Introducing Pathfinder programmes into the Probation ...

Home Office Research Study 247

Introducing Pathfinder programmes into the Probation Service: an interim report

Clive Hollin, James McGuire, Emma Palmer, Charlotte Bilby, Ruth Hatcher and Angela Holmes

The views expressed in this report are those of the authors, not necessarily those of the Home Office (nor do they reflect Government policy)

Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate July 2002

Home Office Research Studies

The Home Office Research Studies are reports on research undertaken by or on behalf of the Home Office. They cover the range of subjects for which the Home Secretary has responsibility. Other publications produced by the Research, Development and Statistics Directorate include Findings, Statistical Bulletins and Statistical Papers.

The Research, Development and Statistics Directorate RDS is part of the Home Office. The Home Office's purpose is to build a safe, just and tolerant society in which the rights and responsibilities of individuals, families and communities are properly balanced and the protection and security of the public are maintained. RDS is also part of National Statistics (NS). One of the aims of NS is to inform Parliament and the citizen about the state of the nation and provide a window on the work and performance of government, allowing the impact of government policies and actions to be assessed. Therefore – Research Development and Statistics Directorate exists to improve policy making, decision taking and practice in support of the Home Office purpose and aims, to provide the public and Parliament with information necessary for informed debate and to publish information for future use.

First published 2002 Application for reproduction should be made to the Communications and Development Unit, Room 201, Home Office, 50 Queen Anne’s Gate, London SW1H 9AT. © Crown copyright 2002 ISBN 1 84082 849.8 ISSN 0072 6435

Foreword

As part of the Crime Reduction Programme, offending behaviour ‘Pathfinder’ programmes are being developed, piloted and ‘rolled-out’ to probation areas in England and Wales. A central component of these Pathfinder initiatives is an emphasis on the importance of monitoring, research and evaluation to provide an evidence base of their effectiveness. This report presents interim findings from the on-going evaluation of offending behaviour programmes being conducted by Leicester and Liverpool Universities. The first stage of the study examines organisational issues in seven pilot programmes and is based on interviews conducted with programme deliverers, programme managers and senior managers. The report summarises each of the programmes then makes overall conclusions and concerns that need to be addressed. Although the Pathfinder programmes outlined in this report are different in the offending behaviours they target and their content, they have several aspects of their implementation and delivery in common. Many of these aspects had shortfalls, which, in the light of experience, could be improved. The study therefore offers useful lessons for probation areas considering delivering offending behaviour programmes. Chris Lewis Offenders and Corrections Unit Research, Development and Statistics Directorate

i

ii

Contents

Summary

v

1

Introduction

1

2

The Priestley One-to-One Programme

5

3

The ASRO and PRISM Programmes ASRO (Addressing Substance-Related Offending) PRISM (Programme for Reducing Individual Substance Misuse)

9 9 18

4

Focus on Violence Programme for male and female offenders

23

5

Drink-impaired Drivers programme

27

6

West Midlands Sex Offender Programme

31

7

Aggression Replacement Training (ART) Programme

37

8

Conclusions and recommendations

41

iii

iv

Summary

Pathfinder Programmes are part of the structured programmes of intervention within probation orders. A central component of these Pathfinder initiatives from the outset was an emphasis on the importance of ongoing monitoring, research and evaluation. The Pathfinder Evaluation Research is a three-year project of work commissioned by the Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Department from the Universities of Leicester and Liverpool. This interim report, researched before the creation of the National Probation Service, mainly describes the seven programmes evaluated but there is also a discussion of the key issues arising in programme delivery. The study did not look at the impact of the programmes on reoffending at this early stage. At this stage in the evaluation, methods used mainly relate to initial information-gathering for the seven projects examined and include site visits, semi-structured interviews with staff, examination of manuals and other documents and discussion with management concerning data collection procedures. Offenders’ views of the programmes were not examined. Seven Pathfinder programmes in 13 probation service areas are examined. All the programmes are based on cognitive-behavioural principles and either tackle general offending behaviour or specific problems linked to offending behaviour patterns. A short outline of each programme is given below, followed by a summary of the issues which are relevant to all these programmes: implementation, referral and targeting, staffing and training, communication, programme integrity and monitoring, and accommodation. The Priestley One-to-One Programme is a general offending behaviour programme designed for one-to-one work with offenders and was piloted in Cumbria, Powys, Shropshire and Surrey Probation Services. It first identifies the needs of an offender before moving onto exercises designed to teach and improve social skills, problem-solving, empathy, self-management, goal-setting and attitudes and values about crime. There are 20 weekly sessions, each lasting an hour. Assessment at the end of the programme measures levels of change. The Priestley One-to-One Programme appeared to be well received by probation staff and, in particular, the training was commented on favourably. As experience in running the programme is gained over time, so Areas can contribute significantly to its development. It is recommended that systems are implemented to record potential issues and bring them to a central forum involving the programme developers. This is already underway in one Area. v


Referrals were reported to be mainly white males and the referral system was seen to be in need of improvement. Drop-outs ranged from 25 per cent to 40 per cent. Video and audiotape recording facilities were in operation but formal procedures for reviewing taped sessions and feeding back to tutors were not well established. Informal viewing of tapes and some feedback was taking place but not systematically. There is a need to improve accommodation, and it was noted that lack of space in probation offices is a general problem. ASRO and PRISM are both programmes for offenders who have a major problem of substance abuse linked to their pattern of offending behaviour. ASRO is for group work and PRISM is a similar programme for one-to-one work. Both programmes involved joint working between the probation service and external ‘partnership’ agencies. ASRO (Addressing Substance-Related Offending) is being implemented in four probation areas (Gloucestershire, Inner London, Lancashire and South-East London). To date, 13 programmes have been delivered, or are currently being delivered, across a total of nine sites in the four areas and 121 offenders have commenced programmes. The ASRO programme has been implemented in the four areas described in this report in quite different ways with some significant changes made to the programme itself. It is not clear therefore what exactly has been delivered, what is being evaluated and the effect of any changes will need to be examined closely. The centrally re-drafted manual may need to be re-launched. Staff who use the programme have a generally positive view of the materials provided and the training they had received. However, they also made some critical comments on the programme manual with reference to its quality of presentation, conceptual level, how appropriate it was for engaging some participants, and some aspects of session contents. It was suggested that the programme needed other ingredients. There has been a sizeable drop-out rate. At this interim stage in the evaluation, of the 121 offenders who had started the ASRO programme, only 24 had completed it. The high level of drop-outs may be partly because substance-related offenders tend to have disorganised lifestyles that can interfere with a regular commitment. Also, the programme is still relatively new and staff have as yet only limited experience of using it. Other factors such as an intensive, slow start to the programme may also play a part. PRISM (Programme Reducing Individual Substance Misuse) is currently being piloted in Bedfordshire, Gloucestershire and Inner London Probation Services. Offenders’ needs are identified before moving on to exercises designed to reduce the use of substances, to vi

Summary

promote a healthier lifestyle, and to teach and improve social problem-solving, selfmanagement and goal-setting in the context of substance use, and the attitudes and values which support the use of substances and offending. These needs are examined again at the end of the programme in order to assess levels of change. The PRISM Programme has 20 sessions lasting between one and two hours, which are delivered twice a week for the first four sessions and weekly thereafter. The development of systems to ensure good referral and targeting emerged as a major organisational issue. The success of any programme will largely depend upon its delivery to the appropriate offenders. Again there will be local variations, but referral systems must be explicit in terms of applying (and communicating) the targeting criteria for screening offenders in and out of the programme. Focus on Violence Programmes for Male and Female Offenders is a Derbyshire Probation Service programme. There was a gap in provision for offenders convicted of violence and local statistics indicated that there was a higher proportion of violent offending in Derbyshire than would have been expected for the size of the population. The programme was hence developed locally in consultation with a Forensic Psychologist in order to meet these needs. The evaluated programme consists of 16 two-hour sessions, normally delivered by two members of staff. Although between six and eight members per group is seen as the optimum, up to 12 offenders may be accepted per intake. Sessions are run at two sites in the main centres of population, Derby and Chesterfield, but the programme has also been run with women at HM Prison Foston. The programme is supported by a full set of documents including programme manuals in parallel versions for male and female offenders. There are supplementary materials, a theory manual, and evaluation methods and measures. However, sessions are very full and staff regard the material as possibly too ‘crowded’. The service ran 11 programmes for male offenders in the financial year 1999-2000. There were 73 starters and 54 completed – a completion rate of just under 74 per cent. During the same year only 11 orders were made for women offenders to the programme (five completed). The Programme for Drink-impaired Drivers is one of several run by the South Yorkshire Probation Service’s Group Programmes Unit. The target group has been viewed as a discrete group of offenders, whose needs were not being met elsewhere. In many cases, they have no convictions for other offences. The programme’s targets include improving knowledge and problem-solving skills and changing anti-social attitudes. In addition to direct training methods, use is also made of motivational enhancement approaches. vii


The programme consists of 12 two-hour weekly sessions and the theory manual sets out targeted risk factors, methods and exercises related to each. There are follow-up assignments between sessions. The average group size is eight but has been as high as twelve. Mixed gender groups are run when there are at least two women who can take part. Drop-out rates are generally lower than for other programmes which is probably due to the types of offenders convicted of this offence. Referral and selection procedures are described as working well. The task is perhaps more straightforward given the nature of the offence and the specialised provision. The West Midlands Sex Offender Programme is an intensive programme which illustrates the pattern of provision of interventions for sex offenders. All referred offenders attend an induction module of 50 hours which is a ‘closed’ group. Offenders (all male) are then allocated to one of two groups, dependent on assessed risk level. Low risk/low deviance offenders attend a relapse prevention programme lasting 50 hours. Others attend the full programme of 200 hours which, following the induction module, contains modules which address cognitive distortions, self-esteem, intimacy and emotional loneliness, social and problem-solving skills, fantasy modification, victim awareness and empathy, relapse prevention and lifestyle change. There are usually eight in a group although groups of 12 or 13 were not uncommon. Based on recent figures, the overall caseload of the Sex Offender Programmes team is in the region of 800, of whom approximately 370 are in the community. Of these, an estimated 170 will be actively attending the programme at any one time. Although drop-out rates are high at over 60 per cent, it has been calculated that the average number of hours completed by participants is in the region of 100. The drop-out rate includes a proportion who stop for valid reasons, the rate of drop-out for unacceptable reasons is thought to be about 15 per cent. Of 126 offenders monitored over a two-to-three year period for evaluative purposes, a total of four re-offended whilst in the programme. Aggression Replacement Training Programme (ART) was developed by Wiltshire Probation Service. An analysis of Pre-Sentence Reports (PSRs) showed that violent offences accounted for about one-third of all PSRs. There are between six to ten programmes delivered a year at two sites (Swindon and Trowbridge), predominantly in evening sessions as a high proportion of offenders are in employment. It entails 16 weekly sessions, usually with six to eight offenders per group.

viii

Summary

Sessions combine three elements (social skills training, self-control training, and training in moral reasoning) into an integrated design. Each session is spilt in two and incorporates two of these three elements. Hence each of the elements constitutes ten of the 55-minute halfsessions. There are ready-made structured learning exercises (e.g., role-play scenarios) for each aspect of the programme. There is a programme manual but there are no hand-out materials as the focus is on live, in-session activity. Completion rates have varied between 65 per cent and 75 per cent. In addition to the usual reasons for non-completion, there are two issues that are specific to this programme: • inability to attend two consecutive sessions is regarded as unacceptable and results in suspension from the programme; and • a proportion of those who drop-out at the Swindon site is thought to arise from the pattern of shift-work at major local employers, which could influence ability to attend. In addition, as Wiltshire is a large rural county, there are travel and accessibility problems – offenders are often brought to programme sites by a combination of staff effort and the use of taxis.

General issues Although the seven Pathfinder programmes outlined in this interim report are very different in many ways, they have several features in implementation and delivery features in common, which, in the light of experience, could be improved. One aspect that seems to be common to all of these programmes is the enthusiasm of the staff for the programmes although some concerns were expressed which are noted below. Several of the programmes described here were developed or adopted as a result of local initiatives, some going back several years, and the design and content of most programmes has evolved over time. Flexibility and adaptability are useful at the design stage but programmes should be fixed once they become Pathfinder programmes and are to be evaluated. Where programmes are run with a combination of staff from probation areas and partnership organisations, such as ASRO and PRISM, formal contracts should be in place.

ix


Targeting suitable offenders for a programme is an important issue. There did not seem to be a problem with insufficient referrals for any of these programmes but securing appropriate referrals for a particular programme was a concern felt by many. Offenders often had a multitude of problems including alcohol and drugs and some programmes such as Priestley One-to-One were thought to be unsuitable for these specific problems. Apart from the Drink-impaired Driving programme, there were high drop-out rates from programmes, either before the commencement of a programme, or in the early stages. This is linked with the issue of appropriate referrals but may also reflect the sort of material used particularly at the start of a programme. The first sessions of some programmes such as PRISM and ASRO were felt to be too long and intense at such an early stage. Some offenders, such as substance abusers, are known to have high drop-out rates related to their chaotic lifestyle, which makes a regular commitment to a programme difficult to maintain. Further examination is needed of the factors influencing offender participation and drop-out rates. In relation to the suitability of referrals for programmes, materials should also be suitable for different groups of people. Some of the programmes were criticised as being too slanted towards male, white, heterosexual offenders. Good communication systems within the probation area and between partnership organisations and probation are vital. Currently, no one system emerges as the best and given local variations it is unlikely that this will occur. However, it is important to note that a good communication strategy is needed in order to inform all staff within the Area about the programme, as well as those working in partnership. As yet, no National Standards have been set regarding the competencies needed in staff to deliver programmes – this is an issue that will need further discussion. This is particularly important for programmes run in partnership with staff from other organisations who do not always have the traditional probation officer training or knowledge of the probation service. The provision of administrative staff emerged as a significant issue during the interviews – most of those interviewed expressed dissatisfaction with the levels of administrative staff provided. Pathfinder programmes require exhaustive data collection and preparation, and, without proper administrative support, practitioners could find themselves spending more time engaged in such tasks rather than working with offenders.

x

Summary

The concept of programme integrity and need for monitoring was well understood by staff in all these programmes, although lack of resources sometimes made this difficult to achieve. Most of the programmes were using video recorders or had plans to do so shortly. However, there were uncertainties about how to use the material produced. Some tapes are viewed but many others accumulate unseen. Guidance is needed on how to scrutinise taped sessions and provide feedback to staff. It is also unclear how the volume of material should be managed and stored. There was an uneven pattern with regard to provision of accommodation. Rooms designated to the running of the programmes were on the whole seen as more satisfactory – setting up the room correctly for a session was time-consuming in rooms used by other staff. Guidelines that set out the minimum facilities required to deliver programmes successfully are needed.

xi


xii

1

Introduction

The Crime Reduction Programme and Pathfinder Programmes The Home Office’s Crime Reduction Programme (CRP) was established to develop and implement an evidence-based crime reduction strategy. Over the next few years £250 million will be invested to fund initiatives under this umbrella. The Crime Reduction Programme funds both social and situational crime prevention projects and one of the areas highlighted for funding was that of effective interventions with offenders focusing on reducing levels of re-offending. In order to address these specific concerns, funding was made available to pilot and evaluate work in the community in four key areas: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv)

offenders on community rehabilitation orders; offenders on community punishment or community punishment and rehabilitation orders; resettlement of short-term prisoners; and improving offenders’ basic skills.

In 1998, as a consequence of the Crime Reduction Programme, the Joint Prison and Probation Accreditation Panel was formed. Comprising of international criminal justice intervention experts, the main purpose of this panel is to award ‘accredited’ status to interventions that meet standards of design and delivery that have been shown by research to be likely to contribute to their overall effectiveness. The panel, however, also provides advice and guidance to programme developers who are in the process of developing a programme towards accredited status. Such programmes that are yet to be accredited are called 'Pathfinder Programmes', the first cohort of which was announced in September 1998 and was added to in 1999 as further programmes were identified. A central component of these Pathfinder initiatives from the outset was an emphasis on the importance of ongoing monitoring, research and evaluation with regard to all the programmes earmarked for development. Research teams from the Universities of Leicester and Liverpool are in the process of carrying out a three-year evaluation of these Pathfinder programmes. A final report will be published when the evaluation is completed in 2003. The present report covers the first phase of the evaluation. As an interim report, it mainly describes the seven programmes evaluated but there is also a discussion of the key issues arising in programme delivery.

1


The evaluation design being applied within this research involves four strands: • An organisational audit to determine the effect of implementation and delivery on the success of the programme. • Continued monitoring throughout the Pathfinder of offender characteristics, sentence details, programme information, attendance, compliance, targeting procedures, offender and staff feedback and psychometric test scores. • An evaluation of the Pathfinder programmes’ impact on re-offending at one-year and two-year follow-up points. • A cost-effectiveness analysis, both in general terms and comparatively across programmes.

Research methods At this stage in the evaluation, methods used mainly relate to initial information-gathering for the seven Pathfinder programmes examined. For each programme the evaluation has centred on the pilot probation areas – those that applied for Pathfinder pilot status and were successful. Site visits have involved collecting documents of different types such as session manuals. Semi-structured interviews were carried out with probation staff involved in the projects (management, practitioners, research officers and administration) in order to collect information on staffing levels, the experience of staff, provision of staff training, accommodation, communication within the service, availability of course material, measures in place to ensure treatment integrity, compliance with monitoring procedures and costs. Information was also obtained from staff at management level about data collection procedures, in order to establish what data were currently collected and its status, and to identify any gaps in their data collection procedures. The opportunity was also taken to alert staff to what other types of data they would be expected to collect. This included data on offender characteristics, referrals, tutors, programmes, evaluation and monitoring information on offenders, and costs.

2

Introduction

The structure of the report Seven Pathfinder programmes in thirteen probation service areas are examined. All the programmes are based on cognitive-behavioural principles and either tackle general offending behaviour or specific problems linked to offending behaviour patterns. The next chapter deals with the Priestley One-to-One Programme, which is a general offending behaviour programme designed for one-to-one work with offenders. It was piloted in Cumbria, Powys , Shropshire and Surrey Probation Services. Chapter Three examines two very similar substance abuse programmes. Addressing Substance Related Offending (ASRO) is a community-based group intervention. Its implementation and progress in four probation areas – Gloucestershire, Inner London , Lancashire and South-East London – are described. The Programme for Reducing Individual Substance Abuse (PRISM) is designed for one-to-one work with offenders. It is being piloted in Bedfordshire, Gloucestershire and Inner London Probation Services. Chapters Four, Five, Six and Seven deal with programmes each covering a different facet related to offending behaviour. Chapter Four concerns a Violence Programme for Male and Female offenders which has been piloted in Derbyshire Probation Service. Chapter Five examines a programme for Drink-impaired Drivers evaluated in South Yorkshire. Chapter Six discusses a Sex Offender Programme in the West Midlands and Chapter Seven looks at an Aggression Replacement Training (ART) Programme piloted in the Wiltshire Probation Service. Overall conclusions and concerns which need to be addressed are outlined in Chapter Eight. The interviews highlighted several key features which, in the light of experience, could facilitate the process of implementing the programmes. Each chapter covers these areas in relation to the particular programme discussed: programme development and implementation, referral and targeting, programme materials, staffing levels, skills needed, training and administrative support, communication, programme integrity, monitoring and accommodation.

3


4

2


The Priestley One-to-One Programme is a general offending behaviour programme designed for one-to-one work with offenders and was being piloted by Probation Services in Cumbria, Powys, Shropshire and Surrey.

An outline of the Priestley One-to-One Programme Priestley One-to-One consists of 20 weekly sessions, each lasting an hour. The offender's needs are identified at the beginning of the One-to-One Programme before moving on to exercises which are designed to teach and improve social skills, problem-solving, empathy, self-management, goal-setting and attitudes and values about crime. Assessments are repeated at the end of the programme and compared in order to measure levels of change. Referrals were mainly white males, typically persistent offenders with a range of convictions.

The initial evaluation of the pilot implementation was carried out via a series of face-to-face interviews with probation staff. Visits were made to Cumbria, Powys, Shropshire and Surrey Probation Services and interviews were held with senior management (3), line managers (6), and tutors delivering the Pathfinder Programme (8). Both senior and line managers had experience of seven to twenty-six years within the Probation Service. All the senior managers interviewed had a depth of experience in managing teams and in project management. The line managers interviewed had all managed teams within the Probation Service and were responsible for the delivery of the Priestley One-to-One Programme. The range of experience amongst the tutors for the One-to-One Programme was more varied. Some had up to fifteen years experience of the Probation Service, others had been recruited as Programme Delivery Officers and had been in post for less than a year.

Programme development and implementation The Priestley One-to-One Programme was developed by Phillip Priestley in 1993 for use by probation officers in Somerset, and the services that implemented the programme were not involved at the development stage. Despite this, the service personnel, mainly line managers, were encouraged to attend regular development meetings, hosted by the National Probation Directorate, to discuss issues that arose from the implementation and delivery of the programme.

5


In order to aid the delivery of the programme, a Service Implementation Plan should be agreed at a very early stage. This plan should cover communication systems, all issues concerning staff who manage and deliver the programme, organisational structures to ensure effective referral and targeting, structures to facilitate programme integrity, and provision of appropriate accommodation. In addition, the importance of having staff with experience of running programmes and an understanding of the organisational demands of implementing and running programmes should not be under-estimated.

Referral and targeting Referrals were reported to be mainly white males. Drop-out rates ranged from 25 per cent to 40 per cent. Referral is a major organisational issue as the success of the programme will, in part, depend on the programme being used with appropriate offenders. There will be local variations, but referral systems must be explicit in terms of applying the targeting criteria for screening offenders in and out of the programme.

Programme materials The programme material was felt to be of a high standard, although tutors felt the programme was rather slow to start. Some exercises were seen as too easy. For example, offenders saw the breathing exercises as a waste of time: ‘I know how to breathe’. Senior managers and tutors commented that the programme seemed to be aimed at young males and the material was not always appropriate for women. Tutors also felt that offenders with literacy problems may struggle with the programme.

Staffing – levels, skills needed, training and administrative support Senior and line managers had similar views about staffing levels and selection criteria for staff recruited to run the One-to-One Programme. Running programmes is a skilled task and identifying staff competencies required to do this work needs clarification, particularly when recruiting staff who are not trained probation officers. As experience of running One-to-One Programmes increases it should be possible to define the competencies needed to run the programme more exactly. There were signs of tension between trained probation officers and staff recruited specifically to run programmes. Some interviewees felt that new staff might lack the ability to relate to offenders in depth, particularly in respect to antidiscrimination and issues relating to motivation.

6


Programme staffing levels will vary locally and cannot be prescribed easily. One question which needs to be considered is whether a substantial number of staff should be trained to run the programme, although not all will be actually doing so at any one time, or whether to develop specialists in programme delivery. This is particularly relevant for probation areas that plan to run more than one programme. Also to be considered is whether tutors should be specialists in one programme or be trained to deliver a range of programmes. Staff training is important and it can be anticipated that demands for further training and development will emerge as staff currently involved in programme delivery mature in post. The training was well received by line managers and tutors, although it was felt that booster sessions would be valuable once staff had some experience of running the programme. When possible, staffing issues including organisation, support, and management of staff teams should be considered when drawing up the implementation plan. Those involved at the planning stage should be familiar with the demands of running programmes. The provision of administrative staff emerged as a significant issue during the interviews. These programmes are resource-intensive with respect to data gathering and, without proper administrative support, will eat heavily into the time of practitioners.

Communication Good communication across all levels of staff is crucial and dependent upon many local variables such as numbers of staff, organisational structures and geographical location of staff. Formal meetings with all levels of staff were seen as important. In areas that covered a large geographical area, email or a newsletter provided an alternative. All line managers interviewed felt they had good communication of all types with senior managers. Line managers also reported good communication with tutors. Tutors’ views were more mixed – some felt that information did not arrive quickly enough from senior managers. Tutors were often based in different locations and not all had access to electronic communication methods. One Service held forums where line managers discussed the running of the programme; these meetings were valued by tutors. Given the variation in Areas, it is not wise to prescribe one system for all, but a good communication strategy should inform a wider audience about the programme, pass information quickly and on a regular basis, and integrate staff’s knowledge and awareness of both local and national developments.

7


Programme integrity, monitoring and accommodation Video and audiotape recording facilities were in operation but formal procedures for reviewing taped sessions and feeding back to tutors were not well established. Informal viewing of tapes and some feedback was taking place but not in a systematic way. Senior managers thought there should be a formal system to measure integrity and feedback to tutors and managers and that training was necessary to review recordings effectively. Managers and tutors expressed concern about the vast amount of material collected, which could create problems in terms of the bulk of material to be stored and the staff time needed to collate and store this material. Monitoring systems were in various stages of development. Concerns were expressed about the time taken and the availability of resources to allow efficient data collection. There were some problems with accommodation. Two problems mentioned were lack of dedicated, purpose-built rooms for programme delivery and the fact that central control of accommodation made it difficult to resolve problems quickly. Tutors said that lack of suitable accommodation had led to some sessions being cancelled and rearranged – not conducive to running the One-to-One Programme effectively, particularly at the early stages with an offender.

Conclusions Probation staff were enthusiastic about the Priestley One-to-One Programme. Tutors enjoyed delivering the programme and the training was commented on most favourably. There is a need to improve accommodation, although it was noted that lack of space in probation offices is a general problem. The implementation of systems (already underway in one Area) to record potential issues and bring them to a central forum, involving the programme developers, may be worth considering. Information gathering in support of integrity and monitoring was not seen as problematic (although the resource implications were). The major policy issue was with respect to the development of systems to analyse information and to use this information to facilitate effective programme delivery. This issue cuts across all the Areas and may be work that could be carried out together.

8

3

The ASRO and PRISM Programmes

ASRO (Addressing Substance-Related Offending) is an offending behaviour programme for substance-abusing offenders, based on cognitive-behavioural principles, and designed for group work with offenders. PRISM (Programme for Reducing Individual Substance Misuse) is a similar programme for one-to-one work with substance-abusing offenders. Both programmes were developed by Mary McMurran and Philip Priestley during 1999, at the request of the Home Office Pathfinder Unit and are based on the same theoretical principles. Programme materials include a theory manual, session manual, and session supplements. Apart from their mode of delivery (group work versus one-to-one) the two programmes cover virtually identical ground. As the programmes were specially devised and are of comparatively recent origin, there is no pre-existing evaluation material and the present project will furnish the first opportunity to gather information of this kind. A distinctive feature of both the ASRO and PRISM programmes is the process of joint working between the probation service and external ‘partnership’ agencies. The field of substance abuse is not solely the preserve of the Probation Service: both health service staff and those from voluntary sector agencies provide extensive services within it. In addressing substance-related offending, probation officers and colleagues work closely with these other groups. The pattern of provision and the precise form of multi-agency working differs slightly from area to area, and this can obviously raise a number of organisational issues in respect of how ASRO or PRISM are delivered.

ASRO (Addressing Substance-Related Offending) ASRO is being implemented in four probation areas: Gloucestershire, Inner London (both also piloted PRISM), Lancashire and South-East London. The programmes started between February and May, 2000. To date, 13 programmes have been delivered, or are currently being delivered, across a total of nine sites in the four areas and 121 offenders have commenced programmes.

9


An outline of the ASRO Programme The programme consists of 20 two-hour sessions and would normally be delivered by two members of staff. The ASRO programme (McMurran and Priestley, 1999) is designed to enhance motivation to change, teach skills of self-control and relapse prevention and encourage individuals to modify their lifestyles in ways that will reduce their risks of relapse into substance abuse and resort to further offending. Participants in ASRO are required to keep diaries throughout the programme. This is seen both as a method of change by promoting awareness of factors associated with substance abuse, and as a means of monitoring the programme’s impact. The theory manual also includes a set of materials for evaluation of some dimensions of change amongst programme participants. Most of these are psychometric instruments designed for administration as a part of the programme. They are divided into two groups: one is a set of predictors of change, the other measures the process of change.

The information was collected principally from a series of 15 interviews with staff in each of the four areas. Three groups of staff were interviewed in each case: a member of the senior management group, usually an Assistant Chief Officer with responsibility for the programme; the line manager, usually a Senior Probation Officer; and practitioners directly involved in delivery of the programme to participating offenders. In addition, some services provided other materials, such as job descriptions of key staff. These were examined alongside the programme manuals and other materials provided for support of the programme.

Programme implementation and development There was a similar and fairly straightforward rationale for adoption of the ASRO programme across all four areas. Substance-related offending is widespread and a major demand on probation time. The availability of an expertly designed ‘off-the-shelf’ programme was seen as offering great advantages. It is widely appreciated that substance abuse problems greatly detract from offenders’ capacities to sustain attendance at other structured programmes. In two areas, there had been pre-existing substance abuse programmes which were discontinued in favour of ASRO. One of the advantages of Pathfinder programmes mentioned was the research and evaluation aspect: ‘…we wanted the research and we wanted the evaluation so that we knew what we were doing was effective’. Staff therefore welcomed the provision of a carefully planned programme which rested on a sound theoretical basis, and was supported by session manuals and supplements, delivery 10


guidelines, evaluation materials, and associated staff training. Probation and partnership staff were trained in the same manner and, in fact, attended the same training events. They spoke positively about the programme as a whole and there was evidently a lot of enthusiasm for the work. However, there were some criticisms of the materials provided: • Interviewees felt that the original version of the manual had been very badly presented and whilst the revised version was an improvement it was still deficient in some respects. In one area staff had re-written session plans. It was also suggested that the ‘cognitive-behavioural triangle’ (thoughts, feelings, behaviour) should be communicated more explicitly as part of the session contents. • The opening set of sessions was described as too slow-moving for some offenders rather than being ‘motivational’. This put some offenders off. Those who completed the programme gave much more positive feedback concerning the second half, though they may of course have been more highly motivated from the outset. • The emphasis on craving, and of focusing on motivational enhancement, was thought to be less appropriate for those offenders who had already gone beyond that stage in attempting to manage their substance abuse problems, for example those on Drug Treatment and Testing Orders (DTTOs). This is an issue which can be taken up in the next stage of the research. • Some commented that the programme demanded a high level of literacy, and was very ‘masculine’ in its style and orientation. • It was felt that the use of diaries and other self-monitoring instruments was difficult to sustain in community settings. Three of the four services running the ASRO programme commented on the need for some pre-programme work for offenders in order to support the programme. This work was felt to be essential, as many of the offenders did not seem ready to start the group programme. Lack of preparedness was seen as one of the causes of the high drop-out rate. In one area the programme had been altered to a significant extent. This consisted of adding pre-group and post-group sessions and was seen as essential to ensure the programme addressed the range of problems and varying level of preparedness of those assigned to participate. In another area, the need for such material was suggested but had not been developed. Alongside this, it emerged that some programme tutors and managers felt they had to spend significant time in re-designing portions of the manuals. From statements made, it seems 11


unlikely that this compromised the conceptual model of the programme. However, it is not clear at this stage how much it may have involved departure from the planned content or sequence of activities. In another area, a senior manager said that the programme could not stand on its own, especially for those on DTTOs, and required a broader context of other activities. This included provision of a ‘process group’ meeting that took place weekly and was also attended by other offenders not taking part in ASRO. The four services using ASRO differed considerably from each other. The probation services diverged somewhat in their mode of implementing the programme, partly in response to local organisational circumstances and patterns of referral. Modes of delivery varied between one and three sessions per week, making use of both daytime and evening sessions. One respondent thought the ideal was to deliver the programme over a ten-week period. Overall programme time-commitment was estimated to be more than twice that of face-to-face delivery time and a total of five to six hours per session was cited, though one senior manager expressed scepticism regarding the need for this. There were several comments to the effect that the pace at which the ‘What Works’ agenda is driven has been too fast from the outset and many pronouncements regarding time-scales had been unrealistic. There were criticisms that consultation regarding such matters was not always adequate. Similarly, staff at all levels pointed out that pursuit of the new agenda was not always accompanied by an easing of previous workloads or responsibilities. Some teams adopt a model in which group tutors also have active caseloads. In response to questions on this theme, the word ‘stretched’ was very commonly used.

Referral, targeting and drop-out rates Across the four areas, participants have been predominantly between 18-30 years of age, and with an isolated exception in one group at one site, exclusively males. Probation services mostly took the view that they would not place women offenders on ASRO and where substance-related offending was present would refer them to the one-to-one PRISM programme instead. Those interviewed in one area envisaged that at some stage an ASRO group might be run solely for women offenders. In terms of ethnic group membership, participants were mainly white in areas other than Inner London. Most respondents thought that the programme materials could be modified to deal with cultural diversity amongst offender groups but this issue had not yet been explicitly addressed in any area. A group of eight is considered to be the optimum size by many staff although of the 13 groups, the size ranged from four to 13, with six groups of ten or more participants.

12


Some area staff expressed dissatisfaction with current criteria for selecting offenders, stating these excluded many offenders who could benefit from the programme. In one area, the lower cut-off point in LSI-R scores was to be reduced, which potentially raises the prospect of ‘net-widening’ and should be carefully monitored. This was despite an overload of referrals, who were not seen as suitable in other respects: it was suggested that PSR writers require more precise criteria on the nature of an offender’s substance-abuse problem when making referral decisions. With regard to unacceptable absences by offenders, members of the programme team not currently delivering sessions inform case managers by fax if offenders do not arrive for sessions. It is intended that this should be done no later than half an hour after the session begins. In one area, there were also daily team meetings to review attendance and the need for individual catch-up sessions. However, there has been a sizeable and possibly worrying drop-out rate. At this interim stage in the evaluation, of the 121 offenders who had started the ASRO programme, only 24 had completed it. The high level of drop-outs may be influenced by two factors: • Substance-related offenders tend to have disorganised lifestyles that can interfere with a regular commitment. Also, there are compulsive elements to substance abuse that can interfere with any regular commitments. • The programme is still relatively new and staff have as yet only limited experience of using it. Other factors such as an intensive, slow start to the programme may also play a part. For this programme as for others, large groups of ten or more where eight is seen as the maximum group size may be partly in anticipation of drop-outs. However, whether it is acceptable to anticipate or pre-plan drop-out is a question which should be considered. Communication within teams was reported to be good and there were no significant problems reported in this respect. Similarly, no-one reported significant problems of access between programme staff, line managers, and senior managers. The main deficiencies that were identified related to communication barriers between staff running the programme and case managers who were responsible for the overall progress of an offender though a probation order. That, of course, is by no means unique to ASRO.

13


There also appeared to be some gaps in communication between probation staff and those of partnership agencies. When personnel left, as happened in one area, and were not immediately replaced, this led to a perceived ‘hole in communications’ between probation and the partnership agency. Staff from the four areas had met each other during training events. They found it useful to have contact with colleagues from other areas but plans to remain in contact had not been materialised due to workload demands and the absence of an established network or mechanism for this purpose. There was extensive familiarity with the ‘What Works’ agenda amongst those interviewed, and some staff had played significant roles in management of relevant initiatives or dissemination of ideas. Home Office information on policy and practice tended to be filtered through management hierarchies and therefore programme tutors were sometimes less aware of the framework surrounding ASRO. Some staff involved in programme delivery emphasised the need for direct receipt of information from the Home Office. In contrast, one senior manager preferred that Probation Circulars and similar documents should be sent only to area headquarters offices, with local management then preparing material for distribution. This enabled them to build it more directly into other management communications.

Staffing – levels, skills needed, training and administrative support Staff involved in management and delivery of the ASRO programme were generally a very experienced group. On average, they had had several years of probation experience ranging from three to 23 years. All staff had appropriate previous experience in terms of running offending behaviour or other group programmes, staff training, management and supervision. There was no instance in which individuals appeared to be carrying out a task for which they did not have relevant past experience. However, there was some lack of continuity at senior management level in terms of who had prepared Pathfinder bids, managed them in their initial stages, and those who subsequently took on responsibility for implementation – this was sometimes carried out by recently appointed or promoted staff. While there were no marked problems arising from this, there were references to periods of uncertainty. It may be speculated that having several transitions occurring in parallel has not eased the process of making new departures and innovations in some areas. Staff training is required prior to running the programme but there were suggestions that some staff were not suitable for training to run programmes, had gained little from it and that more attention should be paid to how tutors for group programmes were selected. Another viewpoint, heard from delivery staff and management, was that group tutors required separate training on the skills involved in running groups. 14


Staff training entails an introduction to the theoretical background of the approach, and familiarisation with and practice in the use of the session materials. Training is currently delivered in a series of three events: an initial four-day block; a second two-day block; and a final review day. It is envisaged, however, that this training will be modified and increased in length. All staff spoke in very positive terms generally about the quality of training they had received to run the programme. At the same time, they said they often returned from training with many unresolved issues and would have benefited from some additional training. For example, managers in two areas felt that a session to look at implementation issues would have been beneficial. They suggested that this should have preceded the staff training so that they had a fairer idea of what concerns their staff would come back with and could have made plans for these prior to the training. One interviewee commented that specialist drugs workers are much in demand at present and it is not always easy to recruit suitably experienced staff to work on probation programmes. The structure of the staff teams delivering ASRO was therefore quite variable. All were accountable to a member of probation service senior management. Most had an experienced practitioner who had taken up a line manager role who was responsible for several (if not all) of an area’s programme activities (including in some instances several Pathfinders programmes). Two of the services had created the new post of 'Treatment Supervisors/Managers'. This included responsibility for monitoring programme integrity, maintaining systems for this and providing supervision to programme tutors. In one service, ASRO was delivered by a partnership agency and in another, staff from a partnership agency were seconded to work in the probation programmes' team. Those who commented on administrative support all agreed that the level of support for ASRO as well as other programmes has been and remains insufficient. The amount of administrative work surrounding provision of accredited programmes has been widely under-estimated. It involves not only efficient internal management through lines of accountability from tutors, through programme managers to senior managers, but also extensive liaison between programme teams and case managers, oversight of referral procedures, session preparation, de-briefing, monitoring, supervision, and data collection and thorough documentation of all aspects of this. In most areas, programme staff carry out a sizeable volume of the administration. Staff expressed reservations about this and again often made reference to the need to re-configure workloads accordingly.

15


Programme integrity, monitoring and accommodation General programme monitoring information is being collected steadily, including numbers and sources of referrals, commencement, attendance and completion. One area has devised an ‘Integrity Checklist’ for recording operational details of implementation. In another area, reasons for non-commencement and for drop-out are also recorded and this is valuable information that should ideally be collected as standard in all areas. In-session treatment integrity is monitored by a variety of methods. In all areas, this includes writing-up session review logs after every session, accompanied by discussion of what did and did not go well. This takes, for example, 30-40 minutes per session. Emphasis is also placed on the joint leadership of sessions by two members of a group of three allocated to the programme, and the regular exchange of views concerning sessions that results. Videotaping is carried out but, as with other Pathfinder programmes, while some tapes are viewed, many others have accumulated unseen. Guidance is expected on how to scrutinise taped sessions and provide staff feedback. It is also not yet clear how to manage the volume of material generated. In one area visited here the quality of video recording was stated to be very poor. Whilst partnership staff have probably had less exposure to the ‘What Works’ agenda than probation staff, the importance and value of ensuring programme and treatment integrity was understood and recognised. In addition to these information-gathering processes, areas also have supervisory or other feedback arrangements. For example in one area, the programme manager currently meets staff every fifth week, and every third session is to be reviewed with the Treatment Supervisor once that person is in post. Elsewhere, ratios of one supervision session per three or four programme sessions are typical. There was an uneven pattern with regard to accommodation. One area regarded the quality of this as unsatisfactory. In another area, the designated room was not always available and repeated negotiation was required to secure it. In the area using multiple sites most accommodation suites were adequate; however a search was continuing for other sites to expand access to more offenders. Of the two hostel sites in use, it was recognised that one had much better quality accommodation.

Conclusions The ASRO programme has been implemented in the four areas described here in quite different ways with some significant changes made to the programme itself. This makes it unclear what exactly has been delivered, what is being evaluated and the effect of any changes will need to be examined closely. Alternatively, the centrally re-drafted manual may need to be re-launched. 16


Staff commented that the ASRO programme must be located in the wider context of work with substance-abusing offenders' services. Overlap in this field of work could have an impact on the validity of any conclusions that might be drawn from the evaluation research. For example, offenders may also attend other group work sessions and there could be monitoring by other agencies, notably health services. In its present form, the ASRO programme may not be suitable for those on DTTOs, as the use of DTTOs with offenders is based on the premise that individuals are likely to benefit from treatment and are at an ‘action’ stage in their responsiveness in which they need maintenance and support. In one area, some of those on the programme were reported to have already stayed off drugs for three months prior to starting the programme. However, the ASRO programme was felt by several interviewees to focus on ‘craving’ (which is at its peak during the first attempts at control or abstinence) and this was not received well by some group members, such as those on DTTOs. It may also be inappropriate to place offenders under two different kinds of orders (e.g. those on DTTOs and those on a probation order with additional requirements) in the same groups. Mixing with others in the same group who have already had some experience of drug control could lead to disillusion amongst participants who have not reached this stage and also create difficulties for programme staff. Unlike those on DTTOs, individuals placed on probation with additional requirements may require stabilisation before being able to benefit from intervention. Given its focus on motivational change (Miller and Rollnick, 1991), the programme content of ASRO appears oriented towards those who have not had any preparation for staying off drugs. The suitability of referrals and the high drop-out rate are overlapping areas which might need closer, in-depth study in the full evaluation. There has been a steady flow of referrals to the ASRO programme but it is not clear whether the referrals during this pilot period have been the most suitable ones. This might reflect the issue concerning different orders suggested above. But some respondents have also been unsure about the appropriate risk level to be targeting. Others have mentioned the need for a clearer picture of the relation of substance abuse to an individual’s offence pattern. The high drop-out rate as discussed earlier may be largely related to the chaotic lifestyle and compulsive element related to substance abuse, which can interfere with any regular commitments. Research might need to focus on factors influencing drop-out, the extent to which this is associated (if at all) with aspects of the programme, and whether these can be modified.

17


Staff said they would find it valuable to have contacts with other areas. This could be done through joint review meetings at regular intervals as has been organised for other programmes; access by staff to e-mail facilities; or a programme of brief exchange and discussion visits. One interviewee suggested the use of teleconferences.

PRISM (Programme for Reducing Individual Substance Misuse) The PRISM Programme, similar to ASRO, is designed for one-to-one work with offenders rather than group work. PRISM is being piloted in Bedfordshire, Gloucestershire and Inner London Probation Services.

An outline of the PRISM Programme The PRISM Programme has 20 sessions lasting between one and two hours, which are delivered twice a week for the first four sessions and weekly thereafter. There are also assignments to be completed between sessions – they often take the form of diaries of offender’s feelings with regard to their substance use and/or offending. These are used as tools within sessions rather than as formal assessments of progress. The offender's needs are identified, then the offender progresses to exercises designed to reduce the use of substances. Areas considered are about promoting a healthier lifestyle, teaching and improving social skills, problem-solving, self-management and goal-setting in the context of substance use. It also tries to encourage individuals to change attitudes and values that support the use of substances and offending. Offenders’ needs are assessed again at the end of the programme in order to assess levels of change. The initial evaluation of the pilot implementation was carried out via a series of face-to-face interviews with senior managers (2), line managers (3), and tutors delivering the Pathfinder Programme (5). The interview schedules were designed to facilitate the collection of detailed information about the fine details of the piloting of the programmes, including implementation and staff experiences in delivering the programme. A semi-structured interview schedule was used to collect the same information as for the Priestley One-to-One Programme.

18


Programme development and implementation With respect to the development and implementation of the Programme, it would appear that putting into place partnerships between probation service and other agencies has been found to be useful at all levels. This requires both the probation service and partnership to work together on all aspects of programme delivery. It is also clear that procedures need to be put into place at a very early stage to cover the running of the programme and to outline people’s roles in this. This Service Implementation Plan needs to include a number of issues, including organisational structures, communication and feedback systems, staffing levels and training, procedures to ensure effective referral and targeting, procedures to facilitate programme integrity, and the provision of appropriate accommodation. Furthermore, there are often no formal contracts in place between the probation services and partnership organisations. How this may influence the running of the programme in the long-terms is an issue that needs to be monitored. It also raises issues with respect to collecting data on costs. As with the Priestley One-to-One Programme, the importance of individuals with experience of running programmes is also highlighted.

Referral, targeting and drop-out rates At this stage no offenders have completed the programme. When more information is available to compare those who complete and those who drop out it will be easier to identify appropriate offenders for PRISM. Referrals and targeting should be carefully monitored, along with the suitability of the programme material for all members of this offender group. The main reservations raised by line managers and tutors concerned the length and intensity of the programme. It was felt that this one-to-one programme was highly demanding for both the tutor and the offender with this particular offender group. The first session was long and intensive and tutors felt this acted as a disincentive to continue for some offenders. Session Six moves away from assessment of offenders to skills training. Earlier sessions may need to be less intensive to prevent the high drop out rate: none of the participants had stayed with PRISM to reach the skills sessions. Due to the intensity of the programme there were reservations about how many offenders who were referred would have the right level of motivation and be at the right point physically to undertake the programme. Assessment criteria should incorporate measures of the scale of substance misuse by offenders so that the targets being set are not unrealistic. Levels of substance misuse are not taken into account with referrals to date, which may partly account for the high number of drop-outs and refusals.

19


The line managers all reported that they were disappointed with the low number of referrals and thought that the targeting criteria, particularly the high OGRS (Offender Group Reconviction Score) scores might need reassessing. Line managers are aware of many offenders who do not fit the targeting criteria but who they feel would benefit greatly from the programme. However, the manual does state that the OGRS cut-off score can be overridden by professional judgement if the referring officer feels that the offender would benefit from the programme. Staff interviewed did not seem to be aware of this, as some asked the evaluators whether this could be done. Making PRISM more widely known to appropriate offenders may increase take-up for this programme. For example, information about the programme will be made available to those involved in the DTTO (Drug Treatment and Testing Orders) process.

Staff – levels, skills required, training and administrative support Managers had experience ranging from being newly appointed to up to 30 years in the Probation Service. All tutors had extensive probation service experience and some had run offending behaviour programmes. As yet, no national standards have been set regarding the sort of skills needed to recruit staff to deliver the PRISM programme. This is an issue that will need further discussion in the future. This issue becomes more important for programmes run in partnership with outside organisations, particularly if staff without the traditional probation officer training or knowledge of the Probation Service are recruited. Levels of staffing were consistent across the services, but again this is not something that is easily prescribed. Decisions about staffing, both in terms of numbers, training and experience, need to be taken at local level when the implementation plan is drawn up, and need to take account of expected referrals and the other roles of staff within the organisations. Care should be taken to ensure that staff are adequately supported in terms of both management and administration issues. Furthermore, staff involved in the running of the programmes should be familiar with both the general principles of programmes and the specific programme details. Staff training is an important issue and initial training has been well received, particularly by tutors and line managers. However, further training and refresher courses will be needed as time passes.

20


The provision of adequate levels of administrative staff was a need identified by all concerned. Programmes such as PRISM require exhaustive data collection and preparation and, without proper administrative support, practitioners will find themselves spending more time engaged in administrative tasks instead of working with offenders.

Communication Good communication systems, both within the probation services and between partnership organisations and services, are vital. How these are achieved may depend upon a number of factors such as numbers of staff, organisational structures, geographical location of staff, and so on. Currently no one system emerges as dominant or as the best, and given local variations it is unlikely that this will occur. However, it is important to note that a good communication strategy is needed in order to inform all staff within the service about the programme, as well as those working in partnership. Information should also be shared on a regular basis, and staff should be made aware of both local and national developments concerning Pathfinders. This is particularly important with respect to partnership organisations that do not have a direct link to the Home Office.

Programme integrity, monitoring and accommodation The concept of programme integrity was well understood and the information gathering needed to ensure this was not seen as a problem. However, despite the management manual containing detailed instructions for data collection (including a checklist) this process was not being consistently carried out in practice as yet. This raises major issues about the consistency with which the programme is being delivered. The local management and delivery manuals, written by the probation services, outline the running of the programme and give detailed procedures for monitoring and integrity, which suggests that it is on services’ agendas. However, staff interviewed mentioned that lack of resources (for example, video and tape recorders) made it difficult to adhere to these guidelines. Different monitoring systems were in use in the different probation services and some databases could not ‘talk to each other’. As data collection was not being consistently carried out in practice as yet, procedures to facilitate this could be devised by the probation services together to ensure uniformity of practice. All those interviewed felt that the accommodation provided was adequate and there were no real concerns. However, tutors said that a room allocated specifically for the programme would save time, as the room has to be set up correctly for each session at present.

21


Conclusions Overall, there was a positive feeling about the development of the PRISM Programme. The programme and training were both well received by staff in the probation services and partnership organisations. The fact that some staff members had helped in writing the programme’s local service management manuals made them feel involved. Overall, it appears that the programme is struggling at present due to a combination of factors: the particular offender group, problems with the referral and targeting criteria, and the high intensity of the programme, particularly in the first few sessions. The importance of these first few sessions can be highlighted by the fact that no offender in any of the services had so far gone beyond the initial sessions. All the probation services were encountering the same problems in delivering the programmes, which along with the small number of participants and 100 per cent dropout rate so far, make any comparisons between probation services on other factors premature. It may be worthwhile setting up a central forum where these issues can be discussed with the programme developers.

22

4

Focus on Violence Programmes for Male and Female Offenders

This Derbyshire Probation Service programme was established following a review of existing programmes, which indicated a gap in provision for offenders convicted of violence. Local statistics indicated that there was a higher proportion of violent offending in Derbyshire than would have been expected for the size of the population.

An outline of the Focus on Violence Programmes for male and female offenders The evaluated programme consists of 16 two-hour sessions (however, the programme has since been extended to 18 two-hour sessions) and would normally be delivered by two members of staff. The programme is supported by a full set of documents including, programme manuals in parallel versions for male and female offenders. There are supplementary materials, a theory manual, and evaluation methods and measures. The programme lasts for 16 twohour sessions. Although between six and eight members per group is seen as the optimum, up to 12 offenders may be accepted per intake. Programme sessions are run at two sites in the main centres of population, Derby and Chesterfield, but the programme has also been run with women at HM Prison Foston. Until recently, female tutors ran the version of the programme for women. It is currently being run jointly by one male and one female tutor.

The programme design team was set up in 1997. The information was collected principally from a total of 17 interviews with staff including a member of the senior management; the line manager and practitioners directly involved in delivery of the programme to participating offenders. Documents relating to the programme, such as theory manuals, session manuals, staff training materials and evaluation reports were examined. The service ran 11 programmes for male offenders in the financial year 1999-2000. There were 73 starters and 54 completed: a completion rate of just under 74 per cent. During the same year only 11 orders were made for women offenders to the programme, five of whom completed.

23


Programme development and implementation The programme design team was established in 1997 and the structure set up was for three main grade probation officers to be recruited as the first generation of core programme coordinators, with one half of their role being designated as developmental at that initial phase. Initial activities included literature search, developing a model for the programme, considering the application of this respectively to male violence, female violence and domestic violence, with respect to its appropriateness in each case.

Referral, targeting and drop-out rates The completion rate for the programme, at nearly 74 per cent for males, could be regarded as reasonably satisfactory. The completion rate for women, as noted above, is lower (5/11). Any offenders who do not commence a programme are allocated to the next group and this process is repeated to attempt to ensure compliance. Thus there is a progressive, if slow, increase in completion rates. However, this could mean more difficult behaviour in sessions as the less motivated offenders and possibly those who are avoiding the programme would be grouped together. In the last year for which figures are available, there were just over 140 proposals for the programme and 85 orders made. For men, there were 132 referrals with 74 orders made and for women, 11 proposals and 11 conditions made. To check on suitability of these referrals, a small-scale assessment exercise was conducted to examine a cross-section of PSRs. In general, the results of this were deemed to be very satisfactory. At the outset the design of the programme was very broadly based, so that it was suitable for a wide range of violent offence types, but referral criteria are now stricter. Discussions were held about participants in programmes, specifically on the issue of referrals to the men’s programmes of offenders who have been on domestic violence programmes. In terms of diversity amongst those attending, the programme explicitly embodies different approaches for female and male offenders. It has been examined in respect of responsivity factors with reference to ethnic minority offenders, and relatively few adaptations were considered necessary. However, it was commented that no specific work has been conducted to assess the programme’s applicability with clients who may have disabilities; nor to make it accessible to service users whose first language is not English. In respect of both materials and staff skills, a wide range of ability levels can be managed in one group.

24

Focus on Violence Programmes for Male and Female Offenders

Communication Communication within the programmes team, and between it and other parts of the service is reported to be adequate or good by all staff members, and similarly with regard to external information including circulars and other relevant materials. There is a good level of contact between the programmes manager and senior manager who meet regularly and communicate with the area management team. However, there are some perceived difficulties in communication. There is a view that the frequency and volume of material distributed by the Home Office is difficult to keep up with. Also, the programmes manager felt that team members might occasionally prefer him to be more accessible. Other than the three core programme co-ordinators, the other staff who have been running the programme at different sites have been non-specialist. Although they have been appropriately trained, they were field staff who have carried out programmes work on a part-time basis. To that extent the programmes group has not been a fully functioning team. As a consequence of the dispersed model of working, staff may not have felt they had consistently good access to the programmes manager, and supervision and support systems for those staff may not have been sufficient. However, their own perceptions of this should be sought.

Staffing – levels, skills needed, training and administrative support The staff complement as a whole allocated to programme delivery consists of six probation officers, three full-time and three part-time. Two are designated as Core Programme Coordinators for the north and south of the county respectively. There are also four full-time PSOs dedicated to programmes work. Due to an uneven distribution of male and female staff there are some difficulties in achieving the desired gender balance amongst those delivering programmes in different sectors of the county. The programme is designed to be run by two joint tutors and considerable effort is made to ensure the quota available for delivery of sessions does not fall below two. There have been rare exceptions when this did occur. The new management model proposed should greatly enhance quality by building in a third staff member in a slightly different role. This is something the service is now embarking upon, which was scheduled to be in place from September 2000. From experience of delivering the programme, a clearer picture of the skills required by tutors to run it has gradually emerged. Those thought not to possess those skills or whose performance had declined could, in principle, be de-selected, and this has happened on other programmes. Staffing levels for the programme are considered to be adequate, and retention has not been a problem, due to the high level of enthusiasm and commitment of the tutors involved.

25


Staff training is required prior to running the programme. Training is highly focused but fairly limited. To date, it has consisted of an introductory day looking at the principles of ‘what works’ and cognitive-behavioural work, and specifically the cognitive-behavioural model of violent offending. This is followed by a two-day event run by two experienced, programme coordinators. It includes an overview of the programme, the background to it, and the model on which it is based. The third part of the training consists of giving participants an opportunity to try out selected exercises. Staff are given supervision which includes a focus on programme sessions and may involve watching videotapes. Performance is appraised annually. However, the programme manager does not consider the overall level of support to be adequate.

Programme integrity and monitoring Since August 1999, most of the programme sessions have been videotaped. However, as elsewhere, the probation service has not yet developed a procedure for systematic viewing of the videotapes, which is inevitably a very time-consuming process. The guidance of advisory groups working on this issue will be valued. Staff are acutely aware of the issues of programme and treatment integrity and their importance. Monitoring forms are completed for each group participant following every session. While fully developed systems for formal monitoring of integrity are not yet in place, there is continuing discussion amongst tutors which reflects their concern for appropriate and competent delivery of programme sessions. Currently, monitoring information is relayed to the service's research and information section. It is planned that feedback reports will be made available following completion of every group on the programme.

Conclusion The focus on violence programme was established and has been developing since 1997. In this time there has been a satisfactory completion rate for the male attendees but lower for the females, with a progressive increase to this rate. Overall, the success of the programme is increasing with staff experience. The staff involved are very enthusiastic about the programme and keen to make it a success. The present problems with the programme appear to be those surrounding staff training and the skills that are required to run the programme. The staff have commented that the training for running this programme is fairly limited. Programme integrity and monitoring procedures are now being implemented and the addition of new staff should help this situation. 26

5

Drink-impaired Drivers Programme

This programme for drink-impaired drivers is one of several run by the South Yorkshire Probation Service’s Group Programmes Unit. Two other programmes also focus on motoring offences but they are not yet Pathfinder programmes.

An outline of the Programme for Drink-impaired Drivers The programme consists of 12 two-hour weekly sessions and the theory manual sets out targeted risk factors, methods and exercises related to each. There are follow-up assignments between sessions. The programme’s targets include improving knowledge and problem-solving skills and changing anti-social attitudes. In addition to direct training methods, use is also made of motivational enhancement approaches.

Programmes for offenders convicted of motoring offences have been provided in South Yorkshire for some time but the advent of the programmes team and associated structures through which they are now managed is more recent. This emerged from a form of internal audit or peer-review process that was instigated in1997. The information was collected principally from interviews with 17 members of staff including a member of the senior management; the line manager and practitioners directly involved in delivery of the programme to participating offenders. Documents relating to the programme, such as theory manuals, session manuals, staff training materials, and evaluation reports, were examined. The theory manual, which was written within the service, sets out the rationale for a focus on drink-impaired drivers, employing a combined cognitive-behavioural and educational approach.

Programme development and implementation It is intended to extend the programme from 12 to 14 sessions. A revised manual has been completed which also describes pre- and post-programme work. The programme is provided at a single site. While there are some access problems, most journey times are not too long as the location is central for the whole area.

27


The Group Programmes Unit employs a total of 14 group workers, providing a range of programmes service-wide including three programmes in the motor programmes. No member of staff can be familiar with the number and variety of all the programmes. There is some specialisation but there is some degree of cross-over between programmes.

Referral, targeting and drop-out rates The target group for this drink-impaired drivers programme has been viewed as a discrete group of offenders, whose needs were not being met elsewhere. In many cases, they have no convictions for other offences. The courts often placed them on probation but probation staff were sometimes unsure as to the kinds of interventions that might be applicable. The average group size is eight but occasionally has been as high as twelve. A group would not be run with less than four members. Because of the vagaries of the intake process, more are accepted and, should the number of actual arrivals be larger than anticipated, two groups may be run in parallel. Mixed gender groups are run when there are at least two women who can take part. Drop-out rates are generally lower than for other programmes – probably due to the types of offenders convicted of this offence. Referral and selection procedures are described as working well. In one sense the task is more straightforward, given the nature of the offence and the specialised provision. The programmes team also carries out its own pre-sentence assessments, which is timeconsuming. It is also a little frustrating, as approximately half of the referred offenders are then given custodial sentences. This system is being altered and greater reliance placed on telephone discussions with referring PSR writers, to equip them to carry out the assessments done by unit staff. There have been a few difficulties in distinguishing those referrals most suitable for the Drink-impaired Drivers programme rather than another motor programme (the Responsible Drivers programme run by the same team).

Communication In general terms, there is reportedly considerable enthusiasm for this work and great interest in the Pathfinder process. There are good communications within the group programmes team but area networks within the service work less well. This sometimes results in delayed arrival of Home Office circulars and similar documents. It would also help if the programmes manager had direct e-mailing systems available for access to Home Office publications and other research documents and computerised databases.

28

Drink-impaired Drivers Programme

Staffing – levels, skills needed, training and administrative support The dedicated motor programmes group consists of a pool of two probation officers and three probation service officers (PSOs). This is thought to be inadequate for ongoing delivery of three programmes – a pool of six or seven staff would be more appropriate. One probation officer and one other group worker run programme sessions but occasionally sessions are run involving other personnel, such as police officers, magistrates, and a solicitor. Administrative support is also considered to be inadequate. As the programmes have been developing over a number of years, most staff have trained gradually through direct experience, and were themselves the originators of the programme materials. There is a supportive culture in the unit, and the manager also provides supervision. There is no specially developed staff training for the Drink-impaired Drivers’ Programme. However, there are practice development sessions run by an external trainer who is a group work specialist. Staff training is linked to the annual appraisal process with staff occasionally being allocated to external training courses. This often includes group work courses. There is no specially developed staff training for the Drink-impaired Drivers’ programme. A training manual is in preparation with a view to being able to train staff external to the service.

Programme integrity, monitoring and accommodation Currently, there is a checklist for recording aspects of programme integrity session by session. Video equipment has been purchased but only recently installed and while sessions are being taped, there are uncertainties regarding how to make use of this material. Perhaps, therefore, programme integrity monitoring needs to be strengthened. As elsewhere there is scepticism concerning the viability of reviewing tapes or of finding an audit system capable of managing the material generated. Short-term evaluation is carried out only by means of fairly limited quiz-like tests. Reports are prepared which are sent to case managers and a three-way meeting takes place but it is not clear in what proportion of cases. Some data of this kind is logged but it is held centrally and so far no formal analysis of it has been undertaken. The service has developed a database in support of the programme for administrative purposes. The database for referrals, entry and attendance is reported to work well but the evaluation databases remains very limited.

29


There are two rooms in the Programmes Unit building, one large, suitable and well equipped, the other smaller and regarded as inadequate. The former is much more often used for the programme sessions with Drink-impaired Drivers.

Conclusion Overall, there appears to be great enthusiasm and interest for this programme. The referral and targeting procedures are reported to be working successfully, and the staff are successfully carrying out the programmes. There is no official training for staff at present, and the staff have trained gradually through years of experience of running and developing this programme. The staff have described a supportive unit and adequate supervision within the service which have helped with their training requirements. A training manual is being developed to train external staff to run this programme in other services. There are currently concerns and uncertainties surrounding programme integrity and monitoring arrangements. The correct arrangements and procedures are now being put into place. There is an awareness of the importance of these issues and the need to strengthen this area of their programme implementation.

30

6


The West Midlands Sex Offender programme has been in existence since 1993. The impetus for creating it derived in part from a wish to apply some guiding principles from ‘what works’ research (McGuire et al., 1995) that were discussed in the early 1990s. It is an intensive programme and illustrates the pattern of provision of interventions for sex offenders. Given the nature of this type of offending and the knowledge-base now available on factors that contribute to it, the need for longer multi-modal programmes has not been questioned.

An outline of the Sex Offender Programme The West Midlands Sex Offender Programme is an intensive group programme of varying length depending on assessed risk level. All participating offenders attend an induction module of 50 hours which is a ‘closed’ group. It starts with a one-week block followed by weekly sessions of two and a half hours. Offenders (all male) are then allocated to one of two groups. Low risk/low deviance offenders attend a relapse prevention programme lasting 50 hours. Others attend the full programme of 200 hours. The full programme following the induction module contains six other modules which address cognitive distortions, self-esteem, intimacy and emotional loneliness, social and problem-solving skills, fantasy modification, victim awareness and empathy, relapse prevention and lifestyle change. The evaluation information was collected principally from interviews with 17 members of staff including a member of the senior management; the line manager and practitioners directly involved in delivery of the programme to participating offenders. Documents relating to the programme, such as, theory manuals, session manuals, staff training materials, and evaluation reports, were examined. There is a theory manual for the programme though, at the time of the present study, it contained a number of gaps and was not yet completed. Nevertheless it is sufficiently developed for the basis of the programme to be clear. The manual relies primarily on a cognitive-behavioural approach and intervention methods. A model of sexual offending is presented, based on recognition of a series of risk factors, including deviant sexual interests; cognitive distortions; low empathy; impoverished social interaction skills and impulsive antisocial lifestyle. In addition, attention is focused on the phenomena of denial and minimisation observed in some sex offender populations; on aspects of motivational enhancement and engagement; and also on poor levels of sexual knowledge and the 31


maintenance of sexual ‘myths’. Thus, while the version of the manual seen was incomplete, the review of relevant literature was wide-ranging and well balanced, and a reasonable coverage of the key aspects for programme design purposes was provided. Both direct and indirect treatment targets are identified and a rationale given for each.

Programme development and implementation The programme, which has evolved over time, needs to have a flexible approach as not all offenders require the full treatment programme. Also, a group is run for some offenders who are on short licences – they need speedier provision as their licences might expire before commencement. Some criticisms of the programme so far include: • The programme manual has evolved considerably as work has proceeded and is regarded as in a state of permanent development. New aspects of work are occasionally introduced but some resolution must be found if there is to be a programme manual which can be circulated. In addition, while the basic model of the programme can be communicated without difficulty, the staff group is selfcritical regarding the programme manual and recognises it may need further revision to be usable by new staff. • The material was considered to have an almost exclusively heterosexual focus (i.e., concerned with male sexual aggression towards females) and the format of some exercises might allow some male homosexual offenders to escape attention and scrutiny. • Concerns were also expressed about the lack of cultural diversity of the material. It was felt to be unsuitable for engaging offenders from Indian/Pakistani or African/Caribbean cultural groups. • Some commented that some early sessions were too densely packed with material and that some of it was repetitive. • Some participants dropped out of the programme because they found the sessions too difficult. Modifications to the programme to suit different ability levels should be considered.

32


• It was also commented that neither the material nor advance skills training adequately prepares staff for the management, in group sessions, of those who continue to deny their offences.

Referral, targeting and drop-out rates There are usually eight offenders in a group – this is seen as the preferred number. Often more are accepted with the assumption that some will not arrive or will drop out. However, groups of 12-13 were not uncommon and occasionally there are groups of 16. A group would not be regarded as viable with fewer than five members. Based on recent figures, the overall caseload of the Sex Offender Programmes team is in the region of 800, of whom approximately 370 are in the community. Of these, an estimated 170 will be actively attending the programme at any one time. Drop-out rates are very high but this must be placed in the context of the multi-site, modal nature of the programme and its overall length. It has been calculated that the average number of hours completed by participants is in the region of 100. The drop-out rate is over 60 per cent but this includes a portion who stop for valid reasons. For example, some stop because supervising officers think they have made satisfactory progress. Others drop out because they have been a victim of threats and they need to move areas for reasons of personal safety. It is believed that the rate of drop-out for unacceptable reasons is about 15 per cent. Of 126 offenders monitored over a two to three year period for evaluative purposes, a total of four re-offended whilst in the programme.

Communication Communication within the team is regarded as working well but external communication is seen as less satisfactory. For example, there may be difficulties in this respect with regard to Home Office communications and from senior management. Also, during the Pathfinder submission process the previous programmes manager had numerous demands on his time and felt his availability to team members was often restricted. This has eased somewhat following completion of the submission and changes of staffing at line manager level. Another type of communication often thought to be important in work with sex offenders is to have access to victim accounts, deposition statements and other material. This can provide a clearer picture of participants’ resistances or distortions and may be 33


occasionally used in an indirect way during sessions. Staff members described this as not working sufficiently well and would prefer to have regular access to this type of material.

Staffing – levels, skills needed, training and administrative support The staffing levels for the programme cannot be characterised as neatly as for other programmes described in this report. In addition to the core group of specialist officers, many other staff (sometimes as many as 40) operate at different sites and act as co-leaders of sessions. The sites include Birmingham, Coventry, Walsall, Dudley and Smethwick, and Wolverhampton. Thus, the programme is geographically dispersed as well as having two levels and a modular framework. Further, the core programme has numerous other variations for adult offenders, offenders with learning disabilities, for adolescent offenders, and for offenders on licence. Taking into account different forms and sites of the programme, the total number of inter-connected programmes is 17. Only one of these – for adult male sex offenders without learning disabilities – is identified as a Pathfinder. All staff recruited for the purpose of co-leading are provided with training. This consists of a three-day block event, but the remainder of it involves group observation and discussion of actual programme sessions. This is no longer viewed as adequate, and the staff training manual currently in preparation (to be used for dissemination purposes following programme accreditation) will be for ten training days. In addition to this core training element, plans have been drawn up for a one-day training course for PSR writers and a three-day course for case managers. The latter will be focused on pre- and post-group offender supervision work. Staff recruitment to co-facilitator roles has presented problems and it may be that these will increase, primarily due to a declining number of applicants seeking experience of this work. However, retention rates amongst core programme staff are high; approximately half of that group has been consistent throughout the programme’s existence. Encouragingly for the core team, other staff members who join as co-leaders at ‘outreach’ sites stay considerably longer than they originally intended. Staff are supported through supervision. In addition, an independent counselling service is available which is booked in advance so that individuals’ usage of it is not made known to colleagues. This useful innovation notwithstanding, the pressures of this work are intense and there are also periods when a worrying number of staff are on sick leave. This is described as a function not of the work in itself but of programme delivery in the context of a basic shortage of eligible staff. Whilst other modes of delivery such as two sessions per week have been advocated, this would not be feasible given staffing levels. Evidently, this issue would need to be considered in advance of dissemination planning. 34


In general, whilst there appeared to be enormous enthusiasm and commitment to this programme, there is an impression of a large-scale enterprise which may be significantly under-resourced. It was stated that staff may occasionally be delivering up to four programmes per week (and occasionally more), which might be at different stages (induction versus treatment modules) and in different locations with different co-workers. In addition to this, staff were obliged to carry out consultations with case managers but these occasionally were not conducted as planned. Most respondents described administrative support as inadequate.

Programme integrity, monitoring and accommodation Monitoring of participants’ progress on the programme is carried out by a variety of means. Individual reports are prepared following completion of each module and sent to case managers. A range of psychometric tests is administered at three time-points on the programme. In total, there is a very large volume of information available concerning levels of participation and progress of individuals towards intermediate targets. Videotaping all sessions is part of the monitoring process and, as with many sex offender treatment programmes, this has been an aspect of programme delivery for many years. It was commented that video is not reliably available on all sites and the placement of recording equipment rendered the group activity inaudible. There is a need for technical advice to be taken to remedy problems of this kind. As noted elsewhere, there are problems dealing with the volume of material generated by this procedure. There are also end-ofsession feedback forms for completion by group members. This provides a measure of one aspect of integrity, as it reflects whether participants grasped session objectives, but there are obvious gaps in this aspect of monitoring. Some rooms at some sites were deemed unsatisfactory, and it was further commented that programmes staff felt they were treated as intrusive and unwelcome when visiting dispersed sites to run sessions.

Conclusion The West Midlands Sex offender programme has a clearly developed programme manual that relies on cognitive-behavioural interventions and has developed over time. The programme is not yet completed and it does not come without some criticisms.

35


Communication at different levels has been commented on as being unsatisfactory. External communication with the Home Office, along with lack of access to the necessary information has been reported as adding to the difficulties of this programme. Staff training is viewed as inadequate and a comprehensive training manual is currently being prepared. Administrative support is reported to be inadequate, but support by senior staff through supervision is adequate. In all, the staff remain enthusiastic and committed to the programme. The programme integrity and monitoring arrangements are securely in place, but there are still some discussions concerning the retention of the volume of the information.

36

7


A distinctive feature of Wiltshire Probation Service’s Aggression Replacement Training Programme (ART) is that it is an adapted version of an international programme initially developed in the US for younger (juvenile) offenders by Professor Arnold Goldstein (Goldstein, 1999).

An outline of the ART Programme The programme as implemented in Wiltshire entails 16 weekly sessions. Each session is in two parts lasting 55 minutes, each with a short break in between. Programme sessions are ‘multi-modal’ in combining three elements – social skills training, self-control training, and training in moral reasoning – into an integrated design. Each of the elements constitutes ten of the 55-minute sessions. There are ready-made structured learning exercises (e.g., role play scenarios) for each aspect of the programme. There is a programme manual but there are no hand-out materials as the focus is on live, in-session activity.

During 1996-1997, an analysis of PSRs within the Wiltshire Probation Service showed that violent offences accounted for about one-third of all PSRs. The ART programme was established in 1997. The information was collected principally from interviews with 17 members of staff including a member of the senior management; the line manager and practitioners directly involved in delivery of the programme to participating offenders. Documents relating to the programme, such as theory manuals, session manuals, staff training materials, and evaluation reports were examined.

Programme development and implementation In the mid-90s an analysis of pre-sentence reports in the Wiltshire Probation Service found that violent offences accounted for approximately one-third of all PSRs. Development of the aggression replacement training (ART) programme followed attendance by Wiltshire probation staff at a workshop delivered by Professor Arnold Goldstein prior to the 1996 ‘What Works’ conference. The programme was established in 1997. As the original programme is American in content, cultural context and style, considerable work was required to adapt materials for use in the UK.

37


Some programme developments are pending and include: • an extension of structured learning materials to cover additional sessions, especially in a manner that can be used in a ‘booster’ or follow-up format; and • sessions involving offenders and their partners.

Referral, targeting and drop-out rates There are between six and ten programmes delivered a year at two sites (Swindon and Trowbridge), predominantly in evening sessions as many offenders are in employment. There are usually between six and eight offenders per group – a maximum of eight is preferred to allow time for skills practice which is a key ingredient of the programme. Although this programme receives a higher rate of referral for women offenders than most, the absolute number of female clients remains low and they constitute only one or two members of some groups. Also, as Wiltshire has a very low proportion of members of ethnic minorities, the number of black offenders seen is very low. Selection has caused some difficulty, with only an estimated 60 per cent of referrals viewed as genuinely appropriate. There are plans for a programme tailored to domestic violence offenders – this should channel some inappropriate referrals away from the ART programme. Good use is made of pre-programme information. There are procedures in place for liaison between referrers and programme co-ordinators. PSRs, risk assessments and other material are made available, and a pre-group meeting takes place with the offender, followed by further liaison with the referring officer. Completion rates have varied between 65 and 75 per cent. In addition to the usual reasons for non-completion, there are two issues specific to this programme: • inability to attend two consecutive sessions is regarded as unacceptable and results in suspension from the programme; and • a proportion of those who drop out at the Swindon site is thought to arise from the pattern of shift-work at major local employers which could influence ability to attend.

38


In addition, as Wiltshire is a large rural county, there are travel and accessibility problems. High transport costs plus limited public transport facilities, particularly in the evening, means that offenders are often brought to programmes sites by a combination of staff effort and the use of taxis.

Communication Internal communications are reported to be good and the size of the Wiltshire service allows frequent and regular contacts. In general, there are no serious ‘access’ problems between staff at different levels either upward or downward in the line management hierarchy, though the process of preparing Pathfinder materials has inevitably taken up additional time. The programmes' manager has not, however, always received relevant Home Office circulars in good time. Practitioners clearly felt that their line manager’s availability was restricted during the Pathfinder submission process.

Staffing – levels, skills needed, training and administrative support The staff group involved has been fairly stable with few changes of personnel. Though not always feasible, the aim is to achieve a gender balance and mixture of grades and prior experience amongst tutors. To ensure cohesiveness of delivery as far as possible, some staff are also allocated as reserves for programme sessions. Two staff per session are involved in running the programme. There are regular supervision sessions with all staff – material from live observation of sessions is utilised in supervisory work. There are two review weeks a year. These incorporate both training work and a review of staff competencies. Issues arising from the programme work are also discussed, such as difficult incidents occurring in the groups. One problem, which is likely to change with the advent of a programme focused on this type of offence, is the sizeable number of offenders on the programme who have committed domestic violence. Somewhat unusually, staff who instigated the programme trained themselves to run it. This involved a thorough examination of Goldstein’s materials. Subsequently, new staff have been trained by existing staff. For each new member of staff there is a lengthy induction process moving from observational work and limited experience of session input, through adoption of an increasingly active role, to co-leadership. However, some staff saw this overall format as inadequate with too much learning ‘on the job’. A staff training manual was prepared for the Pathfinder process, designed to support a three-day training event. A theory manual is in preparation but not yet complete. In addition, the service is 39


collaborating with the West Midlands Training Consortium to design an assessment centre procedure for designation and evaluation of staff competencies.

Programme integrity, monitoring and accommodation Offenders’ participation in the Wiltshire ART programme is closely monitored. Attendance records are kept and absences are communicated speedily to case managers. A final report for each participant gives levels of attendance, punctuality, factors established as contributing to offending behaviour and those which require monitoring in terms of future risk. For monitoring of programme integrity, the programme manager directly observes two sessions per programme delivered; staff keep written records of session planning and feedback, and these materials are used in supervision sessions which occur four times per programme. Integrity issues are reported to be high on the team agenda and are regularly discussed. Resources are not currently available for videotape recording but this is planned. There are dedicated group rooms at both sites, though that at Swindon is regarded as requiring some improvement for purposes of programme provision. Whilst these resources are readily available, it was commented that they were often left in a disorganised state, requiring additional preparatory work by tutors.

Conclusions The programme was developed in Wiltshire in 1997 after adaptation from an international version. Considerable work has been done to adapt the materials for use in the UK, and further programme developments are still pending. There have been problems reported with inappropriate referrals and plans are being developed to tailor more offence-specific programmes to eliminate this problem. There is a comprehensive and cohesive team of staff who are delivering the programme. Staff have trained themselves to deliver the programme and new staff are trained by existing staff members. A training manual has been produced and a theory manual is not yet complete. The service has also developed an assessment centre tool for evaluation purposes. Programme monitoring and integrity procedures are in place with further resources being required for more intense recording.

40

8


Although the seven Pathfinder programmes outlined in this interim report are very different in many ways, they have in common several features both in the implementing and running of these programmes which, in the light of experience, could be improved. Early interviews with those involved in these programmes also indicate some concerns, such as the fairly high drop-out rates for most of the programmes, which need further research. One aspect which seems to be common to all of these programmes is the enthusiasm of the staff for the programmes generally, the material and training, although some concerns were expressed which are noted below.

Programme development and implementation Several of the programmes described here were developed or adopted as a result of local initiatives, some going back several years, and the design and content of most programmes has evolved over time. Flexibility and adaptability are useful at the design stage, but programmes should be fixed once the Joint Accreditation Panel awards accreditation and the programmes are to be evaluated. Where programmes are run with a combination of staff from probation services and partnership organisations, such as ASRO and PRISM, ideally there should be formal contracts in place.

Referral, targeting and drop-out rates Targeting suitable offenders for a programme is an important issue, as the success of these programmes will depend in part on their being delivered to appropriate offenders. There did not seem to be a considerable problem with insufficient referrals for any of these programmes, but securing appropriate referrals for a particular programme was a concern felt by many. Offenders often had a multitude of problems including alcohol and drugs and some programmes such as Priestley One-to-One were thought by some not suited to these specific problems. At the same time, there was concern that appropriate programmes should be available for offenders with multiple problems. Clearer guidance to pre-sentence report writers and field workers about the sort of offenders a programme is designed for will help. Communication is also relevant here as sometimes staff were not fully aware of the targeting criteria. However, a lack of consensus about who is an appropriate referral is felt to be 41


partly a reflection of the present state of knowledge with regard to appropriate treatment for individual offenders. Pathfinder evaluations may help to develop a greater understanding. Apart from the Drink-Impaired Drivers programme, there were high drop-out rates from programmes, particularly either before the start or in the early stages. This is linked with the issue of appropriate referrals discussed above but could also be a reflection of the material used, particularly at the start of a programme. The first sessions of some programmes such as PRISM and ASRO were felt to be too long and too intense at such an early stage. Research is needed to focus on factors influencing drop-out, the extent to which this may be associated with aspects of the programme and whether these can be modified. The fact that some staff saw high drop-out rates as inevitable (groups are often larger than is considered appropriate on the grounds that they will get smaller in time) is also an area which could be usefully explored. In relation to the suitability of referrals for programmes, materials should also be suitable for different groups of people. Some of the programmes were criticised as being very much geared up to male, white, heterosexual offenders. Materials from a programme could be modified to suit others such as women offenders, those from minority ethnic groups and those with literacy or other communication problems. It is clear that issues surrounding tutor responsivity to offenders and creativity with the programme materials must be investigated to ensure that programme integrity is maintained at all times.

Communication Good communication systems within the probation services and between partnership organisations and the probation services are vital.How this is achieved may depend upon a number of factors such as numbers of staff, organisational structures and geographical location of staff.Currently, no one system emerges as dominant or as the best, and given local variations it is unlikely that this will occur.However, it is important to note that a good communication strategy is needed in order to inform all staff within the area about the programme, as well as those working in partnership.Information should also be shared on a regular basis, and staff should be made aware of both local and national developments regarding Pathfinders.This is particularly important with respect to partnership organisations that do not have a direct link to the Home Office. The majority of those interviewed were happy with communication between members of programme teams but there were some criticisms about the uneven distribution of key types of information. In particular, line managers and tutors commented that either they did not see Home Office guidelines and circulars at all or received them very late. 42


The volume of material distributed from the Home Office Probation Unit and other central sources has at times been perceived as daunting. It is not always passed on to programmes staff – they occasionally learn news from indirect sources. There can also be problems absorbing this material in the midst of other demands.

Staffing issues As yet no national standards have been set regarding the competencies needed in staff to deliver programmes – this is an issue that will need further discussion in the future.This is particularly important for programmes run in partnership with outside organisations, where staff do not necessarily have the traditional probation officer training or knowledge of the probation service. The provision of administrative staff emerged as a significant issue during the interviews. Pathfinder programmes tend to require exhaustive data collection and preparation, and, without proper administrative support, practitioners will find themselves spending more time engaged in such tasks rather than working with offenders. Most of those interviewed expressed dissatisfaction with the levels of administrative staff provided. Staff training is important and many of those interviewed commented on the quality of the training received. However, some felt they would have liked further training. In addition, demands for further training and development will emerge as staff currently involved in programme delivery mature in post.

Programme integrity and monitoring The concept of programme integrity and need for monitoring was well understood by staff in all these programmes, although lack of resources sometimes made this difficult to achieve. Most of the programmes were using video recorders or had plans to do so shortly. However, there were uncertainties about how to use the material produced. Some tapes are viewed but many others accumulate unseen. Services have not yet developed procedures for systematic viewing of the videotapes, extracting information relevant to programme integrity, and use of effective feedback mechanisms. Guidance is needed on how to scrutinise taped sessions and provide feedback to staff. It is also unclear how the volume of material should be managed and stored. A system is needed which can be applied to all programmes to ensure that information is analysed accurately and can be used to facilitate effective programme delivery. Most of the programme sessions are now videotaped, though the pattern remains uneven. Also, while this is inevitably a very time-consuming process, it is essential to ensure that programmes are delivered as planned. It is acknowledged that central guidance is also required and this is awaited. 43


Accommodation There was an uneven pattern with regard to provision of accommodation. Rooms designated to the running of the programme were on the whole seen as more satisfactory – setting up the room correctly for a session was time-consuming in rooms used by other staff. In one area, the designated room was not reliably available and repeated negotiation was required to secure it. In another area, where the programme was run at various dispersed sites, staff sometimes felt intrusive and unwelcome. The comments of tutors in particular should be taken into account as they, along with offenders taking part in the programme, are most directly affected by inadequate programme accommodation. Guidelines which set out the minimum facilities required to deliver programmes successfully are needed.

Overall conclusion Overall, the Pathfinder programmes have demonstrated success at differing levels, this being related to the specific problems of the individual programmes or the service infrastructure.All services have shown an enthusiasm for running the programmes in light of development and implementation problems, staff training issues, referrals and targeting criteria and integrity and accommodation provisions.These common problems have been noted throughout the services and attempts to rectify the problems have been attempted within services. It is clear that services require clearer central guidelines to facilitate the implementation and delivery of the programmes to produce a more consistent method for referrals and targeting, programme delivery, staff training and support, accommodation and integrity and monitoring provisions.

44

References

Copas, J. B. and Marshall, P. (1998). The Offender Group Reconviction Scale: the statistical reconviction score used by probation officers. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Vol. 47 pp 159-171 Series C. Goldstein, A. P., Glick, B. and Gibbs, J. C. (1998) Aggression Replacement Training: A comprehensive intervention for aggressive youth. Revised Edition. Champaign, IL: Research Press. McGuire, J., Broomfield, C., Robinson, C. and Rowson, B. (1995). Short term impact of probation programs: an evaluative study. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 39, 23-42. Miller, W.R. and Rollnick, S. (eds.) (1991). Motivational Interviewing: Preparing People to Change Addictive Behaviour. New York, NY: Guildford Press

45


RDS Publications

Requests for Publications Copies of our publications and a list of those currently available may be obtained from: Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate Communication Development Unit Room 275, Home Office 50 Queen Anne’s Gate London SW1H 9AT Telephone: 020 7273 2084 (answerphone outside of office hours) Facsimile: 020 7222 0211 E-mail: [email protected]

alternatively

why not visit the RDS web-site at Internet: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/index.htm where many of our publications are available to be read on screen or downloaded for printing.

46

Introducing Pathfinder programmes into the Probation ...

Introducing Pathfinder programmes into the Probation ...

Suggest Documents

Introducing Technology Into Linux

Introducing Bentonite into the Environment in the

Introducing the Humanities into Medical Education

Introducing Rare Books into the Undergraduate Curriculum

introducing noise into the marine environment

Introducing Review Mechanisms into Statutory

Introducing Charge Hydration Asymmetry into the

Introducing Qigong Meditation into Residential

Cradle to? Introducing 'Environmental Issues' into the

Introducing alternative assessment into engineering

Introducing the Azlactone Functionality into Polymers through ...

Introducing Pharmacovigilance Into the Curriculum Overview

PATHFINDER®

ADMISSION INTO POSTGRADUATE PROGRAMMES FOR 2018 ...

PATHFINDER®

Pathfinder

PATHFINDER

PathFinder

PATHFINDER®

PATHFINDER®

Article - The Probation Service

Taking Probation Abroad - European Journal of Probation

Totals - The Probation Service

Introducing Programmes In A Box This email contains information ...