Tags are keywords. I put tags on every post to help you find the content you want. Tags may be people (Dominic Raab, say), organisations (The Howard League, PRT), themes (women offenders, homelessness) or specific items (heroin, racial disparity, ROTL). If you’re looking to research a particular issue, they can be invaluable.
HMPPS toolkit to measure intermediate outcomes to reduce reoffending from arts and mentoring interventions.
Not only do outcomes therefore have to be accurate and realistic but commissioners need to consider that providers will quite reasonably de-prioritise work which is not governed by an outcome.
New research seeks to establish a basket of indicators to define recovery, now updated with SURE self-checklist: Substance Use Recovery Evaluator
Measuring drug recovery is problematic, to say the least. Recovery from drug dependence is, like desistance from crime, rarely a linear process and typically includes lapse and relapse over many years. Different people choose different recovery goals: some people remain abstinent from all substances for life; others continue to use occasionally; or replace drug dependence with a reliance on alcohol.
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.”
Not everything that counts can be counted… The first challenge of payment by results schemes is to set the right outcomes. The second is to
