Menu
wikipedia/commons/a/a2/Christmas_wish_list_to_Santa.jpg
Russell Webster

Russell Webster

Criminal Justice & substance misuse expert and author of this blog.

Dear Mr Grayling… My Transforming Rehabilitation wish list

Share on twitter
Share on facebook
Share on linkedin
Share on print
Share on email
Like a young child writing to Santa, I don’t quite know where to begin with my wish list of all the things I’d like to know from NOMS before the Transforming Rehabilitation procurement process starts in earnest. Perhaps the obvious first request is to know when the PQQ process is going to start and end? And will it be the rumoured “light touch” process to ensure that most new entrants, including probation mutuals, will have a good chance of getting through? Or will it be the (also rumoured)...

Like a young child writing to Santa, I don’t quite know where to begin with my wish list of all the things I’d like to know from NOMS before the Transforming Rehabilitation procurement process starts in earnest.

I’m sure that most probation staff would want to know whether they will be going to the National Probation Service or the Community Rehabilitation Companies and whether they have any say in the process.

But, to focus on the procurement process:

Perhaps the obvious first request is to know when the PQQ process is going to start and end?

And will it be the rumoured “light touch” process to ensure that most new entrants, including probation mutuals, will have a good chance of getting through?

Or will it be the (also rumoured) more rigorous process which will give the NOMS procurement team a better chance of managing the tendering process (alongside the numerous others they will have going on at the same time)?

While we’re talking about such basic matters, it would be really helpful to know the percentage split between the new National Probation Service and the Community Rehabilitation Companies.

Most people seem to think it’s now going to be 60/40 rather than 70/30 – which I guess makes it 50/50 for London once you take out the existing contract with Serco to run Community Payback.

There’s also the minor issue of what the payment mechanism will be – the balance between Fee for Service & PbR etc. The second version of Straw Man is still awaited.

wikipedia/commons/a/a2/Christmas_wish_list_to_Santa.jpg
wikipedia/commons/a/a2/Christmas_wish_list_to_Santa.jpg

It would also be really helpful if NOMS could give definitive answers to the following questions/rumours:

  • How many CPAs will prime providers be allowed to bid for?
  • And win?
  • Will the caps on the number of CPAs be based on volume, price or number of areas?
  • How will NOMS reconcile multi-area bids and possible price discounts with 21 separate procurement competitions?
  • Will offenders who move risk category from high to low or vice versa stay with their existing provider (NPS or CRC) or transfer to “the other side”?
  • Will all sex offenders, irrespective of risk, be managed by the NPS?
  • Will sex offender treatment programmes be commissioned and/or delivered by the NPS?

I could go on – but my mum says Santa doesn’t like you to ask for too many presents.

 

Let me know what you would like to know about Transforming Rehabilitation in the comments section below.

 

 

Share on twitter
Share on facebook
Share on linkedin
Share on print
Share on email

All Probation Posts are sponsored by Unilink

With over 20 years’ experience in the criminal justice sector, Unilink is a world leader in probation and community corrections software applications, as well as prisoner self-service, prisoner/case management and prisoner communications. Unilink’s integrated suite of products provide a complete digital solution enabling efficient running of prisons and probation. Underpinned by biometrics it integrates seamlessly to deliver security, efficiency and value – while being proven to help rehabilitate prisoners.

4 Responses

  1. What about women offenders? Are they going to be managed by mainstream provision along with men who could potentially be dangerous to them, be perpetrators or previous partners in crime? What about the government’s legal duty to consider the different needs of women through a gendered lens? Serco and G4S don’t have the same legal obligations under international law or CEDAW and will not look after the practical requirements, crèches, sensitivity to domestic violence and trauma, running programmes and appointments around school run commitments.
    The Commons Justice Select Committee has recently slated NOMS and the Ministry of Justice for ignoring the needs of women in their recent report on women in the criminal justice system. So they do it again. The problem with dismantling probation trusts and decimating the existing infrastructure is that there will be nothing to fall back on when private providers do not make their payments by results and wish to hand the contracts back. This is already starting to happen. Serco has handed back contracts because they were not lucrative enough!
    The much reduced public probation facility won’t have the capacity to insource all the work needing to be done to attend to those abandoned by the private sector.
    Then what?
    Now is the time for judicial review. Particularly as the Ministry of Justice refuses to publish the full risk register and impact assessment for Transforming Rehabilitation.

  2. I am dyslexic – which does not just involve a reading difficulty – but is concerned with memory function.

    I would be better able to comment if I knew what all the acronyms are – is this just written for an ‘in crowd’?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Transforming Rehabilitation Resource Pack

Keep up with all the latest developments by clicking on the image above.

Select Language

Keep up-to-date on drugs and crime

You will get one email with a new article every day.