PPAARRTTNNEERRSSHHIIPP CCOOMMMMIISSSSIIOONNIINNGG SSTTRRAATTEEGGYY

Presented to: Joint Committee/Strategic Management Group Author: Norman Firth Date of Document: September 2011 Date of Revision: July 2013 Document Version: 4.0

1 Version 4.0: Revised July 2013

1. Introduction

In “The Guide to Strategic Commissioning” (2009), the Social Work Inspection Agency (SWIA) defines this activity as:

“the term used for all the activities involved in assessing and forecasting needs, agreeing desired outcomes, considering options, planning the nature, range and quality of future services and working in partnership to put these in place.”

Implicit in this and other definitions is an activity which is cyclical and therefore dynamic. SWIA illustrates this via reference to a model developed by the Institute of Public Care (IPC). “The model is based upon four key performance management elements; analyse, plan, do and review. The model requires that each of the four elements receive attention, and all are kept in balance” (SWIA: 2009 from Joint Commissioning Model for Public Care: IPC: 2006).

The overarching context for Criminal Justice Social Work (CJSW) is a framework of statutory duties within a public policy context focusing on reduction of offending and public protection against a background in which the service requires to improve effectiveness and reduce costs.

2. Focus

This Commissioning Strategy relates to Criminal Justice Social Work Services. CJSW services principal duties and tasks relate to the assessment and supervision of offenders in the community either through the medium of community sentences or post release supervision following a custodial sentence.

The Strategy refers to CJSW services and functions organised and delivered via formal partnership between and Bute, West and Councils; referred to below as the Partnership (see below, Governance).

3. Legislative and Policy Context

3.1 Legislative context

The legislative basis for Criminal Justice Social Work Services is located within The Social Work () Act 1968. Section 27 of that Act transferred the responsibilities for community based Criminal Justice Services from the Probation Service to Local Authorities. Responsibility for prison based SW services followed subsequently and is relevant in the context of this document in terms of the provision of prison based SW services at HMP Lowmoss ().

The powers and responsibilities vested in Local Authority officers in relation to preparing reports for court, community sentences such as Probation and Community Service and in respect of the supervision of prisoners released on various forms of licence are underpinned by the overarching responsibilities established under the terms of the 1968 Act. From January 2011 most community sentences will be delivered within a new legislative framework introduced via the Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010. The implementation of the new sentences: Community Payback Orders (CPO) has been supported by substantially revised National Outcomes and Standards for Social

2 Version 4.0: Revised July 2013

Work Services in the Criminal Justice System and associated practice guidance. Commissioning has been identified as a key element in the implementation process.

The Management of Offenders (Scotland) Act 2005 established Community Justice Authorities (CJA) with the intention of co-ordinating and improving the delivery of services to offenders across eight CJA areas. The North CJA comprises East , Renfrewshire, , East and and . The Act requires Local Authorities, the Scottish Prison Service (SPS) and other key partners (Police, Health, COPFS and major voluntary organisations) to co-operate and co- ordinate their efforts to reduce reoffending. The CJA is responsible for the co-ordination, and the preparation of an Area Plan supporting the objectives of the National Strategy for the Management of Offenders. The CJA Plan is vetted by a National Advisory Board (NAB) and approved by the Cabinet Minister for Justice.

The 2005 Act also placed a statutory obligation on Local Authorities, the Scottish Prison Service, Police and Health Service to co-operate in respect of certain categories off offender. These Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) are supported by national guidance and currently relate to Registered Sex Offenders and Restricted Patients. The principle of predicating the nature and level of intervention on risk, supported by formal arrangements for the sharing of relevant information extends beyond MAPPA to the supervision of offenders in general.

Underpinning the above demand is the level of business dealt with by courts, related in turn to the level and nature of criminal activity. The volume of recorded crime has in recent years (since 2006-07) declined with exception of crimes of indecency. The Scottish Crime Survey (2009-10) also indicates a reduction in victimisation (percentage of population directly affected by a crime) since 1990-91.

It should be noted that prosecution is not the inevitable outcome of a criminal charge. The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) has a range of options available short of prosecution, including Fiscal Fines in respect of certain offences and other diversionary measures (WDC hosts a pilot project involving unpaid work as an alternative to prosecution).

3.2 Policy Context

The Scottish Government defines its strategic purpose within the context of a National Performance Framework as; “to focus government and public services on creating a more successful country with opportunities for all of Scotland to flourish, through increasing sustainable economic growth”. This purpose is further articulated in terms of a vision for the justice system that “contributes positively to a flourishing Scotland, helping to create an inclusive and respectful society in which all people and communities live in safety and security, individual and collective rights are supported and disputes are resolved fairly and swiftly”. (Strategy for Justice in Scotland: 2012)

The objectives underpinning Scottish Government policy have the community at the centre. Thus, the overarching (national) strategic objective of achieving “safer stronger communities” is expressed in the National Performance Framework in terms of National Outcomes:

3 Version 4.0: Revised July 2013

We live our lives free from crime disorder and danger

We have strong resilient and supportive communities where people take responsibility for their own actions and how they affect others

Our public services are high quality, continually improving, efficient and responsive to local people’s needs

The Scottish Government identifies eight Justice Outcomes within the Strategy for Justice, against which progress is to be measured and twelve related priorities which will have an impact on delivering outcomes (in italics below).

We experience low levels of crime  Reducing crime particularly violent and serious organised crime  Reducing the damaging impact of alcohol and drug problems  Reducing reoffending

We experience low levels of fear, alarm and distress  Reduce fear of crime and increase public confidence  Supporting victims and witnesses

We are at low risk of unintentional harm  Promoting risk awareness and fire safety

Our people and communities support and respect each other, exercising both their rights and responsibilities  Preventing offending by young people  Strengthening community engagement and resilience  Tackling hate crime and sectarianism

We have high levels of public confidence in justice systems and processes  Transforming the civil and administrative justice system

Our public services are fair and accessible  Widening access to justice and advancing law reform

Our institutions and processes are effective and efficient  Enhancing efficiency

Our public services respect the rights and voice of users  Supporting victims and witnesses

The guiding principles underpinning the Scottish Government’s strategic approach can be summarised as effective local delivery supported by greater integration of public services, better partnership working and collaboration and a decisive shift towards prevention. The achievement of the Scottish Government’s justice outcomes and supporting priorities involve a range of organisations and agencies within and out with the public sector. For instance, the fire service in relation to fire safety, COPFS, courts, faith groups and football clubs in relation to hate crimes and sectarianism, the Police and Fire Services in relation to the creation of single services to enhance efficiency. 4 Version 4.0: Revised July 2013

It should also be noted that the focus on prevention establishes a clear relationship between justice outcomes and those for families, children and young people in terms of early intervention / whole systems approach in early years. Similarly, the reduction of the harmful impact of drug and alcohol use links Justice Strategy outcomes to the national drugs strategy (Road to Recovery) and the responsibilities of Alcohol and Drug Partnerships (ADP).

National Outcomes and Standards for Criminal Justice Social Work describe the three key outcomes for CJSW services as:

Community Safety and public protection

The reduction of reoffending

Social inclusion to support desistance from offending

The introduction and implementation of CPO with effect from February 2011 follows from a review of community penalties and the report of the Scottish Prisons Commission. These reviews were influenced by concern regarding a rising prison population, a public perception that community penalties are “soft options” and a perceived lack of confidence in such penalties by the judiciary.

The principles supporting community penalties

Quality consistent high standards of delivery

Effectiveness reducing reoffending and delivering visible “payback” to communities

Immediacy the offender is dealt with as soon as possible after sentencing

Visibility refers to penalties which involve work of benefit to the community and includes the notion of consultation with victims and the wider community

Flexibility responsive to a range of needs

Relevancy address issues directly relevant to an individual’s offending and which prevent them moving towards desistance

The focus of CJSW strategy and practice is to achieve a series of broadly restorative objectives (below). It should be noted that all of these objectives involve active collaboration with other agencies and organisations within and out with the Criminal Justice system (housing, health, education services, employment etc.). This collaborative, multi–agency approach is a significant feature of the landscape within which CJSW operates and a significant factor to consider in the planning and design of services.

5 Version 4.0: Revised July 2013

Strategic and operational focus

Reparation restoring responsibility for harm through making amends

Re-integration restoring relationships and opportunities (including access to and constructive participation in services and activities)

Rehabilitation restoring self awareness, responsibility, skills and internal controls

Restrictions external controls necessary to protect the public and communities whilst supporting participation in community rehabilitation

The legislative and policy landscape described above provides the supporting framework for the Partnership Planning and Performance Improvement Framework (PPIF). Within the PPIF operational priorities flow from a series of Partnership strategic priorities and objectives (Planning and Performance Improvement Framework 2011-14):

Strategic Priorities Strategic Objectives

Assessment Improved quality and consistency of Criminal Justice assessments

Supervision Improved case/risk management Focus on reducing re-offending Continuing development of CPO

Workforce Development Improve and maintain skills/competence of workforce

Resource Planning and Commissioning Effective deployment of resources to meet current and projected need

Management and Performance Implement, review Performance Improvement Improvement Framework

3.3 Impact of Policy

The main drivers in terms of the nature of work undertaken by CJSW services are legislation and policy. This is expressed in terms of new responsibilities. Since 2002 these have included:

 Mandatory Supervised Attendance Orders (SAO)*  Assessment for Home Detention Curfews (HDC)*  Implementation of Restriction of Liberty Orders (RLO)  Implementation of Bail Supervision Orders*  Fiscal Work Order pilot (FWO)*  Roll out of accredited programmes (Constructs PSSO)**  Establishment of Through-care team** 6 Version 4.0: Revised July 2013

 Implementation of Integrated Case Management (with SPS)  Implementation of extended home leave arrangements  Implementation of Multi Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA)** (2007)  Implementation of revised MAPPA guidance (2012)  Establishment of Through-care Addiction Service*  Roll out and establishment of Drug Treatment and Testing Orders (DTTO)*  Availability of Supervision on HDC prior to liberation on Parole  Implementation of ViSOR arrangements ( Violent and Sex Offender Register)*  Implementation of risk assessment tools for Sex Offenders (Risk Matrix 2000 and Stable Acute 07)  Implementation of Community Payback Orders (commence 1st February 2011)  Implementation of LS-CMI assessment and case management tool (December 2010-May 2011)  Implementation of CJSW report national template (January 2011)

The above marked * indicate the availability of funding to take account of additional duties. The above marked ** indicate that additional funding was in support of existing resource committed to that task. In the case of MAPPA the additional resources were allocated to the Community Justice Authority to fund a co-ordinator post and administrative posts in support of the formal MAPPA meetings.

3.4 Current policy context 2012-2016

There have been a number of significant critiques arising from reports into the delivery of public services in general and community justice services in particular since 2011. The critiques underpin the rationale behind potentially radical changes to the delivery of community justice services in the coming years.

Commission on the Future Delivery of Public Services (2011)

The above Commission noted that despite the efforts of the Scottish Government and significant growth in public spending since 1997 social and economic inequalities have remained unchanged or become more pronounced. The Commission estimates that as much as 40% of all spending on public services is accounted for by interventions that could have been avoided by prioritising a preventative approach.

Within this context the merits of a collaborative, outcomes focused, integrated approach to public services are highlighted as essential in engineering significant change. A major factor inhibiting both radical change and effectiveness in the medium to longer term is what the Commission describes as an unduly cluttered and fragmented public service landscape.

Overview of the Criminal Justice System in Scotland (2011) Reducing Reoffending in Scotland (2012)

The overview, undertaken by Audit Scotland, highlighted the complexity and inefficiencies within the CJ system as a whole. With regard to the role of the Scottish Prison Service and community justice services in particular, noted the persistent and relatively static levels of reoffending in Scotland over many years; and that less than 10% of the total (non Police) CJ budget was spent on tackling this problem. A further report; “Reducing Reoffending in Scotland” (2012) was undertaken by Audit Scotland in which the efficiency and effectiveness of approaches to reducing reoffending were examined. In brief the 7 Version 4.0: Revised July 2013 recommendations of this report focused on better targeting and more responsive/flexible use of community justice funding, improvements to the measures by which public bodies such as local authorities, CJAs and SPS are assessed in terms of effectiveness.

Commission on Women Offenders (2012)

The Commission was established by the Cabinet Secretary for Justice to make recommendations for practical measures to reduce reoffending and reverse the increase in the female prison population.

The Commission made 37 recommendations 34 of which the Scottish Government has accepted. The recommendations recognise the need for a distinctive approach to the particular needs of women offenders and in particular the merits of closer inter-agency working and of intensive mentoring.

The Commission refers to a grossly cluttered landscape and concludes that the current arrangements in which Community Justice Authorities have a critical role do not provide “the opportunity for overall strategic and operational responsibility for the delivery of offender services in the community”. The Commission recommends the establishment of a Community Justice Service to provide national strategic leadership and operational responsibility in terms of a range of functions including the commissioning of services from the statutory and third sector.

Redesigning the Community Justice System (2012)

The Scottish Government is consulting on proposals to restructure the management and delivery of Community Justice. The consultation focuses on three options;

 Enhanced CJA model  Local authority model  Single national service model

This Commissioning Strategy makes two assumptions in light of the as yet unknown outcome of the Scottish Governments deliberations. The first is that potential or actual reorganisation should not prevent a continuing strategic approach to the analysis, planning, implementation and reviewing of the current service. This activity will be of benefit whatever the nature of the re-designed service.

Integration of adult health and social care

An additional factor which may influence the future nature of both commissioning and service delivery is the intention of the Scottish Government to effect the integration of adult health and social care. The response to consultation on this issue (2013) states that the Scottish Government will legislate to integrate health and social care for all adults but will leave it to local arrangements to decide whether to include other areas of service within the scope of the integrated arrangement. The outcome of decisions regarding local arrangements may have a significant impact on the wider strategic landscape within which services are planned and commissioned.

8 Version 4.0: Revised July 2013

4 Funding arrangements

Criminal Justice Social Work funding is ring fenced and from 2007-2008 has been allocated via the CJA. Funding is based on a formula derived from a combination of allocation based on social need (including adult population and indices of social deprivation) and activity levels averaged out over three years. The latter is intended to smooth out the effects of short term fluctuations in activity levels. It should be noted that owing to the setting of the local CJSW grant level within a framework, which seeks to achieve proportionality within a finite total, it does not automatically follow that a rise in workload generates a subsequent rise in grant level.

The establishment of a clear relationship between strategic priorities, the operational demands of statutory obligations and allocation of resources is therefore complex and challenging.

5 Partnership and Governance

Criminal Justice Social Work Services are delivered within a formal partnership arrangement between West Dunbartonshire, East Dunbartonshire and Argyll and Bute. Governance arrangements include responsibility for the overall management of the service resting with a Partnership Manager and a single Partnership budget.

Accountability is achieved to the member Local Authorities via a Joint Committee with delegated powers, comprising of elected members from each Authority. Staff are employed by their host Local Authority although a number have remits which extend across authority boundaries.

6 Needs analysis

The Partnership area embraces a population of approximately 285,640 (2009). All Partnership authorities are experiencing a decline in overall population and an ageing population in general. The Partnership covers an extraordinary range of economic, social and geographical diversity, including some of the most economically and socially prosperous areas in Scotland, the most economically and socially deprived, the most remote/rural and high levels of urban density.

6.1 Argyll & Bute

In SIMD 2012, 10 (1%) of the 976 data zones in the 15% most deprived data zones in Scotland were found in Argyll & Bute, compared to 10 (1%) in 2009, 10 (1%) in 2006 and 9 (0.9%) in 2004.

The level of income deprivation in Argyll & Bute is below that in Scotland as a whole. In the income domain, 10.7% of the population of Argyll & Bute were income deprived. This compares to 13.4% across Scotland as a whole.

In the crime domain, 17 (1.7%) of the 976 data zones in the 15% most deprived data zones in Scotland were found in Argyll & Bute, compared to 15 (1.5%) in 2009 and 13 (1.3%) in 2006.

9 Version 4.0: Revised July 2013

Data regarding recorded crime indicates that in 2012-13 there were 348 crimes per 10,000 population and 4 serious assaults per 10,000 population.

6.2 East Dunbartonshire

In SIMD 2012, 3 (0.3%) of the 976 data zones in the 15% most deprived data zones in Scotland were found in East Dunbartonshire, compared to 4 (0.4%) in 2009, 3 (0.3%) in 2006 and 4 (0.4%) in 2004.

The level of income deprivation in East Dunbartonshire is below that in Scotland as a whole. In the income domain, 7.9% of the population of East Dunbartonshire were income deprived. This compares to 13.4% across Scotland as a whole.

In the crime domain, 10 (1%) of the 976 data zones in the 15% most deprived data zones in Scotland were found in East Dunbartonshire, compared to 3 (0.3%) in 2009 and 7 (0.7%) in 2006.

Data regarding recorded crime indicates that in 2012-13 there were 331 crimes per 10,000 population and 6 serious assaults per 10,000 population.

6.3 West Dunbartonshire

In SIMD 2012, 31 (3.2%) of the 976 data zones in the 15% most deprived data zones in Scotland were found in West Dunbartonshire, compared to 31 (3.2%) in 2009, 33 (3.4%) in 2006 and 32 (3.3%) in 2004.In SIMD 2012, 12 (10.2%) of West Dunbartonshire’s 118 data zones were found in the 5% most deprived data zones in Scotland, compared to 7 (5.9%) in 2009, 5 (4.2%) in 2006 and 6 (5.1%) in 2004.

The level of income deprivation in West Dunbartonshire is greater than that in Scotland as a whole. In the income domain, 19.1% of the population of West Dunbartonshire were income deprived. This compares to 13.4% across Scotland as a whole.

In the crime domain in SIMD 2012, 32 (3.3%) of the 976 data zones in the 15% most deprived data zones in Scotland were found in West Dunbartonshire, compared to 32 (3.3%) in 2009 and 27 (2.8%) in 2006.

Data regarding recorded crime in 2012-13 indicates that there were 675 crimes per 10,000 population and 9 serious violent crimes per 10,000 population.

6.4 Summary (needs analysis)

The above figures indicate the persistence of factors indicative of deprivation over time in all areas and whilst indicative of a pattern of falling levels of reported crime conceal within this overall picture the continuing impact on communities particularly affected by criminal activity and continuing increasing levels of reported domestic violence in all areas.

The relationship between deprivation and crime is complex and far from absolute; nonetheless a statistically disproportionate number of offenders serving custodial sentences come from the most deprived wards in Scotland and are affected by the consequences of deprivation, such as poor educational attainment, poor physical and mental health, higher levels of substance misuse (including alcohol) and unemployment.

10 Version 4.0: Revised July 2013

The demand for CJ services is clearly related to some extent by the relative economic prosperity of the Partnership Councils. Thus the overall rate of reported crime per 10,000 population within individual Partnership Councils is comparable to that of others with similar urban/rural/deprivation profiles. West Dunbartonshire in particular has a reported and recorded crime profile very similar to that of city council areas and areas affected by the demise of manufacturing industry and similar levels of alcohol and drug misuse, and other indices of health inequality/deprivation

An additional critical factor in terms of need is that of accommodating both high levels of urban density with relative ease of access to services and rural areas where the main towns are some distance from one another and consequently the efficiency benefits of centralisation are difficult to achieve.

7 Workload demands/ trends

Information regarding workloads is gathered and collated for the purpose of an annual return to the Scottish Government. This return, referring principally to the number of reports, orders, licences etc. are a major determinant in the level and apportioning of the annual CJSW grant. Workload figures are available for the period 2003-04 to 20011-12 and will continue to be updated on an annual basis. It should be noted that from 2013 returns will reflect the various requirements available under the terms of Community Payback Orders.

The demand for Criminal Justice Social Work services derives almost exclusively from external sources over which the service has little or no influence.

The vast majority of the various demands arise from the requirements of legislation and are the result directly or indirectly of decisions made by courts.

CJSW does have some influence on the outcomes of cases where a CJSW report is provided to the court but this should not be overstated as there are a range of factors influencing sentencing decisions.

The overall trend within the Partnership has been upward albeit with fluctuations in respect of individual categories and/or Authorities. A feature of the demand for CJSW services in relation to community sentences has been that of the lack of a directly proportional relationship with the demand for Social Enquiry Reports/Criminal Justice Social Work Reports (SER/CJSWR). Changes in pattern of demand in 2011-12 and 2012-13 may on the one hand be reflective of the relative popularity of Community Payback or on the other reflect the approach of particular courts. Thus, the level of demand for supervision is increasing in East and West Dunbartonshire but has declined in Argyll and Bute whereas in contrast the demand for CJSW reports has declined in West Dunbartonshire but increased in Argyll and Bute.

Whilst there is a relationship between new community sentences and current workloads the same is not the case with Throughcare owing to the service’s involvement throughout custodial sentences (usually of four years or more) and the lower level of turnover with regard to longer periods of supervision in the community.

As the full impact of the introduction of CPO becomes apparent there is evidence of significantly higher levels of demand for supervision requirements in some areas and unpaid work in others. However, given local and Partnership wide fluctuations over 11 Version 4.0: Revised July 2013 previous years some caution should be exercised in attributing single causes or anticipating continuing increased or reduced demand.

Service Market and Resource Analysis

CJSW services are delivered in a manner which reflects the nature of local need and opportunities to benefit from efficiencies offered by centralisation. Thus, all services in East and West Dunbartonshire are delivered via co-located CJSW teams in and . In contrast the geography and in particular the distance between towns reduces the opportunities for centralisation in Argyll and Bute. Consequently, there is a CJSW presence in all the towns in that area except , which, with the surrounding communities, is serviced from Dumbarton. In recent years measures have been taken to introduce improved resilience in Argyll and Bute through a necessarily limited degree of centralisation in Lochgilphead and development of para- professional roles.

Simply measuring units of work whilst important in achieving a broad understanding of national and CJA resource allocation does not fully capture the nature of demand on resources. The Service has to affect a response to volume as noted above within a context of priorities in respect of certain groups/categories.

Service Delivery Priority Groups (CJA Area Plan 2011-14)

Serious sexual and violent offenders Persistent offenders Throughcare prisoner release arrangements Young offenders Women offenders Community Payback Orders (Implementation/consultation) Victims

Within the above context the nature, level and complexity of CJSW commitment in terms of resources is increasingly driven and predicated upon an assessment of the “nature, seriousness, pattern and likelihood of offending” (*Framework for Risk Assessment, Management and Evaluation: RMA: 2011). This is defined within National Outcomes and Standards for SW Services in the Criminal Justice System (2010) as “the level of supervision and intensity of contact must be determined by an assessment of the likelihood of further offending, along with a consideration of the pattern, nature and seriousness of offending to date…”

In order to affect a service responsive to these demands there may be a need to alter the number/ratio of Social Workers to unqualified front line staff with an emphasis on a clearer definition between the roles of SW and others with an increasing para-professional role (see below re training). The definition of the role of the registered Social Worker in statutory interventions (Changing Lives: Practice Governance Group: Scottish Government: 2011) describes a series of functions relating to the provision of reports to courts, the Parole and Life Sentence Division and assessment of risk/preparation of risk management plans, “ while directly undertaking case management work in respect of those who are subject to statutory orders or licences and who are considered to pose a high risk of serious harm.” 12 Version 4.0: Revised July 2013

The requirement to affect a workforce planning strategy is critical in ensuring the appropriate and most effective use of resources. Achieving this within the context of reducing budgets is particularly challenging in that the headline activity figures do not properly reflect the complexity of the operational context within which services are delivered. This complexity has increased considerably over recent years and embraces a range of activities from the use of a suite of risk assessment tools, the development of a range of formal and informal relationships with a range of statutory and third sector agencies at the same time as the development of a more sophisticated appreciation of the role of CJSW in developing motivation, skills and capacities in support of the individual offenders efforts to reduce his/her offending.

These developments will, over the course of the next few years, have an impact on the nature, skills and qualifications profile and management of CJSW services in addition to the more immediate workforce development issues.

8 Implementation of Community Payback Orders

A critical factor determining need/demand for Community Justice Services is the impact of Community Payback Orders (CPO) established via Sect 14 of the Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010. CPO comprises a suite of requirements replacing Probation, Community Service and Supervised Attendance orders for offences committed on or after 1st February 2011. The act introduced a presumption against custodial sentences of three months or less. It should be noted that it was the Scottish Government’s original intention to have the presumption against sentences of six months or less.

The intention underpinning the above legislative change was to create a robust and consistently delivered community sentence which enjoys public confidence, credibility with judges and requires individuals to make payback to the community by means of reparation, changing offending behaviour and provides opportunities to reintegrate themselves into society as law-abiding and contributing citizens.

The Act also introduces a requirement for Local Authorities to produce an annual report on the operation of CPOs and to consult with “prescribed persons” (wide ranging representatives of professional bodies and the public) regarding the nature and conduct of unpaid work.

Reparation restoring responsibility for harm through making amends

Reintegration restoring relationships and opportunities and strengthening external protective factors

Rehabilitation restoring self awareness, responsibility, skills and internal controls, and where required

Restriction restoring public safety and boundaries

The Partnership took the view that the impact of the introduction of CPO is unlikely to become clear until at least the second full year of implementation owing to the transition arrangements. Despite this, it is not unreasonable to anticipate additional demands on the service ether through a greater volume of orders or through greater complexity in terms of requirements over time. 13 Version 4.0: Revised July 2013

The framework/model utilised in order to plan and achieve implementation of the Partnership’s CPO implementation strategy may be useful in considering the future direction of CJSW provision.

9 Commissioning (current service provision)

This involves current formal and informal arrangements with other services, agencies and external providers. CJSW relationship with youth justice services and substance misuse services (Health and Voluntary sector) are specifically identified in this context. A challenge for CJSW is to identify those elements in our operational relationship with partners which carry over from the present and those which are new, predicated by new demands arising from the implementation of CPO.

The present arrangements for service delivery whilst largely involving the provision of services “in house” by the Partnership Authorities do reflect the increasing involvement of third sector organisations. Most of the formal arrangements have developed since 2005.

The local authority provides the The following services are purchased following services: from other providers: Criminal Justice SW reports to Courts Court Services (via bail officer in Throughcare Addiction Service (£22k Dumbarton Sheriff Court)* with match funding from charitable trust) Community Service (replaced by CPO)

Supervised Attendance Orders (replaced Treatment and testing support (Argyll by CPO) and Bute; spot purchase arrangements) Probation (replaced by CPO) Fiscal Work Order (pilot) (£33k; note this project is delivered on part purchased/in house basis) Community Payback Orders (Replaces Turnaround community project probation, CS and SAO for offences (purchased via CJA through direct ring committed on or after 1st February 2011) fenced element of CJ grant which includes residential element: the total for the CJA is £1.1m) Drug Treatment and Testing Orders With effect from 2012 there has been a (note treatment services are provided prison based Social Work service in the via staff employed by GG&CHB and re-commissioned HMP Lowmoss. The NHS ) Scottish Prison Service purchases this Throughcare includes supervision of service from East Dunbartonshire offenders subject to post custodial Council. supervision, participation in ICM process, provision of Home leave/Home background reports. Restriction Of Liberty Orders (assessment only; equipment and monitoring provided by private sector contracted by Scottish Government) Home Detention Curfew (assessment only as per RLO) Diversion from Prosecution Bail Services

14 Version 4.0: Revised July 2013

The above accounts for the entire CJSW spend in terms of the CJ grant. However, the CJSW service in Dumbarton also hosts a Women’s Safety and Support Service funded via the Violence Against Women funding stream (£72k). The present funding concludes in March 2015. The service is provided and managed in house by the CJSW team.

10 Training

Staff supervision and Personal/Professional Development systems require to be sensitive to training and developmental issues arising from the implementation of CPO and developments in risk assessment and management. There is an increasing recognition of the value of working within a multi-disciplinary framework and of the challenges this presents in terms of a clear understanding of roles at a strategic and operational level, in which connection the merits and opportunities presented by a joint approach to training and practice development are well established.

The increasing significance of the role of non-SW qualified staff indicates the need to address the development of a Para-professional role, bringing with it a requirement to ensure an appropriate level of training, for instance through the SVQ route.

With effect from 2012 the needs of CJSW staff based within HMP Lowmoss (East Dunbartonshire) have been included within training and workforce development plans.

11 Processes

This involves ensuring that core processes and systems can accommodate CPO and other legislative requirements and are compatible with outcomes. Systems and processes for ensuring timely commencement of Orders have been revised and amended. Standard templates for review, case management plans and performance evaluation have also been amended, particularly in the area of outcome evaluation and in terms of ensuring that the contribution/input of external partners is captured. A critical issue in terms of the efficiency and effectiveness of the service is the functionality of the information/recording system. All Partnership Councils use Care-First (OLM) with CJSW using Carejustice. A new version of Carejustice (SCJ) was implemented in April 2013. This is the first substantive upgrade of the system since initial implementation and is intended to provide greater functionality with regard to operational processes and production of management information.

The accommodation of processes and systems within a challenging operational environment carries implications in terms of the need to strengthen business support arrangements for input and management of data.

All three Partnership authorities either have or are in the process of reviewing/changing their business requirements in terms of office accommodation, business support and ICT business support/requirements. Whilst member authorities are at different stages in this process it is essential that Criminal Justice Services are included in, participate in and contribute constructively to change and take advantage of opportunities to achieve operational and cost efficiencies where this is possible.

12 Resources

The principal resource available to CJSW is staff. We need to consider whether staff are sufficient in number, deployment (including the commissioning of external providers) and

15 Version 4.0: Revised July 2013 represent the best and most flexible range of qualifications and skills. A practical difficulty re flexibility and ability to respond to need/demand is the difference in salary grades within and between Councils, particularly in relation to unqualified staff. Critical related matters include whether grant levels are or will be sufficient in terms of current or future demand, or, more realistically, the level and nature of grant reductions.

The allocated grant level for 2013-14 is £3,443,167

The principal factors underpinning a reduction in total grant are reductions in the level of the core grant allocation for Drug Treatment and Testing Orders and in non- core funding for the Fiscal Work Order Pilot, pending a reallocation of funding in connection with the roll out facility of FWO across Scotland, the Supervised Attendance Order Pilot funding which has been reduced by 50% in 2013-14 and will cease in 2014-15. The Partnership has benefitted from the funding allocation in respect of these non-core allocations via the opportunity to use the funding to support core service. Underpinning the position with regard to the core grant is a relatively steep reduction in core activity levels within NSCJA. However the impact of overall reductions in grant level over the past three years has been mitigated by “dampening” at a national level and relatively higher activity levels within the context of the overall CJA.

Grant levels for previous years have been:

2013-2014 £3,443,167 2012-2013 £3,564,818 2010-2011 £3,681,966 2009-2010 £3,708,059 2008-2009 £3,384,141 2007-2008 £3,162,866 2006-2007 £3,053.811 2005-2006 £3,092,100

The current grant level reflects an 11% rise on the 2005-06 level but a 7% reduction compared with that of 2009-2010. Within this period staff costs have risen as a proportion of spend from 73% to 76%. Overall costs have risen 24% (primarily staff costs). The overall picture is of a budget which has not kept pace with inflation particularly with regard to staff costs, that is the cost of employing staff rather than that of additional staff. In terms of the impact on the service this has resulted in a range of efficiency savings and economies on a year by year basis since 2006-07.

The Audit Scotland report; Reducing Re-offending in Scotland (2012) referred to a general lack of understanding of the actual unit cost of CJSW activities. The Partnership has undertaken work to establish a greater understanding of the nature of the costs attached to community supervision (Probation) and more recently Throughcare. This has contributed to a greater and more detailed understanding of the pressures on core services but requires to be undertaken on a more comprehensive basis to support the aims of this strategy and inform dialogue with the CJA and Scottish Government.

16 Version 4.0: Revised July 2013

13 Conclusion

13.1 Recent achievements

The Partnership has responded to some of the issues in respect of resources, priorities and policy:

Argyll and Bute service re-organisation (changes to staff roles and deployment particularly unqualified/para-professional staff in response to implementation of CPO)

DTTO Review (Partnership and CJA) resulting in re-organisation of service delivery; core social care support taken in-house; re-allocation of nursing resource to A&B and EDC CHPs and reduction of admin

Unpaid Work (West Dunbartonshire) reduction in Officer posts; increase in supervisor resource/capacity and changes to contracts to effect increased squad capacity and efficiency

Re-organisation of Assessment and Supervision teams (WDC) involving creation of generic assessment/supervision teams with a view to efficient use of Social Worker and Senior SW capacity

Review of Throughcare delivery resulting in re-alignment of service in Argyll and Bute and re-distribution of management roles/capacity with consequential benefits to the Partnership

Reviewed management arrangements WDC/EDC taking into account additional responsibilities consequent upon the commissioning of the HMP Lowmoss Social Work Service

Commissioned and established a SW service within HMP Lowmoss (on behalf of East Dunbartonshire Council)

Reviewed and changed the Partnership Agreement with particular regard to clarity re delegation of functions and cross authority managerial responsibilities

Reviewed the Partnership Workforce Development programme to take account of new responsibilities and roles including SW team within HMP Lowmoss

Commenced Implementation of a new Performance Improvement Programme

These activities will assist in the future development of longer term commissioning objectives.

13.2 Future plans

In 2013-14 the Partnership will:

Undertake consultation with key statutory and third sector partners re alignment of priorities and outcomes

17 Version 4.0: Revised July 2013

Establish clear basis for understanding of cost of delivering services

Review arrangements for resource allocation

Review non-staff costs

Participate in development of new working practices, business support and ICT modernisation within membership councils

Improve strategic relationships with other bodies

Contribute to consultation on reorganisation of Community Justice services

Review and update Performance Planning and Improvement Framework

It is recognised that over the longer term the Partnership would benefit from a more strategic approach to service design, delivery and management. The focus in this respect is on the prioritisation and deployment of resources to best effect and with due regard to member Authority’s accountability in terms of risk.

The report to the Partnership Joint Committee, seeking approval of the Partnership Planning and Improvement Framework sets out four quality criteria for operational and performance improvement objectives. These can be applied to strategic commissioning objectives and should be interpreted within a context of value for money.

Do the objectives support and/or enhance delivery of statutory duties in relation to the assessment and management of offenders?

Do the objectives support and or enhance the delivery of services and achievement of outcomes to priority groups?

Will the failure to achieve an objective in whole or part materially affect the quality of CJSW service?

To what extent could a material effect compromise Partnership authorities in respect of their statutory duties and public protection obligations in particular?

13.3 Summary

The key drivers in terms of the future delivery of services are:

Financial: within an immediate context of anticipated reductions in the value of the CJ grant and wider context of (a) public sector retrenchment which will have an impact on the priorities of partner agencies and organisations and (b) the review of community justice funding arrangements recommended by the Audit Commission.

Policy: embracing the response to national priorities and the consequences of recent (and future) legislative/policy change. For instance measures arising from the Commission on Women Offenders.

Strategic: the need to address change in a way which takes account of overarching strategic objectives, outcomes and priorities, with particular reference to the multi- 18 Version 4.0: Revised July 2013 agency dimension and the role of the third sector in a supportive or provider role. For instance in relation to alcohol or drug interventions with offenders in the community or in prisons (see recent studies published by NHS Health Scotland (2011)), domestic violence or young offenders.

Practice: the range of knowledge and skills required of and applied in interventions with offenders has developed in response to empirical evidence of effectiveness and to an increasing understanding of the various dimensions of risk and risk management. Over the next few years CJSW services will require to address the consequences of these and future developments in terms of the recruitment, deployment and development of staff and of externally commissioned services.

The importance of having a strategic approach to the delivery and design of the service in the future is greater than ever given the very challenging circumstances facing all public sector bodies.

Appendix1 Core Statutory Functions of CJSW

Graphical Representation of Trends

19 Version 4.0: Revised July 2013

20 Version 4.0: Revised July 2013