Chief Inspector of Probation annual report 2019; Working with men desisting from self-harm
| Date | 01 September 2019 |
| Author | Emma Cluley,Sharon Brereton |
| Published date | 01 September 2019 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0264550519866043 |
| Subject Matter | Research & reports |
Research & reports
Research & reports
Chief Inspector of Probation annual report 2019
The final annual report by Dame Glenys Stacey at the end of her period as Chief
Inspector of Probation was published in March 2019 and provides a clear analysis
of the limits of Transforming Rehabilitation and Government outsourcing. It is rapidly
becoming a milestone report, providing a key piece of analysis because of the
depth of the research it contains. The following is a brief summary, capturing key
findings. The report contains so much more and is an extremely accessible read.
Some notable key facts are listed at the outset of the report: 258,157 people
under supervision; 80%of CRCs rated as inadequate; 50%reduction in the number
of individuals starting programmes; £294 million forecast losses as of March 2018
for CRCs versus £29 million forecast profits at bid stage; and of 500 offices 15%of
probation premises are jointly occupied by NPS and CRC. Noting the substantive
changes to the probation population and the delivery of probation over recent years
the report is organised into two parts.
Part 1 provides an overview of the probation landscape. The number of com-
munity sentences has fallen and this is attributed to a lack of judicial confidence in
probation and Rehabilitation Activity Requirements (RARs). And more use of cus-
todial sentences for borderline cases is noted. Despite the reduction in use of
community sentences, the number of people under supervision has risen because of
the probation service now providing supervision to all prisoners starting at 12
months prior to release and for 12 months in the community after release. These
cases tend to be prolific offenders and difficult to engage in rehabilitative work. The
general population is recognised as not being reflective of the probation population
where it is estimated that one in two have been abused, one in four have been
placed in care, many have no qualifications and a disproportionate amount have
special education needs and have been expelled from school, and many have
substance misuse issues and depression.
The evidence base underpinning probation is considered and it is noted that
while RARs are widely used, there is no evidence base for their effectiveness. The
evidence base for reducing reoffending tentatively suggests developing prosocial
networks, self-efficacy, and problem-solving capacity. There is strong evidence for
cognitive behavioural programmes where criminogenic needs are addressed.
The Journal of Community and Criminal Justice
Probation Journal
2019, Vol. 66(3) 370–374
ªThe Author(s) 2019
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0264550519866043
journals.sagepub.com/home/prb
To continue reading
Request your trial