PbR jargon demystified (1) A-F

First in a series of infographics which demystify the jargon and technical terms associated with the payment by results commissioning model.

What did we learn from the Doncaster prison PbR reoffending pilot?

Sodexo and NACRO are the new partnership running the South Yorkshire Community Rehabilitation Company and it will be interesting to see whether they can have a positive impact on reducing the reoffending of released prisoners – their results will also be subject to a payment by results contracting approach, this time using both a binary and frequency (but not severity of offence) payment model.

Disappointing outcomes for Peterborough and Doncaster prison PbR pilots

These are very disappointing results for the MoJ. Normally, there would be an expectation of a high level of performance from pilots with such public exposure where the partners had chosen to participate and, indeed, had championed and driven the initiative from the outset. Therefore, it is an extremely worrying sign for the new private providers of probation whose revenue will be, to an increasing extent, dependent on reducing reoffending rates, that these high-profile pilots are performing so poorly.

Did Peterborough and Doncaster reoffending pilots succeed?

So what do we make of these results? To me they represent a mixed picture, there’s no denying that reoffending has been reduced. However, we would normally expect a high level of performance from such a high profile pilot where the partners had chosen to participate and indeed championed and driven the initiative from the outset. On the other hand, there has been significant learning about how best to co-ordinate pre-and post-release activity, use mentors effectively and co-ordinate a multi-agency approach to preventing reoffending.

What’s in the new probation contracts?

The MoJ has decided to stick to its decision to make PbR payments on both binary (reducing the proportion of people who commit further offences) and frequency (reducing the total number of offences) measures. However, providers can only receive the frequency payment if they meet the binary target – the so called binary hurdle remains in place.

Latest on Transforming Rehabilitation Payment Mechanism

The Ministry of Justice responds to criticisms of its proposed payment mechanism for the new Transforming rehabilitation contracts and appears to be willing to make substantial changes. However, there will be no details until the “Invitation to Negotiate” stage of the procurement process…

Will the new Transforming Rehabilitation market work?

The Institute for Government identifies four key challenges to Transforming Rehabiliation – the probation outsourcing project. It argues that the MoJ needs to improve its stewardship of the market and slow down the pace of change. There are major concerns that the outsourcing of prisons, probation, electronic tagging and court enforcement services simultaneously means that none of these will be well managed in the public interest.

The 5th Commandment of Payment by Results: Thou shall not pay for deadweight

Payment by results is about driving improvement, so no self-respecting PBR scheme will pay for results that will happen anyway, known in the jargon is “deadweight”. The proportion of deadweight in a PbR funded initiative varies markedly across different spheres of operation. Despite all the adverse publicity about reoffending rates which has accompanied the debate about the Rehabilitation Revolution, 65.8% of those supervised in the community and 53.1% of those released from prison do NOT re-offend in the first year. However, when we look at the Work Programme…

How are the reducing reoffending prison payment by results pilots doing?

Yesterday the MoJ published interim reconviction figures from the reducing reoffending PbR pilots at Peterborough and Doncaster prisons. The final results for just the first year’s cohort from these pilots won’t be available until 2014 but the MoJ have decided to publish these interim results because of the “high level of public interest” which has been created because the new reducing reoffending contracts will be let on a PbR basis. The results aren’t especially promising…

Who is going to lead the rehabilitation revolution?

I just got back from an interesting roundtable discussion on payment by results and re-offending convened by IPPR. I cam away with two main thoughts. Is there really no alternative to the MoJ’s cumbersome cohort approach to calculating PbR? And who is going to provide on the ground leadership for the rehabilitation revolution in a centrally commissioned model with a much reduced probation service?

Payment by results – the devil really is in the detail

PbR is simple in theory…

Payment by results is quite a straightforward concept. Its chief attraction lies in its ability to incentivise providers to deliver exactly what a commissioner wants. For example, any PbR contract concerned with reducing reoffending should ensure that organisations receive the biggest payments when they succeed in getting prolific offenders to give up crime. This saves the commissioner – the Ministry of Justice – and the country money and is to the benefit of everyone in society.
However, getting the contract right in practice is proving rather more challenging – indeed, I’ve yet to go to a PbR event where at least one speaker hasn’t said: “The devil is in the detail.”

Last of the automatic pilots: Learning from the HMP Doncaster re-offending payment by results scheme

00000The Justice Secretary, Chris Grayling, made it very clear last week in his evidence to the House of Commons Justice Committee that he would be rolling out payment by results without waiting to learn from the existing MoJ pilot schemes. When asked whether, in the light of the work programme results announced the day before, it was not risky to pursue a PbR approach without more information he replied: “In government if you’re going to …

Last of the automatic pilots: Learning from the HMP Doncaster re-offending payment by results schemeRead More »

Roma Hooper of Make Justice Work sees commissioning as the key issue for payment by results

00000In this latest in a series of short video interviews on payment by results, Roma Hooper, founder of Make Justice Work, gives her views on PbR in the criminal justice sector. Roma argues that setting a level playing field for large and small organisations and making sure that commissioning does not squeeze out innovation are the main issues to get right if PbR is to improve the effectiveness of initiatives tackling re-offending. Do you agree? Make …

Roma Hooper of Make Justice Work sees commissioning as the key issue for payment by resultsRead More »

Select Language

Keep up-to-date on drugs and crime

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

Scroll to Top