The sequencing of interventions with offenders: views of offender managers and supervisors
| Date | 12 November 2018 |
| Pages | 257-267 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JFP-02-2018-0003 |
| Published date | 12 November 2018 |
| Author | Zoe Stephenson,Jessica Woodhams,Leigh Harkins |
| Subject Matter | Health & social care,Criminology & forensic psychology,Forensic practice,Sociology,Sociology of crime & law,Law enforcement/correctional,Public policy & environmental management,Policing,Criminal justice |
The sequencing of interventions with
offenders: views of offender managers
and supervisors
Zoe Stephenson, Jessica Woodhams and Leigh Harkins
Abstract
Purpose –The purpose of this paper is to explore the views and opinions of offender supervisors and
offender managers regarding the sequencing of interventions for prisoners in England. More specifically, the
research aims to gain an understanding of any barriers to implementing desired practice.
Design/methodology/approach –Semi-structured interviews were conducted with ten participants
located across four HM prisons in the West Midlands. Questions were designed to gather information and
views regarding: current practice in the area of sequencing of interventions; opinions on the potential
importance of coherent sequencing of interventions; views on how interventions should be sequenced; and
what, if any, issues impacted upon coherent sequencing. Thematic analysis was used to identify, analyse and
report themes within the interviews.
Findings –Participants discussed current practice regarding the sequencing of interventions and made
suggestions regarding tailoring the sequence of interventions to the individual offender. The issue of
readiness to change was emphasised (i.e. engagement with interventions will increase where offenders are
able to participate in an intervention when they feel ready to do so). In addition, participants commented that
they felt there to be insufficient resources at their disposal which led to barriers to thecoherent sequencing of
interventions (e.g. waiting lists for treatment programmes).
Practical implications –Suggestions were made by participants regarding the coherent sequencing of
interventions; for ex ample, providing prisoners with experi ence of a generic group intervention prior to an
offence-specific intervention, prioritising motivation to change and being responsive to the needs of
individual offenders.
Originality/value –The study provides insight regarding the sequencing of interventions from the
perspective of offender supervisors and offender managers who are involved in the planning of treatment
programmes across the course of an offender’s sentence.
Keywords Qualitative, Treatment, Prison, Intervention, Sequencing, Offender, Treatment readiness
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
The National Offender Management Service (NOMS; replaced in April 2017 by Her Majesty’s
Prison and Probation Service) introduced the offender management model in 2005. The model
focuses on the end-to-end management of offenders, i.e. management spanning their whole
sentence across prison and in the community (NOMS, 2006). The offender manager is
responsible for offender assessment, sentence planning, ensuring the plan is implemented,
reviewing/re-assessing the plan and, finally, evaluation. As it is not feasible for offender managers
to have regular contact with offenders, offenders are allocated to an offender supervisor (NOMS,
2006). The role of the offender supervisor is to implement the plan put forward by the manager. In
custody each offender will be allocated a supervisor who will aim to meet them on a frequent
basis in order to assist an offender in the process of behavioural change. The end-to-end
process incorporates selection, sequencing and delivery of interventions across an entire
sentence. More recently, the Ministry of Justice (MoJ, 2015) practice framework notes the need
Received 3 February 2018
Revised 20 March 2018
Accepted 20 March 2018
Zoe Stephenson is Lecturer of
Forensic Psychology at the
University of Birmingham,
Birmingham, UK.
Jessica Woodhams is based at
the University of Birmingham,
Birmingham, UK.
Leigh Harkins is based at the
University of Ontario Institute of
Technology, Oshawa, Canada.
DOI 10.1108/JFP-02-2018-0003 VOL. 20 NO. 4 2018, pp. 257-267, © Emerald Publishing Limited, ISSN 2050-8794
j
JOURNAL OF FORENSIC PRACTICE
j
PAG E 25 7
To continue reading
Request your trial