Early testing and formative evaluation of the Enablers of Change assessment and sentence planning tool for adults with convictions

854996EJP0010.1177/2066220319854996European Journal of ProbationWong and Horan
2019
Original Article
European Journal of Probation
2019, Vol. 11(1) 30 –48
Early testing and formative
© The Author(s) 2019
Article reuse guidelines:
evaluation of the Enablers
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
https://doi.org/10.1177/2066220319854996
DOI: 10.1177/2066220319854996
journals.sagepub.com/home/ejp
of Change assessment and
sentence planning tool for
adults with convictions
Kevin Wong
Manchester Metropolitan University, UK
Rachel Horan
The Averment Group Ltd, Wrexham, UK
Abstract
The Enablers of Change assessment and sentence planning tool has been designed to
assess the risks, needs, strengths and protective factors of adults with convictions.
Developed by Interserve, a Community Rehabilitation Company (CRC) provider in
England, the tool is an innovation. The first of its kind in the United Kingdom (UK) to
operationalise the risk needs and responsivity model with the ‘good lives’ model and
desistance principles for the general adult population of low to medium risk of harm
individuals managed by CRCs. This article reports the development, early testing and
formative evaluation of the tool and recommendations for its onward development.
Given that such integration is regarded by many as the ‘holy grail’ of probation practice,
this article is of international significance and will make an original contribution to the
limited evidence base on operationalising desistance in the management of adults with
convictions in the UK and other jurisdictions.
Keywords
Adults, assessment, needs, risk, sentence planning, strengths
Corresponding author:
Kevin Wong, Policy Evaluation and Research Unit, Department of Sociology, Manchester Metropolitan
University Department of Sociology and Criminology, Geoffrey Manton Building, Rosamund Street West,
Manchester M15 6HB, UK.
Email: kevin.wong@mmu.ac.uk

---

Wong and Horan
31
Introduction
Integrating desistance research with the risk needs responsivity corrections model has
been advocated as the ‘holy grail’ for advancing offender assessment and sentence plan-
ning in the United Kingdom (UK) and other jurisidictions (Canton, 2014; McNeill and
Weaver, 2010). The Enablers of Change (EOC) assessment and sentence planning tool
aims to do just this for the general adult offender population and therefore is of signifi-
cance for policy and practice both in the UK and internationally. The tool has been devel-
oped by Interserve, a private company who run five Community Rehabilitation
Companies (CRCs) established by the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) as part of the
Transforming Rehabilitation (TR) changes to probation provision in England and Wales
(Ministry of Justice, 2013). One of the innovations offered by Interserve as part of their
bids to run the CRCs,1 the EOC tool is one of the more notable innovations arising from
the TR changes and its utility for criminal justice case management practice goes beyond
the shifting sands of politicised policy making (Raynor, 2018; Senior, 2013); which has
taken a new turn with the review of TR announced by the Justice Minister David Gauke,
responding to the government acknowledged shortcomings of TR (Ministry of Justice,
2018).
This article is the first in a series of related papers that will collectively provide: an
overall account of the development of the EOC tool; and examine the innovations in
offender management that the tool and how it is intended to be used has been designed
to operationalise: conceptually integrating RNR and desistance; more effective engage-
ment with adults with convictions; and co-production. This article will provide an
account of the development and testing of the tool, commencing with the rationale for
the tool before considering the development of its first iteration and accompanying first
phase evaluation. The modifications leading to the second iteration of the tool and
accompanying second phase evaluation are then explored before a discussion of the fit-
ness for purpose of the tool and a concluding consideration of its future development and
testing.
The EOC tool is intended to support a whole system approach to Interserve’s delivery
of its CRC contracts for managing adults with convictions assessed as being low to
medium risk of harm2 (Ministry of Justice, 2013). The delivery model ‘Interchange’ is
underpinned by six core modules: induction; assessment; plan; networks; review; and
exit. These are intended to provide a structured approach to the service user’s journey
and a platform that enables Case Managers (CMs) and Service Users (SUs) to adopt a
strengths approach to address the issues in the SU’s lives that has caused them to offend
(Barry, 2013; Interserve, 2016a). Collectively, these modules are not dissimilar to the
overarching structure of the National Offender Management Service3 (NOMS)
Assessment, Sentence Planning, Implementation, Review and Evaluation (ASPIRE)
offender management model (NOMS, 2006). The tool is intended to facilitate discussion
between CMs and SUs to generate information that will inform:
•• A sentence plan that is co-produced by the CM and SU, which is intended to be
dynamic and personalised to each SU;
•• A risk assessment undertaken by the CM;

---

32
European Journal of Probation 11(1)
•• Implementation of the sentence plan through the networks module; and
•• The monitoring and review of SU progress against the sentence plan.
The EOC tool has been designed to fulfil two aims. Firstly, to replace sections 2–13 of
OASys (Offender Assessment System)4, the needs and risk assessment tool used by pro-
bation and prison services in England and Wales since 2002, developed and tested by
NOMS which, as summarised by Moore (2015), is based on the risk needs responsivity
(RNR) model (Andrews and Bonta, 2010; Bonta and Andrews, 2007).5 Secondly, (the
intended significant innovation) the EOC tool has also been designed to collect informa-
tion on strengths, social capital and community networks and to assess SU’s motivations
to change. In so doing, the tool is intended to operationalise primary, secondary (McNeill
and Weaver, 2010) and tertiary (McNeill, 2016) desistance processes and their ‘zigzag’
path (Barry, 2013). As observed by Maruna (2016) in an editorial about restorative jus-
tice and desistance, after 30 years, desistance (and restorative justice) is no longer new.
That the EOC tool is the first attempt in the UK (and arguably other jurisdictions) to
explicitly operationalise desistance as a fundamental part of mainstream probation prac-
tice is novel and welcome, but also arguably a long time coming. In aiming to operation-
alise desistance principles, conceptually, in England and Wales, it is aligned with the
AssetPlus needs and risk assessment tool used with adolescents with convictions (Baker,
2012; Youth Justice Board, 2014) and the Active Risk Management System (ARMS) risk
management tool used by probation and police for people who have committed sexual
offences (Kewley and Blandford, 2017; Nicholls and Webster, 2014).
The development of the EOC tool has been undertaken under the close scrutiny of two
bodies. Firstly, an ongoing consultation with the MoJ responsible for approving the use
of the tool against a comprehensive framework devised by NOMS (2015) for all new risk
and needs assessment tools intended for use in England and Wales. This concluded in
June 2017 with a formal submission, by Interserve to the MoJ for approval to deploy the
tool across one or more of their CRCs. Secondly, through on-going independent evalua-
tion undertaken by Manchester Metropolitan University (commissioned by Interserve) to
validate the tool and inform the tool’s development. It is the results from this ongoing
evaluation that this article draws on. Ethical approval was obtained through the univer-
sity’s ethics committee; and research approval for the methodology was obtained through
Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) National Research Committee
(NRC).
Rationale for the EOC tool
It is widely recognised that the assessment of individuals with convictions is a key first
step in their rehabilitation with the process providing an important and necessary multi-
dimensional perspective of the individual to inform a suitable plan of rehabilitation
(Canton, 2014; Council of Europe, 2010; Moore, 2015). A suitable assessment will iden-
tify needs and risks to determine what should be targeted and what and how any interven-
tions should be delivered. Appropriate assessment is also an important element of
progress review, enabling monitoring, if completed at regular intervals. The EOC tool
has been developed by Interserve to fulfil these assessment and related functions and also

---

Wong and Horan
33
to underpin a more personalised and co-productive approach to developing the sentence
plan, providing a holistic approach to assessment and case management (Fox and Marsh,
2016; Interserve, 2017). Importantly, the EOC assessment is not intended to be stand-
alone but combined with information received including6:
•• offence and sentence information;
•• Risk of Serious Harm Screening (from Case Allocation Screening);
•• Risk of Serious Recidivism (RSR);
•• the revised Offender Group Reconviction Score (OGRS 3); and,
•• Risk of Serious Harm Analysis (if indicated by risk of serious harm screening).
It is planned that all SUs complete a self-assessment during the induction module, which
will be the basis for the...