Service Users whose offending is of greater concern than others in terms of the damage and harm they cause. Police, Probation and others can come together usefully to better address these concerns in my view. There are instances where local communities face particular offending issues and they along with the Police, Probation and others can usefully make a difference to those communities and together engage with the Service User around their rehabilitation as part of that joint work. I would argue for continued investment in this type of joint working.

Political Domain

I have avoided specifically mentioning the Transforming Rehabilitation (TR) Revolution that has impacted on the Probation Services in recent years so far. I need to be upfront and say I was genuinely shocked by the scale and nature of the changes that TR brought with it, limited I think in its public appreciation and support that did, against huge swathes and a spectrum of professional advice, rush this act through in what many perceived was a risky and reckless venture based on flimsy evidence. Here I will stop as this blog has done sufficient to highlight those concerns then and on-going. My fundamental point is that this is no way to treat a Probation service or any part of the Criminal Justice System. I would advocate a circumspect approach to changes in the Criminal Justice System that are tested thoroughly and where the unintended negative consequences are similarly assessed before proceeding. TR is not the only example of politically lead changes that have resulted in unintended consequences that have arguably negated any potential advantage they may have sought. I would advocate some Political maturity, politics that truly engages with the professions it has responsibility for and seeks general consensus and consults widely, tests and trials changes and proceeds judiciously with them. On the whole we need evolution not revolution if we are to avoid trying to constantly mitigate and adapt to ill thought out changes; in a busy working life trying to adapt to well - thought out changes is testing enough.

In Summary

I believe that the core task of a Probation Service and Probation professionals is to develop a working relationship with Service Users. I think this is fundamental and all activity should seek to support this relationship as it provides the basis on which much that we aspire to can happen. I am concerned that the profession of Probation is slipping away from this very important part of our work and becoming impersonal, machine like. Probation work and the ‘relationship’ that I have referred to throughout needs explaining so that it is better understood by all so that the relationship between the Probation professional and the Service User is better supported. This means continued investment in Probation as a profession and on-going professional development a key feature of that profession. By explaining our work better we become, I believe, more able to engage with the communities that we live in, draw on their support, the resources available and they on us. I see such relationships as providing for a source of recruitment to the Probation profession.

My concern is that for many Probation professionals the scope for career variation within the Probation and Criminal Justice System has been narrowed by the fragmentation of those services. To make the profession more attractive, less of a cul-de-sac, Probation professionals need to be able to move around the system with greater fluidity. Beyond enhancing retention and career longevity this is also the means by which Probation services and professionals can work alongside partner organisations within and without the Criminal Justice system with greater ease for the benefit of those we work directly with, our communities and I would say to make best use of our limited resources. With regard to the Political domain that I have referred to I would say bring along your ideas / mandate and work steadfastly (if needs) but carefully through and with all, particularly grass root professionals, to shape them to best effect; evolution not revolution.

This is my third guest blog piece. I do feel, as the months go by since I left, that I am now becoming too distant from Probation work and so I will make it my last. I have found that writing my ideas down in this way has been personally productive and I hope sharing them has been useful too. I remember my Father, in a seemingly casual moment, relating to me as a young person the importance of relationships. He asked me to imagine being stranded on a deserted island, devoid of other humans, week after week, month after month, year after year. He asserted that at some point a form of madness would set in and it would be very likely that such a person would start to doubt their very existence. Relationships he explained are fundamental to our sense of who we are and who we become. In the comments that follow I would be delighted if they sought to flesh out the importance of the relationship I refer to and if possible provide some narrative account to demonstrate its impact (for better or for worse).

Author wishes to remain anonymous.

Taking a Risk

I've been pondering how to follow up the chord that's been struck with the sublime enquiry:-

How exactly does anyone "manage" someone else's offending behaviour?

and it sent me searching the archive very early this morning and a reflective piece about risk I wrote over 10 years ago and triggered by another blogger writing on the subject of 'what makes a good probation officer?' In turn it had triggered some caustic responses from readers of Inside Time. Now the bad news is that the link to the latter is no longer available, but the good news is that I chose to include one of the most interesting in my blogpost of 24th August 2012. The other good news is that the original piece is still available on the Russell Webster website.

As is often the case, does any of this hold true today, indeed did it ever?   

He Has a Point

I hope the author of the following comment to Zoe Stafford's piece in Inside Time will not mind me quoting it in full because I think it very neatly sums up what many clients feel about their probation officer. It makes for uncomfortable reading, but in my view it's no good trying to pretend otherwise and the points raised need addressing.

"Those who say that they have a good probation officer are either gullible, naive or living in cloud cuckoo land. Yes of course they always welcome you when you report. 'how are you today?' 'how's things?' and so forth like they care. All they care about is that you are not offending as that means a recall if you are on licence and you do not even have to offend to be recalled. Never tell them that you have a problem, lost your job, lost your flat etc as that becomes risk. Report on time, smile and tell them everything is fine even if it's not. Never ever trust a probation officer for they have all the options open to them, recall, recommending in their reports that you should receive a custodial sentence and steering you to banal and irrelevant offending behaviour courses which are as useless as they are. Believe me they are the biggest con merchants going but so many ex-offenders fall for it. You do so at your peril."

What makes a 'good' probation officer is a fascinating question and of course the answer will depend to a great extent on who you ask and what side of the desk they sit. Top of my list if I were pushed to come up with a response would be the ability to take appropriate risks.

In my experience a good PO has got to continually weigh up what risks to take with a case in order to achieve the long-term aim of public benefit that flows from crime reduction. Admittedly this willingness and scope to take risks has got much harder over the years with crap like OASys, an increasingly proscriptive culture and management scared witless by what might appear in the press. But deep down all PO's worth their salt know that we are in the risk business and risks have to be taken sometimes in order to achieve progress. Life without some risk is no life at all.

Risk-taking can take many forms such as deciding to give a guy a chance, even when the track record has not been good and he's not responded to previous interventions. It's about the officer wanting to take a risk and then putting an argument to the court that's convincing. Of course this is a risk in itself as there is always the possibility of ridicule from the court, from colleagues or management even. There's the risk that if the court goes along with a positive outcome it will all go pear-shaped at any point. On the other hand the fact that the client knows you've taken a risk and helped give them a chance should help build a good working relationship.

There are always risks associated with exercising judgement. A good PO in my view must decide what it is appropriate to record or pass on to management. Sometimes what is heard in the interview room might be more appropriate to keep between officer and client. The information can form the basis of constructive work at a later date and need not require immediate action. Just to be clear, I'm not referring to child protection issues or discussion of unreported criminal activity, but for example I have not always passed on threats to myself if I felt they were not meant or likely to be carried out.

Sometimes unwise things are said at moments of great stress and an apology at a later date has much more worth than the alternative of adding yet more trouble to an already desperate situation. It should be self-evident that a client is hardly going to be open and honest during supervision sessions if everything they tell you either results in lectures or draconian responses. A degree of trust has to be established if the magic of probation is to have any chance of working.

Good officers always consider what is best for their client and society and act accordingly. Like the comment author, I share the irritation surrounding referrals to courses as a matter of routine and only do so if I feel it appropriate. Shamefully there was a period some years ago when management harassed us as a result of targets introduced by NOMS and in order to justify the hugely expensive investment in accredited programmes. No longer as fashionable thank goodness and with targets a thing of the past, such courses are now only reserved for those who really need them.

Essentially, being a PO is not about winning a popularity contest, it's about doing a useful job for society and a popular officer might not necessarily be a 'good' officer.

--oo00oo--

The post generated the following response at the time:-

I think it is important to acknowledge also that the average caseload of a Probation Officer nowadays is increasingly chock full of higher risk people than it was in my day (1994-2000). I had my share of sex offenders and dv cases but they were about 30-40% of my caseload. Most POs have about 80-90% high risk cases. I could not recall people in my day; the option was unavailable. The nature of the relationship between offender and PO is very different nowadays. A 'good' PO to an SPO, may not be a 'good' PO to a magistrate or a CEO or a member of the public or an offender. I think, by the very nature of their role, POs cannot ever please everybody and are inevitably going to be criticised. One of the core skills (?) is the development of a thick skin.

Nail Hit On Head

Regular readers will be well aware that this blog has had its highs and lows over the years. We've gone down many wonderful and varied avenues, pretty much dictated by you the reader and contributor. Despite my best endeavours as editor, I'm never quite sure what the direction of travel will be each day, but of course that's the very nature of probation isn't it? There will be ups and downs; joy and disappointment; success and failure, because every person is unique both in character and circumstance. 

So it is that during what I hope might be a discussion on how probation might be saved under a new government, regular reader 'Getafix throws in what might appear to be an innocuous and idle question:- 

How exactly does anyone "manage" someone else's offending behaviour?

"A misnomer to perpetuate a charade. I suspect it’s used to offer an assurance to the public that Probation has the necessary wherewithal to combat offending. When, as we know that is just an illusion. I suspect it sounds better than stumbling in the dark and generally hoping for the best. All staff really manage is trying to get home at a reasonable time and not whittling about the next SFO. The rest is just pseudo science and management flimflam."

*****
"According to Chatgpt posted on X managing offending behaviour involves imprisonment of more people and increasing the salaries of senior leaders when they fail. Mischief managed."

*****
"One doesn't...well this one doesn't. Manage your managers (good luck with that one), your own expectations, and endeavour to get some love and practical help in through the cracks."

*****
"This is the delusional thread currently running through probation work. It’s dangerous and conceited that probation officers are made to believe they risk assess and risk manage to “protect the public”. Signing up to this nonsense means we are laying ourselves wide open to be blamed for every person on probation that reoffends. Trying to “manage” every person means every failure is a failure of that “management”. Probation work is about helping people to change for the better. People change when they feel ready, not because a probation officer demanded it, not because of an accredited programme, not because of what’s written in case records. When they do change it’s because of what they did, not what we did. People change because they receive support, consistency and access to opportunities, everything an understaffed and crumbling probation enforcement agency cannot provide."

I've posted both of the extensive responses above on Twitter or X in new money and they've gained a huge amount of attention from possibly what is a much wider audience than is usual here, mostly I suspect because it strikes a chord with many people, some no doubt clients both current and historical; but also probation staff both new and old who 'get' what probation should be about, but know it's hopelessly lost its way and especially since the takeover by HM Prison Service and the dead hand of the civil service. 

I have to say I'm very heartened by the response to the question posed by 'Getafix because what it says to me is that, despite the best endeavours of HMPPS thought police, recusants are still out there and haven't all retired or been driven out by other means. In fact am I to dare to hope the penny is dropping amongst some newer recruits that the job could be done much better and more usefully by listening and learning about it how used to be, and still is in many parts of the world. The sad thing is, probation as practised in England and Wales used to be regarded as an exemplar - was the Gold Standard remember?! - but is now effectively an outlier to the bewilderment of other criminal justice jurisdictions worldwide.  

--oo00oo-- 

As an interesting aside to the above, I was struck by the following posted on Twitter yesterday by someone who had clearly been through the criminal justice system:-

"I know it goes against the grain, but if prisoners were treated better in prison and by society upon release, would the level of repeat offending be as high?"

As the current government gleefully runs up the flagpole the callous notion of removing all benefits from claimants who remain unemployed for more than 18 months for any reason,  doesn't that mournful enquiry say so much about the society we've become......

Local v Central

In order to try and keep the discussion going, I think it helps to highlight reflective contributions, such as this from earlier this morning:-

Over the years I have seen officers struggle to communicate with those they supervise and take the upward route….once promoted they become (at least in their eyes) super officers who were promoted on the basis of their excellence and seek to disgorge their ‘experience’ to those they left behind, confident that their limited skill set is the way. This group have moved now into the higher echelons of probation and as such we have this disconnect between how they think we should work and the reality. 

The reality is that we work with a socially damaged group who seek to return to what they know and are comfortable with and breaking or even impeding that return is difficult and is only achieved incrementally and usually involves failure along the way. I’ve worked and mentored with some fantastic young recruits who have a natural compassion which I see eroded from them slowly but surely by the cold hand of central control.

Regional differences exist yet probations strength is local…not central and the constant launches and re launches are all centrally driven….OMIC [Offender Management in Custody] is an idea that has struggled from the start, One HMPpS will give control to exactly the wrong group…if we are looking at a redesign, local PDUs, loosely linked to other local areas with a local committee of volunteers providing a steer…..will it come to pass? Not a chance as it would take power and control from the top…..I once wrote a PSR on an RSO [Registered Sex Offender], supervised him throughout his sentence and managed him in the community for six years…….not reoffended to date and still sends me a Christmas card…..it worked for him and it was as local as it could have been………

Radical Rethinking Required

I notice the latest Probation Journal has a forthright editorial:-   

Probation is not a panacea for the prison crisis

The crisis in prisons in England and Wales has been brought sharply into focus. On 16 October 2023, the Justice Secretary announced measures aimed at reducing pressure on the prisons, caused in part by a record high of 88,225 people in custody (Chalk, 2023). As if this is not cause enough for concern, forecasts indicate that the population is due to rise even higher in the coming years with predictions that by March 2027 the population may rise to anywhere between 93,100 and 106,300 people (MoJ, 2023). It is clear from the Ministry's explanation of its forecasts the government's own policies (as well as the post-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) backlog of cases in the courts) are a central driver of prison population growth. In recent decades, almost every government policy relating to crime and justice has ratcheted up systemic pressure resulting in more people spending longer in prison. This includes longer sentences for certain offences and changes to mechanisms for prisoner release. Not to mention of course the people who remain imprisoned under the egregious Indeterminate Public Protection (IPP) sentence, which although abolished in 2012, has still left approximately 3000 people languishing in prison. While the Conservative party has been in power for over 12 years, this punitive policy direction has a longer lineage, IPPs were introduced in 2003 by a Labour Home Secretary, who has since regretted the injustice.

The government's announcement of measures to reduce pressures on prison is an exemplar of confused logic. The statement to parliament by the Justice Secretary, Alex Chalk begins by emphasising a record of increased punitiveness: Longer sentences for certain offences, proposals to expand the circumstances in which whole life sentences can be applied, and proposals that people convicted of rape and equivalent sexual offences will serve their entire sentences in custody (i.e., they will not be eligible for discretionary release). More prisons are to be built in the medium to longer term, but to address the imminent crisis in capacity more “lower level offenders” are to be released from prison early and placed under the supervision of the Probation Service. In the longer term, the government proposes to legislate to end the use of short-term prison sentences (of 12 months or less), by imposing suspended sentences that will involve community supervision (Chalk,2023). Some of the other headline-grabbing proposals include commissioning prison places overseas to reduce the imminent pressure on the prison system. While it is surely right to seek to curb the use of short prison sentences, placing further emphasis on the ‘toughness’ and enforceability of community sentences is part of the same circular logic that has led to this punitive-sum position in the first place. Moreover, this rhetoric fails to recognise the current parlous state of Probation Services in England and Wales, which are facing high levels of staff vacancies and unmanageable workloads (HMIP, 2023).

The relationship between the use of community sentences and prison is not straightforward. Various analyses including those based on data published by the Council of Europe in their SPACE statistics, which provides information on the numbers of people imprisoned and subject to community sanctions and measures (including probation) in member states, show that increasing the use of community sentences does not necessarily lead to a commensurate decline in prison populations (Aebi et al., 2022). In fact, in many contexts we see that expanding the use of community sentences can have an overall net-widening effect (Aebi et al., 2015), with more people brought under the ambit the criminal justice system. Some of the reasons for this phenomenon include the fact that expanding the use of community sentences may displace other sanctions (such as fines or discharges), or toughening enforcement policies and practices may lead to “backdoor” entry into prison even where prison was not the initial sanction imposed by a court. In England and Wales, the introduction of the post-sentence supervision requirement under the Offender Rehabilitation Act 2014 is a prominent recent example of net-widening (Cracknell, 2018). When this measure was introduced, it was intended to address the issue of re-offending of people sentenced to short-term prison sentences (i.e., prison sentences of less than 12 months), but as various analyses have shown the overall effects have led to a treadmill effect, propelling people further through a broken system (Cracknell, 2021).

The government's modelling predicts that one of the drivers of the potential future growth of the prison population will be an increase in the numbers of people on both determinate and indeterminate sentences being recalled to prison, precisely because of the growth of the numbers of people in prison (MoJ, 2023: 6):

The recall population is projected to increase for the duration of the projection period. The increase is partly due to the expected growth of the determinate population – this will result in a larger pool of offenders on licence after serving the custodial part of their sentence, and a proportion of this group will be recalled to custody. About 20% of the offenders currently in the recall population have been recalled to prison following an indeterminate sentence. This cohort of the recall population is also projected to increase over the projection period because more offenders will leave prison following an indeterminate sentence and therefore more people will be eligible to be recalled to custody.

Or put more simply – unless something radically changes the system will continue to perpetuate itself. What the government proposes is not radical change. As some commentators have noted shifting pressure onto a creaking probation system, which has been buffeted by years of structural reforms and with significant staffing shortfalls will not be a panacea and will place further pressures on a probation system that is in crisis (Probation Institute, 2023). All of this points to the need for more radical rethinking and reform of criminal justice, one in which the emphasis on punitiveness is decentred.

Finally, I want to conclude this editorial with a tribute to Nigel Stone. Remarkably this is the 40th year of Nigel's work on behalf of the journal in various capacities. Nigel served as the Editor of the journal from March 1983 to September 1997, before handing over the reins to Hindpal Singh Bhui. Over the years he has contributed numerous pieces to the journal and most recently he has been the ‘In Court’ stalwart, writing pithy analyses of court and sentencing matters of particular relevance to probation. This issue of the journal contains a typical example, spanning cases including the impact of delays in criminal proceedings, and cases involving sexual harm and relationship and family violence. We thank Nigel for all of his contributions.

Nicola Carr

Being a Probation Services Officer

This article from the Independent, based on an interview with a a PSO with five years experience, admirably encapsulates much of the discourse on the blog in recent time and deserves wide circulation in my view. Thanks go to regular contributor 'Getafix for drawing attention to it:-  

I joined the probation service as a job for life. But after five years, I’ve had enough

‘I never wanted it to come to this’: A probation worker tells Andy Gregory of the daily realities leaving her ‘completely overwhelmed’ as thousands leave the crisis-stricken service

When Mary joined the probation service in 2018, she believed she had found a job for life in helping offenders to rehabilitate back into society and protecting the public.
But just five years later, she has decided to follow more than 2,000 of her colleagues who quit the service in the year to March – a tenth of the full-time workforce.

Following a failed privatisation drive and several high-profile murders in which the probation service had wrongly labelled the killers “medium-risk”, the system is in crisis. Morale is low among staff, two thirds of whom say they are struggling under unmanageable workloads, as last-ditch government plans to free up space in overcrowded prisons threaten to heap an influx of new offenders into their care.

Mary, who is one of around a dozen probation services officers (PSO) in her office, told The Independent of having to personally handle 65 low and medium-risk cases – with inspectors judging that 50 is the limit at which officers can effectively deliver on rehabilitation and public protection.

“That’s 65 different individuals whose risk needs to be managed, most of them being in the community,” she said. “It’s very anxiety-provoking working in these conditions because you just don’t know what’s going to happen, and unfortunately with a lot of practitioners things do get missed.

“Even when they’re in custody, you’re still attending the panels, doing paperwork, reports ... it’s never-ending. I don’t think there’s enough hours in the day to do this job.”

When people under the supervision of probation are charged with committing serious further offences, the official reviews of these cases are circulated among all staff. There were more than 400 reviews in the year to April. When 86 of these cases were analysed by inspectors, 30 involved murder and 20 rape, and in nearly half, the ‘risk of harm’ assessments were found to be inaccurate or incomplete.

“The first thing [the reviews] will say is: ‘caseloads are too high, the practitioner couldn’t manage, this was missed because the practitioner is overworked and had to remember 101 other things’,” Mary said, adding: “It just feels like it’s falling on deaf ears.”

“We are completely overwhelmed, morale is low, and we have multiple people in our offices on long-term sick leave – so six months or more – because it is so stressful,” she continued. Across the service, more than half of sick days last year were related to mental health, which probation inspectors also say is “a reflection of the stress that many staff feel themselves under”.

“The main thing is the lack of staff,” said Mary. “People leave the service because it’s too stressful, but the fact that nobody else is there to share the load – it’s a lot harder.”

But there is strain across the system. “A lot of the work we do, we take on from other services,” said Mary, who received six weeks of training prior to starting as a PSO in 2018.

“It took me two days last week to work on a housing referral because it had 10 pages. That’s not my job, I don’t work for housing, but I know that this person cannot be on the streets of London, because that could make them susceptible to reoffending and put the public in danger.

“We don’t want that, so now I’m doing everybody else’s job plus my own. It becomes very, very frustrating and you have no work-life balance. I left the office at 10pm last night. I have a key for my office, because I stay there so late that I have to lock up. As soon as I get home I’m in my bed because I’m so tired, so drained. I wake up at 6 o’clock again to do it all again. No trainee would see that and think it’s a life they want.”

While a national recruitment drive means there were 2,600 people training to become probation officers as of 31 March, the most recent data showed nearly one in six of trainees were giving up.

“They are thrown in headfirst a lot of the time, which I think is what scares them off,” said Mary, who is in her 30s. “They’re supposed to be protected with the amount of work they have and cases they have, but what I find is that, when the office is in need, then that’s scrapped.”

Mary said she had seen trainees leave with just two months left to complete of their 21-month probation officer training, after hearing their colleagues with 20 or 30 years experience warn they have never “seen the service in the state that it’s in” – and that “it’s not sustainable”.

While Mary believes her older colleagues “are only here because they feel they can’t go anywhere else” and are “just waiting for retirement age”, younger recruits are using their experience in probation “as a stepping stone” into other government departments, companies and charities.

“A lot are moving into the charity sector to do what they had intended to do in probation,” said Mary. “It’s very hard to do the therapies and rehabilitative work when you’ve got 65 people to do risk assessments, processes, you’re constantly in meetings with other professionals.”

Warning that “we are doing a disservice to people who really need rehabilitation”, she said: “We really are their first port of call to lead a positive life and get back on track. But because we can’t dedicate that time with them and have that one-to-one rapport building kind of relationship, they don’t get what they truly need. And then what happens? They end up back in the service, and the service is again under pressure. So it’s a revolving door.

“And in the meantime we have really big crimes ... and lives are lost unfortunately – we are responsible for a lot and not being able to do what we truly want to do has an impact, it has an impact on everybody.”

Meanwhile, the service is bracing itself to deal with more offenders in the community. In eleventh-hour plans to free up space in prisons, justice secretary Alex Chalk announced last month – with immediate effect – that inmates can now be released up to 18 days early, and is also seeking to ensure that many offenders with sentences of up to 12 months are spared jail.

But Mary plans to have left the probation service by the time the latter change comes into effect.

“I have given it everything I can and I don’t have anything more left for it. I never wanted it to come to this. This was a job for life. It was a service that I definitely believed in and purposely studied to be involved with – and I’ve been in it for less than 10 years, and I’m ready to leave it.”

--oo00oo--

The article generated this comment:-

I was in the probation service for just over 20 years, retiring in the late 90's, it was never this bad despite us undergoing massive changes back then. We did not like it when all our reports had to pass the scrutiny of a colleague, then a few years later we did not like it when they didn't! Change is not welcomed. The introduction of computers was largely experienced as more work not less.

My heart goes out to all the dedicated folk like Mary, who have had their working lives ruined by political leaders who have no real idea how the criminal justice system works and have largely destroyed it rather like they have many other social services and the health service.

But 6 weeks training!!!????? (presumably on the back of a relevant degree or is that followed by the 21 months?) I had 2 years training on the then 1+1 Home office course, the first as a student in studies and on placements and the second, doing the job with a protected case load. Interestingly my pay in my second year of training was higher than it had previously been as a Surgical Ward Sister. Nurses have never been well paid!

If you do not have knowledge of the 'coal face delivery' you should not be able to 'experiment' with new managerial ideas. You need to introduce new ideas that acknowledge real experience and accommodate new learning. Yes change has to be pushed but not by people who have no real understanding of what the job entails.

In particular this government's policies have adversely affected far too many people starting, with those that could be rehabilitated and more seriously the public who have not been adequately protected.

Matters Coming to a Head

The Independent caries a powerful piece outlining the probation crisis and how it cannot pick up any extra work to try and alleviate the prison crisis:-

Criminals released from prison ‘left free to kill’ as overstretched probation service in crisis

Exclusive: 59 offenders being monitored after leaving prison went on to be convicted of murder in just one year – with at least five cases blamed on failings in an overstretched probation service

Mistakes which led to dangerous criminals released from prison going on to kill could be repeated as new government plans heap further pressure on a probation service already in crisis, The Independent has been told.

Officials are dealing with “appallingly” high workloads due to an exodus of both staff and experience, union leaders warn – prompting fears that convicts will be free to strike again. There are also concerns that the system will not be able to cope with plans to send fewer convicted criminals to jail – part of the government’s scramble to free up space in overcrowded prisons – without radical change. The unions are holding a crisis meeting this week with justice secretary Alex Chalk to discuss plans for low-level offenders to be spared jail and to demand more funding.

The aunt of Zara Aleena, a young lawyer murdered last year by a man wrongly freed from prison despite his violent background, warned that other families could suffer a similar tragedy to hers without government action.

Warnings about the perilous state of the probation service came as:

• Ministry of Justice figures for 2022 show 59 people have been convicted of murder committed while either in the care of probation or by those who had recently left supervision
• Mistakes within probation have been directly blamed in the murders of at least five people in the past two years
• One union said orders to release prisoners up to 18 days early – which have recently come into effect – are already increasing pressure on probation staff
• Figures show there were 2,390 fewer full-time probation officers than the required 6,780 as of June – a shortfall of 35 per cent
• Nearly 1,650 probation officers have quit their jobs over the past two years – a sharp rise since 2021. Two-thirds of those who quit in the last year had five or more years’ experience

Speaking to The Independent, Aleena’s aunt Farah Naz said: “The compromised and overstretched probation service, coupled with officers experiencing low morale, heightens the risk of additional errors, potentially leading to grave consequences and – at its worst – a tragic recurrence akin to the murder of our Zara.”

Tory MP Elliot Colburn, who chairs a cross-party parliamentary group on restorative justice, added: “While we’re waiting for investment and trainees to come through the system, how do we make sure that we are still able to deliver a good and safe level of service? We don’t want to end up with another Zara Aleena case, and absolutely that will be going through people’s heads at this time.”

But Ian Lawrence, head of the probation union Napo, warned that this risk remains “until we see politicians take steps to offer better support for the service, work with us to find ways to reduce workloads and motivate experienced staff”.

He described hearing “harrowing” accounts from newly trained employees – some handling twice the number of cases they should be – suffering “nervous meltdowns” and fearful of going to work.

While Napo backs plans for prison sentences of less than a year to be scrapped for some criminals, Mr Lawrence warned there is “no way” to suddenly increase capacity in probation without sacrificing existing aspects of the job, which sees officers supervise and rehabilitate offenders both in prison and in the community and assess their risk to the public.

He added: “If senior politicians – who have now woken up to the fact that probation matters – want staff to help them out of the hole that they’ve dug for themselves on prison overcrowding, then they need to engage with us in a way that motivates staff to undertake this work. That includes seriously talking to us about the need for a paid remuneration package to help us through this crisis.”

Sir Bob Neill, Tory chair of the MPs’ justice committee, said that while Mr Chalk’s plans are “the right thing to be doing”, there must be “a proper awareness of the resourcing implications” for the already “very hard-pushed” probation service.

Ms Naz said ministers’ plans to reduce prison numbers and reoffending rates “require a comprehensive, sustainable approach that won’t further demoralise an already beleaguered service. If staff morale remains low, as it seems to be the case, mistakes are likely to persist,” Ms Naz said, raising concerns over the impact that further overburdening a service “already in crisis” could have on morale.

In the year to April, more than 400 charges for serious further offences were brought against offenders either in the care of probation officers, or within 28 days of leaving supervision. Out of 86 cases analysed by inspectors, 30 involved murders and 20 related to rape. “Risk of harm” assessments were found to have been inaccurate or incomplete in 44 per cent of these cases, and 42 per cent of perpetrators had previously been assessed as medium-risk.

Mr Lawrence said: “Our members have to work under that shadow of ‘have we looked at the case properly when I’ve got twice the workload I should have?’ People are under so much pressure that they cannot always guarantee they do the necessary checks and balance. Now if we get an influx of early release prisoners back into the community we’ve got to be sure that the supervision leaves no doubts about them risk-wise. So we can only do that if some of the other work we do drops off the edge.”

At this week’s meeting, unions are trying to determine which parts of probation work can be cut back, said Mr Lawrence: “Unless the government does something to retain staff, the haemorrhage is going to get worse.”

Just one of the 31 Probation Delivery Units (PDUs) inspected between June 2021 and July 2023 was rated as “good”, with 15 given the lowest rating of “inadequate”, then-chief probation inspector Justin Russell said last month. On average, each was scored just five out of a possible 27.

Two-thirds of probation officers described their caseload as “unmanageable”, up from 50 per cent two years ago, said Mr Lawrence. In what inspectors say is “a reflection of the stress” many employees are under, 55 per cent of working days lost to staff sickness in the past year were due to mental health issues – up from 43 per cent five years earlier.

Confronted over the huge staff vacancies and “unmanageable” caseloads by a House of Lords committee last month, Mr Chalk was asked whether the probation service could cope with any more work. Mr Chalk replied: “We’re completely onto it, lots of resources are going into this area, and I think you will see a recovering and improving probation service over the coming months and years.”

A Ministry of Justice spokesperson said: “Our hard-working probation officers do incredibly important work protecting the public and helping offenders turn their backs on crime. That is why alongside our long-term reforms to prisons to keep the public safe from crime, we are ensuring the Probation Service is well resourced by investing £155m extra a year compared to 2019 to recruit more staff and reduce workloads."

Sign The Petition!

I don't usually post at this time of night, but there's always the exception such as a change.org petition just launched and wouldn't it be great to give it a boost asap. I'm assuming there is the option not to have personal details published:- 

The Impending Collapse Of The Probation Service - Enough Is Enough

It should come as no surprise to anyone that the Probation Service is well over its maximum capacity to manage dangerous offenders. It is in absolute meltdown, at a point of total chaotic internal destruction, the likes of which have never been seen before.

Following the Damien Bendall inquest probation officers are voicing their fears that more and more serious further offences will occur, resulting in either life changing damage to the victims, or indeed death.

Officers live in constant daily fear that one or more of their cases may be the next Damien Bendall. They are dangerously overworked with most officers being well over the 110% accepted caseload of the Workload Management Tool. Many are holding caseloads close to 200% or more. This means that the offenders they supervise, both in the community and on licence from prison do not complete the rehabilitation work they need. Many complete their entire community orders and prison licences without ever receiving any rehabilitation at all.

A high level of offenders have multiple probation officers during their supervision, as officers are being signed off on long term sickness or are leaving the Probation Service in a state debilitating trauma, mental and emotional breakdown.

It is well known and accepted fact that if an offender retains the same probation officer for their entire sentence then they are more likely to build trust with their officer, leading them to being willing to complete the necessary rehabilitation work they need. With multiple probation officers coming in and out of their supervision there is no continuity. The rehabilitation simply doesn’t get done and officers miss vital risk warnings because communication between staff breaks down.

Victims and their families want justice through staff having the capacity to actually do the job. They aren’t getting justice when probation officers have high numbers of offenders coming in each day, and only have time to spend 10 minutes with each of them. The reality is officers spend more time doing administrative data input tasks than they do with the offenders.

Probation officers spend the majority of their time writing up case notes, making referrals to housing, mental health and substance misuse and other agencies, typing OASys documents that each take hours each to complete, making and taking phone calls to social services, housing agencies, courts, police etc, completing safeguarding checks, doing MAPPA and MARAC updates, breaches, parole reports and attending parole hearings, answering emails, attending teams calls and staff supervision, and much much more.

Everyone would agree this is all very important work, but there are not enough staff to do it. Somewhere in there they are also expected to complete home visits to offenders to ensure they are living where they say they are, and check for potential the risks that may be present at those accommodations. Staff use their own cars to complete home visits, which leave many feeling vulnerable, as offenders then have their personal licence plates. Staff also face daily abuse and threat of physical assault from offenders they are working with. Offenders often attend their appointments under the influence of drugs and alcohol or in a state of unmanaged, poor mental health. This serves to further erode the already very low morale of remaining staff, and heightens their fears for their own physical, mental and emotional safety.

The stark reality of all of this is that the rehabilitation work that officers trained and specialised in does not get completed. Most officers do not even have time to get away from their computers to take their lunch breaks. Most work late into the evening and on weekends without extra pay, trying to stay on top of the endless flow of work.

A high number of probation staff end up on medication for depression and anxiety, in therapy, signed off sick with stress and trauma related illness such as PTSD and in a state of utter breakdown and burnout.

The Probation Service is unable to retain staff for all of the above reasons, and experienced staff are leaving in very high numbers. A large proportion of trainees either leave before the end of their training or as soon as they qualify because of the overwhelming levels of stress.

Probation staff are professionally trained. They joined to make positive change within the wider communities of society and to protect the public from the risks of serious harm. Currently they do not even have the ability to protect their own well-being. The traumatised are supervising the traumatised. Staff are being placed on capability procedures by managers for not being able to complete impossible levels of work. There are not enough hours in the day, and so officers are having to prioritise one high risk case over another, even though both cases have the potential to commit serious further offences, creating more victims and resulting in potential death.

New cases are allocated daily to staff who have reached maximum capacity and have nothing left to give. It impacts on their own well-being and that of their families.

Why would any probation officer stay and continue working in such a toxic environment? Their pay is low, the impact on them personally is high, and their desperate cries for support are ignored.

When the Probation Service was run as local Trusts they had more control over how work was managed, and were able to give offenders the time needed to complete the vital work integral to changing their offending behaviours. The move to privatise the Probation Service marked a devastating spiral into chaos, with vast numbers of experienced staff leaving the Service and going elsewhere. The reunification did not improve the situation. The decision to make the Probation Service part of the civil service, and a part of One HMPPS has led to even more experienced staff leaving. The Probation Service is in a very real state of collapse.

The profession is no longer a vocational career. Those that remain are struggling and broken, often unfit for employment elsewhere when they leave due to the high levels of trauma they suffer. Those with offenders who do commit serious further offences are left to live with debilitating guilt for the rest of their lives, even though they were beyond capacity and suffering stress related harm themselves, and could not have done anything more to prevent the incident from occurring.

Unless something drastically changes, the Probation Service will be run by a majority number of trainees and inexperienced newly qualified officers. Public protection will become a thing of the past. Members of the public will die as a result of more serious further offences being committed because staff do not have time to complete essential work.

Staff at every level are under extreme pressure leading to long term ill health and the development of new medical conditions.

Senior Probation Officers are under obligation to continue allocating cases to probation officers who are already being harmed by their overwhelming and excessive caseloads. Probation Delivery Unit heads MUST be held to account for their failures to protect their staff from serious harm within the context of their employment, and action MUST BE TAKEN NOW.

Enough is enough. The Probation Service is in critical state of breakdown. It is understaffed, overwhelmed and in dire need of greater resources.

To protect the remaining staff, and the public alike, things needs to drastically change and IT NEEDS TO HAPPEN NOW.

--oo00oo--

Postscript 10/11/2023

"There is a new petition which supersedes this one. The new one, if it gains enough signatures will then be discussed by parliament. Please be patient as the new petition is currently undergoing clearance checks. As soon as it is given the all clear, it will go live and can be signed and shared far and wide. Hopefully it will have a positive impact for the well-being of everyone. The link to the new petition will be available in the same places you found this one." 

Sally Day

Update 03:55

It now reads thus "Petitions UK Government and Parliament

We’re checking this petition 19 people have already supported this petition.
We need to check it meets the petition standards before we publish it. Please try again in a few days."

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/651215/moderation-info