Lancs Audit report - final 23 October 2001

Administrator

Description

HM Inspectorate of Probation AUDIT OF ACCREDITED PROGRAMMES North-West Region of the National Probation Service for England and Wales Report on: Lancashire Probation Area – Think First July 2001 Lancashire Probation Area Audit Report 2 Lancashire Probation Area Audit Report Acknowledgements: We are grateful for the cooperation of staff from the Lancashire Probation Area in completing this audit. The audit team comprised: Breda Leyne Andy Bonny Rosanna Heal Deputy Audit Manager Inspection and Audit Officers Alan MacDonald Audit Manager Frances Flaxington HM Acting Deputy Chief Inspector of Probation Glossary ACE Assessment, Case Recording and Evaluation System ACO Assistant Chief Officer CO Chief Officer HMIP HM Inspectorate of Probation IAPS Interim Accredited Programmes Software IQR Implementation Quality Rating JAP Joint Accreditation Panel LSI-R Level of Service Inventory-Revised N/A Criteria not assessed OASys Offender Assessment System OGRS Offender Group Reconviction Scale PSR Pre-sentence report Contents Page Context: 4 Scoring Approach: 4 Overview: 5 Findings and recommendations: 6 SECTION A: COMMITTED LEADERSHIP 7 SECTION B: PROGRAMME MANAGEMENT RESPONSIBILITIES 9 SECTION C: QUALITY OF PROGRAMME DELIVERY 19 SECTION D: CASE MANAGEMENT RESPONSIBILITIES 22 Next Steps 25 Scoring summary sheet: 26 3 Lancashire Probation Area Audit Report Context: Programmes achieving accredited status have ...

Sujets

• management
• managers

Informations

• Publié par: Saep
• Nombre de lectures: 14
• Langue: English

Extrait

 

   

  HM Inspectorate of Probation  

AUDIT OF  ACCREDITED  PROGRAMMES

North-West Region of the National Probation Service for England and Wales

Report on: Lancashire Probation Area– Think First

 

July 2001 

 

Lancashire

 

  2

 

Probation

Area

Audit

Report

 

aLihercnsartpo    diAuRet A no aerorP itab re grate ts:  We a elgdmenecAnkwo ffta sofn ioaerpooc eht rof lufon Abati Prohirecnsa eaL mhtf or ea titudrimpcom  erB  :des enyeL ad in crea etinomplsia  ght eha  du T    Oiticffs er dyAnnoB  D  yn tupeuA y   Rosanna Heal  Inpsceitnoa dnA du secnarF  reganaM   AHM n tongxila F lAna eg raManid t udit ld  A Dona Mac  nborPoitaupytC ihtcni geDctor of f Inspe

Glossary ACE Assessment, Case Recording and Evaluation System ACO Assistant Chief Officer CO Chief Officer HMIP HM Inspectorate of Probation IAPS Interim Accredited Programmes Software IQR Implementation Quality Rating JAP Joint Accrdeitation Pa nel LSI-R Level of Service Inve-nRteovriyse d N/A Criteria not assessed OASys Offender Assessment System OGRS Offender Group Reconviction Scale PSR Pre-sentence report

Contents

Contex t: Scoring Approach: Overvie w: Findings and recommendations: SECTION A: COMMITTED LEADERSHIP SECTION B: PROGRAMME MANAGEEMNT RESPONSIBILITIES  SECTION C: QUALITY OF PROGRAMME DELIVERY SECTION D: CASE MANAGEMENT RESPONSIBILITIES Next Steps Scoringsummary sheet:

   

3

Page 4 4 5 6 7 9 19 22 25 26

Lancashire Probation Area Audit Report   Context: Programmes achieving accredited status have undergone a rigorous process of development to ensure they have maximum impact in terms of reducing reoffe-ntdeisntge.d  Sperloegctrianmg mwelsl is however only pa rtth eo fpictur–e  without effective implementation by probation areas much of t positive influence on offenders’ behaviour   may be lost. Establishing robust quality assurance systems and independent audit arrangements for programmes is thererfuocriea l.c HMIP is responsible for auditing accredited programmes on beha the JAP. Each probation area will be assessed against the delivery criteria given in the P Standards Manual June 2001, which also outlines how these crti taenrida  eavried eton   m.edee cb Scoring Approach: The criteria for the delivery of accredited programmes have been divided into 4 sections. The and the overall weighting assigned for each section, are as follows: Committed leadership and supportive management 20% Programme management responsibilities 30% Quality of programme delivery 30% Case management responsib   i   liti   es     20% Each criterion is scorFeudl   lays    Met(   2 marksL)a,rgely Me(t1 Mark) oNrot Met(0 marks). The scoring summary shee ttarof –e marks awarded of raehch tnd ef  oisthper  trowohsht s   cire tnior those criteria designated as Mandatory (see Performance Standards Manual) the mark give This denotes the critical impact these criteria have on the effecgtriavem dmeel isv. ery of pro The marks awarded for each section are shown and then expressed as a % by dividing the t of marks scored by the maximum available, and multiplying by 100. Section B has been di sub-sections for ease of scoring. To determi naen area’s IQR, the scores for each section are multiplied by the appropriate facto account of the relevant weightings given above. The % totals for each section are then adde give the IQR.   4

 

Lancashire Probation Area Audit Report   Overview: · ran an  this itxesiitnJae arnut rsncsioirPot r02 y .10 delbeenhad ire  kiFhTnini gvirehsacnaL McGuire programme (locally known as “STOP”). Staff training, provided by James M for this programme, was similar in content to that available for Think First. The transiti accreitded programme involved some crossover with the original both in managing st offenders with existing STOP requirements. This audit focused entirely on the implem of Think First. ·The programme was delivered by a centrally managtesd   thea of s reev d aunbmren  osi3 tm different probation offices. ·The audit comprised video monitoring of randomly selected programme sessions, a reading exercise, assessment of advance information material, and a visit to the area involvedn idelivery or support of the programme were interviewed. They included managers, information support staff, programme and treatment managers, program case managers and court personnel. Some offenders who had undertaken the progra also interviewed. ·Nine videos were observed from 3 sites, sampling a group at an earlier stage of imple and 2 recent groups. ·Three of the criteria specified in the Performance Standards Manual were not applie area reflecting the eaerl yo f stdaeglivery of Think First: B4.2, where it is assumed that relativ inexperienced tutors will be assigned to deliver programmes together; B4.3 and D1 await national planned training for experienced tutors and the accreditation of the behavioural booster programme.    5

er dqeiureairctid met anhe ret thT ecudosriF knirdhad ketrino  tcnsaiherh daw ro Findings:  La isra nal rdppeaivera weinna ,gns up andramme waht erpgowot ah t res ltsuree thd na noitatnemelpm e plvanch adroug dhteieva hcebne tneg xe    tcepoita ntcot ex sofintr nidec iretir.aT ns on pr-determ sriF kniargorp tngniun   rThe Th. tndeelemht ei  nhad mme  impbeen fft ah tiseds atly engagwere fulss e ek  ,i deht n ewvihe t tenreo  opis  suat ihf ro nce erie exptiveet tidua eht rofnglo arkwoo  tam This audit has bee nacrrei duo t aatel rivaty ellraets y egai fo trenir s andgthssaf a erpmorroi  antmevefoe  bndol drawr  .gniko agement case mannest e   av raargnmef  ofeofndteceannife gnirednr ,s  levtorysfacsatiamcnfrro fepleo  ornf iton ioatlu  ehT  .ecitcarp m edwryat  odardse these issues.  rapp tne anamsregnd aor wwak uns ni t  re e itgnraeg man andg atagin niam ehTf saera romp ior wntmeve tcepfo snaM   sa y dali. te ctosoonekt mi eowlu dat a procesmes was  a ylraelc erew tdiaus hi tinr we dolocerevs  tah thaanceform per retund a nd   aan L segn ni htobluc  significant chaih sah deruqride editedcramgrro pitatnemeca fo noed tgnisimplhat rieachserocah d n  apslovede·  e  utluc noitacollato mder n orre it ranolaanitee ttt adaentsgeor f htiwt ni  ecn dna oups;  ·  arget gr eruf locigev sac sgnirb dcca lla tidamoomtop  uonl vet dh  ·er le ; s taviewing rget dnaessaemsso tnoff ndfes erd anedevolspa c elra plan for improv neadocmm  . eR evsll let alff a sta  taht erusne dluho sCOe Th s onti a ttneitf ruhtre :  · pays the area edivna dseitorp fae lici tontho  withell xpecin et eh esierw erofenpls  iscf  otya oitatereht dn ent with the evi po eof r mirpvomed anpeexisrtofe tnedtom tavi noi me mgramemenanag s rt ;t ·   ehsnnetg s teraegan seca tnemegaorp htiw nt of policy andp artcci;e ·   i tn h itffsuieic introfn  dnaiferemen atffeds orivotp ls wleveall  at ved ylwen eht see asabat dedopel  erpgoarect  ohtal;  · us mme manuarramegnkrow gnidh aenertsennd acus seus-oc sa hra   p nd a ise ict  oomivedirgninotutoral ting s ussdee fo idniudivev dopelntme nalffreneittaset eh  sessions;   · di ofg inmmraogprd na emit rotut fouse the ers nsideroc  ;  · otsr rutiencfos om ctepeitanlanosu l gniappraisaefining oi notr sndireta of sevitcejbo  ni

Lancashire Probation Area Audit Report  

 

 s.erndfeofr 

  6

ingna dnu eso  fsupervision planrof ssa msse tnerusturct tedlsoo es sc ir pup g t or nal xternderoffe auq eht  fo ytil·  ; seha esovprim tivationender mossseo ff·   a dder as, end ialuesstittnidua laa dn agem mancasethe er scuuts rta dn; ryvelidep ougr gnirud elor tne