Probation Employment Schemes
| Published date | 01 March 2001 |
| DOI | 10.1177/026455050104800114 |
| Date | 01 March 2001 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
53
The
results
are
marked
by
extreme
variations
in
the
costs
of
property
and
violent
cnme.
For
example,
murders,
though
rare,
cost
an
average
of £1
million
and
other
violence
around
£19,000;
on
the
other
hand
more
common
burglaries
cost
around
£2,300
and
cnmmal
damage
£500.
Overall,
the
study
found
that
the
costs
of
crime
in
England
and
Wales
in
1999-2000
was
around
£60
billion,
nearly
£ 18
billion
of
this
the
result
of
the
physical
and
emotional
impact
on
victims.
The
response
of
the
Criminal
Justice
System
constitutes
around
£ 12
bilhon.
The
Economic
and
Social
Costs
of
Crime,
2000,
by
Sam
Brand
and
Richard
Price,
Home
Office
Research
Study
217.
Probation
Employment
Schemes
The
undoubted
link
between
unemployment
and
crime
has
led
in
recent
years
to
a
greater
probation
focus
on
increasing
offenders’
employability
and
training
opportunities.
However,
there
has
been
little
evidence
regarding
the
success
of
probation
employment
schemes.
This
report
presents
the
findmgs
of
two
innovative
education,
trainmg
and
employment
(ETE)
projects,
in
Inner
London
and
Surrey,
evaluated
over
a
penod
of
three
years.
Reconviction
Rates -
Offenders
participating
m
both
schemes
had
sigmficantly
lower
reconviction
rates
than
those
who
were
referred
to
the
projects
but
did
not
attend.
The
’ASSET’
scheme
participants
in
London
had
one
year
reconviction
rates
of
43%
compared
to
56%
for
non-attenders.
The
equivalent
figures
for
the
‘Spnngboard’
scheme
in
Surrey
were
45%
and
32%.
Offenders
who
attended
the
schemes
and
were
subsequently
reconvicted
were
also
slower
to
reoffend
with
a
longer
average
gap
(151
1
days
compared
to
132
days)
between
first
appointment
and
offence.
Findings
from
the
ASSET
Project -
Between
July
1997
and
March
2000,
758
offenders
were
referred
to
and
assessed
by
ASSET.
One
hundred
and
two
offenders
(13%)
gamed
employment
over
the
project’s
lifetime
with
23
obtaining
more
than
one
job.
Two
thirds
of
the
jobs
were
in
retail,
93
were
permanent
and
111
I
full-time.
Over
two
hundred
were
referred
to
training
providers
and
12
offenders
eventually
gained
National
Vocational
Qualifications.
Most
offenders
were
very
positive
about
the
project,
30%
stating
that
it
had
changed
their
lives.
Probation
officers
also
valued
the
project
and
became
more
enthusiastic
as
the
project
developed.
Initial
underperformance
of
the
scheme
was
attributed
mainly
to
poor
staff/management
relations,
which
were
resolved
only
half
way
through
the
evaluation.
Findings
from
the
Springboard
Project -
Data
was
collected
on
1,808
offenders
over
the
lifetime
of
the
evaluation,
during
which
time
452
offenders
secured
employment
and
over
a
hundred
gained
places
on
training
courses.
The
fact
that
more
than
half
of
them
succeeded
during
the
third
year
suggests
that
the
impact
of
the
scheme
increased
over
time.
Feedback
from
offenders
showed
that
while
only
three
said
they
had
obtamed
work
directly
through
Sprmgboard,
three-quarters
felt
contact
with
the
project
was
helpful
and
over
90%
found
the
staff
supportive.
Initial
scepticism
and
criticism
of
different
aspects
of
the
project
by
probation
officers
had
been
replaced
by
an
appreciation
of
the
development
team’s
professionalism
and
knowledge
by
year
three.
The
Spnngboard
project’s
more
hohstic
approach,
incorporating
advice
on
accommodation
and
leisure
as
well
as
employment
and
trammg,
was
seen
to
To continue reading
Request your trial