Prison Service Effective Regime Order Interventions ORDER NUMBER 4350 Date of Issue / Amendment 23/12/2002 Amendments can be tracked in the Numerical Index. PSI Amendments should be read before and in conjunction with PSO INTRODUCTION FROM THE DIRECTOR OF RESETTLEMENT 1. This Prison Service Order provides instructions and guidance on the management of regime interventions intended to change prisoners‟ behaviour. 2. The PSO establishes an internal Prison Service validation system for regime interventions which are not validated by an appropriate external body. Each such intervention will require the approval of a Prison Service Area or Operational Manager. 3. This PSO applies to regime interventions for prisoners aged 18 and over. Different arrangements, to meet the requirements of the Youth Justice Board, apply for prisoners aged under 18. 4. Regime interventions which are validated by independent external bodies will continue to be subject only to the requirements of those bodies and it will not be necessary for them also to comply with the requirements for validation set out in this PSO1. Priority must continue to be given to delivery of interventions which are accredited by the Correctional Services Accreditation Panel and other external bodies. 5. Regime interventions in scope will be required to meet nine criteria covering design, participation and management. These criteria are based on What Works principles, established through research on effectiveness. Completion of a business case pro-forma is required to show how an intervention will meet each of the nine criteria and approval is needed from the Area/Operational Manager. 6. To date, there have been no guidelines for such regime interventions. This PSO aims to lay the foundations to raise standards in the delivery of these regime interventions so that they are more likely to be effective in changing prisoners‟ behaviour. Compliance with the PSO will not in itself ensure effectiveness. That will depend on evidence gained from research and evaluation. 7. It is recognised that there is already much good work and commitment by establishments in the delivery of regime interventions. This PSO is designed to build upon that and to set clear guidelines to support and develop the work. It will also establish a comprehensive database of interventions, which will assist in the sharing of good practice. PURPOSE 8. The outcomes sought are: To raise the quality of the design and delivery of regime interventions To apply What Works principles to regime interventions To validate a range of regime interventions To facilitate rational allocation of resources on the basis of needs and effectiveness PERFORMANCE STANDARDS 9. This PSO supports the Regimes Standard. The Standard is: Every establishment provides a constructive regime which addresses offending behaviour, improves educational and work skills and promotes law abiding behaviour in custody and after release. OUTPUT 10. This PSO will assist establishments to meet targets relating to purposeful activity, resettlement, decency and good order. IMPACT AND RESOURCE ASSESSMENT 11. There will be some additional work to review current regime provision initially to implement this PSO. This will vary between establishments. There are no new 1 See Annex F resources specifically for implementation but the timetable can take account of this. Establishments must not reduce regime provision solely in order to carry out the required reviews. The review timetable can take this into account. If current provision is cut because it fails to meet the criteria, then it must be replaced by more appropriate provision. 12. Implementation of this PSO may lead to re-allocation of resources to improve cost-effectiveness. The allocation of additional resources made available for regimes under Spending Reviews will take account of regime provision made in accordance with this PSO. IMPLEMENTATION 13. This PSO comes into effect on 1 April 2003. The requirements of this PSO must be applied immediately to all new regime interventions. Implementation will be staged for existing regime interventions as follows: Establishments must notify regime interventions requiring review according to instructions in this PSO by 30 June 2003. Establishments must draw up a plan and timetable for reviewing regime interventions by 30 September 2003, which will be approved by the Area/Operational Manager and copied to What Works in Prison Unit (WWPU). The plan and timetable must take account of contractual commitments. Establishments must complete reviewing regime interventions by 30 September 2004 unless a longer timescale has been approved by the Area/Operational Manager. A longer timescale will be approved where this is necessary to avoid this PSO having the unintended consequence of reducing total purposeful activity time. Any subsequent changes to an establishment’s plan and timetable must be approved by the Area/Operational Manager and copied to WWPU. Where the same internal regime interventions operate in a number of establishments, arrangements may be made for a lead establishment to take responsibility for the review2 MANDATORY ACTION 14. Mandatory action is specified in this PSO by the use of italic typeface. 15. Governors and Directors of contracted-out establishments must ensure that all staff and partner agencies with responsibilities for regimes and the movement of prisoners are aware of the contents of this PSO and have access to it. This PSO must be available to prisoners and members of Boards of Visitors on request. A copy of this PSO is available on the Prison Service Intranet. AUDIT AND MONITORING 16. Establishments and Headquarters must comply with the mandatory instructions in this PSO. 2 See Section 2 for details. Self audit will apply. This PSO is concerned with quality assurance. Monitoring is integral to its provisions. 17. This PSO will be taken into account in inspections carried out by HM Chief Inspector of Prisons and may be taken into account by the Adult Learning Inspectorate or OFSTED, whose inspections are based on the Common Inspection Framework. 18. Periodic reports on the workings of this PSO will be made to the What Works in Prison Strategy Board (WWPSB) and the Prison Service Management Board. CONTACT 19. Further advice on the PSO as a whole is available from What Works in Prison Unit in Sentence Management Group: Michael Cole 020 7217 5255 Gareth Mercer 020 7217 5935 Elizabeth Barnard 020 7217 5086 20. Further advice on topics within the PSO and types of regime intervention is available from: Martin Lee, Drug Strategy Unit 020 7217 5045 Anthony Harris, Prisoners‟ Learning and Skills Unit, DfES020 7925 6162 Susannah Nisbett, Prison Health Policy Unit, DH 020 7972 3932 Georgina Campbell, Custody to Work Unit 020 8760 1706 Mike Gibbs, Safer Custody Group 020 7217 2135 Jo Gordon, National Voluntary Sector Co-ordinator, 020 7217 6842 Prisoner Administration Group Steve Niven, RDS, Home Office, for monitoring and evaluation020 7217 5240 KEN SUTTON Director of Resettlement NOTE FOR ESTABLISHMENT LIAISON OFFICERS ELOs must record receipt of this PSO – EFFECTIVE REGIME INTERVENTIONS – in their registers as issue 161 set out below. This PSO must be placed with those sets of orders mandatorily required under Chapter 4 of PSO 0001. Issue Date Order Title Date ELO signature No. No. entered in set 161 23/12/02 4350 Effective Regime Interventions CONTENTS 1 Overview 1.1 Introduction Table 1 Scope 1.2 - 1.3 Criteria 1.4 Central database of regime interventions 2 Implementation arrangements 2.1 General 2.2 - 2.6 Full business case 2.7 Shorter business case 2.8 - 2.11 New interventions 2.12 - 2.15 Review of existing interventions 2.16 - 2.18 Managing change control Annex A Scope A1 Age A2 – A3 In scope A4 – A9 Not in scope A10 – A15 Other issues of scope Annex B Quality Assurance Criteria B1 - B3 Introduction B4 - B7 Criterion 1: Objectives B8 - B9 Criterion 2: Rationale B10 - B12 Criterion 3: Structure B13 - B23 Criterion 4: Selection B24 - B26 Criterion 5: Achievement B27 - B30 Criterion 6: Scale and Costs B31 Criterion 7: Staff Selection, Competence, Management and Support B32 - B36 Criterion 8: Records, Monitoring and Audit Pro-forma Prisoner record B37 - B38 Criterion 9: Evaluation Annex C Pro-forma for Business Case and Approval Annex D Procedures for Approval of Regime Interventions - Flow Chart Annex E Database of Regime Interventions E1 – E4 Pro-forma Annex F Regime interventions validated by independent external bodies F1 - F3 General F4 - F5 Validating bodies F6 Central database of regime interventions 1. OVERVIEW Introduction 1.1 This PSO establishes internal procedures for validation of regime interventions which aim to change prisoners‟ behaviour and attitudes and criteria for assuring their effectiveness. The term “intervention” is used to include programmes, courses and other systematic activities. Scope TABLE 1: Summary Principles Examples See following paras. in annex A for details In scope The primary or major Social and life skills courses A2-3 objective is to change Victim awareness course, eg. Sycamore prisoners‟ behaviour Tree Parenting skills course The intervention has not Courses run by Alcoholics Anonymous or been approved or rejected Narcotics Anonymous by any independent, Courses for prisoners experiencing external body difficulties coping with prison life Drug importers‟ programme Drug mentor scheme Pre-release/resettlement courses 3 Not in scope Any interventions for A1 prisoners under 18 years Offending behaviour Accredited programmes A4-5 programmes accredited by ETS, R&R the Correctional Services SOTP Accreditation Panel4 or in CALM the Prison Service CSCP development portfolio with a Development portfolio view to being so accredited Intensive drug treatment programmes Short term resettlement programmes Interventions validated by Education and training courses approved A4-5 appropriate external, by the Qualifications and Curriculum independent bodies authority (QLA) such as the National Open 3 The criteria for interventions in scope may be applied where this would be useful to benchmark. 4 This includes programmes accredited by its predecessors. College Network, ASET, NVQ awarding bodies and other education awarding bodies The Guidance Council Accreditation Board Interventions provided for Careers Service A6 prisoners which are Job clubs identical to those provided in the community and which are provided or authorised by statutory bodies and subject to their arrangements for quality assurance Interventions provided Structured one-to-one work by A8 solely by professionally psychologists qualified staff such as Detoxification doctors and psychologists whose right to practise is subject to their professional bodies‟ clinical and ethical standards One-to-one interventions Counselling A8-9 Personal officer work Listeners and befriending Drop-in advice surgeries Advisory services provided individually5 Activities whose primary Health care A7 purpose is to preserve the Religion rights, decency and dignity Clothing and laundry of prisoners Meals Canteen Visits and „phone calls Legal services Bereavement courses Diet and nutrition courses Activities whose primary Induction courses A9 purpose is to enable Lifer discussion groups prisoners to serve their sentence appropriately Activities whose primary Cleaning A7 purpose is to enable the Maintenance establishment to function Catering Activities which serve the Commercial workshops A7 interests of the establishment rather than the prisoner Leisure activities Association A2 Recreational PE Model making TV, film clubs 5 Guidance on good practice in relation to housing and employment is provided in the Custody to Work Practice Framework Meditation techniques More detail on scope is in Annex A of this PSO. Criteria 1.2 The criteria that must be met by regime interventions to obtain approval are: Design Objectives, i.e. the purpose(s) the intervention sets out to achieve Rationale, i.e. why the methods set out can be expected to achieve the objectives Structure, i.e. what the intervention will do; how it will do it; and, if appropriate, its sequence and intensity Participation Selection, i.e. the target group of prisoners for whom the intervention is designed, how they will be assessed and selected Achievement, i.e. how outcomes for prisoners will be assessed and recognised, including feedback from prisoners Management Scale and costs, i.e. how many places etc. are to be provided and what the intervention will cost Staff selection, competence, management and support Records, monitoring and audit, i.e. what records will be kept, how they will be used, and what steps will be taken to ensure practice follows what has been approved Evaluation, i.e. how the intervention’s overall success at achieving its objectives will be assessed. This is broader than ‘achievement’, which is concerned solely with outcomes for participants. More detail on these criteria is in Annex B. 1.3 A pro-forma for drawing up the business case for approval is at Annex C. It is available through the Prison Service Intranet. Formatted disks may be supplied to partner agencies, subject to IT security requirements. More detail on the approval process is in Section 2. Central database of regime interventions 1.4 A database must be maintained of all regime interventions which have been approved or are in development and at which establishments they are run. What Works in Prison Unit (WWPU) will use this database to provide an information service to the Prison Service Management Board, Area/Operational Managers and establishments. It will also assist RDS in the identification of interventions and sites for evaluation. Details of the contents and operation of the database are at Annex E. Requirements relating to the database are in Section 2 and Annex F. 2. IMPLEMENTATION ARRANGEMENTS General 2.1 Regime interventions whose primary purpose is to change prisoners’ behaviour must comply with quality assurance arrangements. Where an appropriate external body has validated the intervention, no further quality assurance action is required6. In all other cases within scope7, the approval of an Area/Operational Manager is required, on the basis of a business case showing how the nine quality assurance criteria described in Annex B are met. A pro forma for the business case is at Annex C. The Area/Operational Manager must be satisfied that all nine criteria are met, but may permit minor variation from the Code of Practice set out in Annex B. Full business case 2.2 A full business case is required where an intervention is seeking approval for the first time. This may be an intervention which is already operational or a new proposal. 2.3 A business case may be submitted by an establishment, a consortium of establishments, a policy unit, a working group of policy and operational staff, or an outside body. 2.4 An outside body must have an internal sponsor, whether or not Prison Service resources are involved. The internal sponsor may be an establishment, a consortium of establishments, a policy unit, or a working group of policy and operational staff. 2.5 The steps in the process for obtaining approval must be: 1 Originator and/or sponsor prepares full business case, completes pro- forma at Annex C 2 Business case submitted to Governor/Director of contracted-out establishment for support 3 Governor/Director of contracted-out establishment submits business case to Area/Operational Manager for approval 2.6 At any step, the relevant policy unit or area specialist, such as the Area Psychologist, may be consulted before proceeding to the next step. Their advice on relevant evaluation evidence will be particularly valuable. The Area/Operational Manager must ensure that the decision is recorded in the database of regime interventions.8 Shorter business case 6 See Annex F for details 7 See Table 1 above and Annex A 8 See Annex E for details 2.7 Where an existing or new intervention has already been approved and consideration is being given to whether it will be delivered at another establishment, then the same steps set out at para 2.5 are required, but the business case need only specify how the intended operation differs from the approval given elsewhere. This is likely to include Criterion 6-Scale and Costs. It may also include evidence that the target group, to satisfy Criterion 4-Selection, is likely to be available. The ID of the intervention already approved must be referred to. New Interventions 2.8 All new regime interventions developed from the date of implementation of this PSO must follow the procedures in this PSO. 2.9 Before an originator may proceed to design of a new intervention, they must: consult the database of regime interventions; be satisfied that a suitable approved intervention is not already available - or in development9; be authorised - and, if necessary, resourced - by Governor(s)/Director(s) of a contracted-out establishment (in the case of an establishment or a consortium of establishments) or by a sponsoring Head of Group (in the case of a policy unit or a working group of policy and operational staff) to design a new intervention. 2.10 Where a consortium of establishments, a policy unit or a working group of policy and operational staff has been involved in developing a new intervention, any relevant Area/Operational Manager may take the initial decision on approval, but each establishment intending to adopt the approved regime intervention must prepare a shorter business case. 2.11 Before agreeing to sponsor or resource design of a new intervention by an outside body, the prospective internal sponsor must: consult the database of regime interventions ; be satisfied that a suitable approved intervention is not already available - or in development; comply with procurement rules. Sponsorship does not guarantee commitment to delivery, should a new regime intervention succeed in becoming approved. Review of existing interventions 2.12 All existing interventions within scope must seek approval within 18 months of the date of implementation of this PSO or later if agreed with the Area/Operational 9 Information from the database of regime interventions will be brief but will indicate where relevant regime interventions exist and advise contacts for details. See Annex E for details of what will be recorded in the database. Manager.10 The same business case (using the pro-forma at Annex C) is required for this process. 2.13 The first action establishments must take is to identify existing interventions in scope and prepare a draft plan and timetable for their review and approval.11 Where similar interventions are in operation at more than one establishment, Area/Operational Managers may designate a lead establishment to take responsibility for the review and preparation of a full business case. Area/Operational Managers must approve plans and timetables and inform WWPU of the existing interventions in scope at their establishments and the timetables agreed for their review. Details will be entered in the database of regime interventions and Area/Operational Managers will have full national information. Where similar interventions are in operation at establishments in more than one Area/Operational Command, the Area/Operational Managers concerned may agree on the designation of a lead establishment to take responsibility for the review and preparation of a full business case. 2.14 Interventions may already have written material demonstrating how some or all of the criteria are met. In such cases, it will not be necessary to re-write; it will be sufficient to attach existing material to the pro-forma, but the appropriate sections of the pro-forma must refer to the precise parts of the attachments which match the specified criteria. 2.15 Where a lead establishment has prepared a full business case and it has been approved, then other establishments must prepare a shorter business case for approval by their Area/Operational Manager, as set out in para. 2.7 above 10 See para. 13 of the Introduction 11 For timetable, see para. 13 of the Introduction Managing change control 2.16 In accordance with What Works principles, regime interventions must be delivered as designed. Substantial changes require a fresh business case to be made and approved. In such cases, the pro-forma need only: specify the proposed changes; state „no change‟ where the means of meeting any criterion are unchanged; attach existing material relating to any such criterion. 2.17 Only minor in-year changes in design may be made, but they must have been justified in writing, and the approval of the Governor/Director of contracted-out establishment must be recorded in writing and notified to the Area/Operational Manager, who will consider whether the changes are more than minor and hence whether a fresh business case is required. 2.18 Continuation of delivery of an approved regime intervention and the scale of delivery approved must be considered on an annual basis by reference to: the evidence from monitoring, audit and inspection; any evidence from evaluation of this or another relevant intervention any changes in the risks and needs profile of the establishment’s population; and any changes in the capacity of the establishment to deliver; and will be included in the establishment’s business plan. Any decisions to cease delivery or to change the scale of delivery must be recorded on the database of regime interventions.12 12 See Annex E. ANNEX A SCOPE A1 This PSO applies to regime interventions for prisoners aged 18 and over. Different arrangements, determined by the Youth Justice Board, apply for young offenders under 18. In Scope A2 Regime interventions in scope are those whose primary or major objective is to change prisoners‟ behaviour, supported by changes in attitudes and development of skills. Regime interventions which may have such by-products, but whose primary or major objectives are different, are not within scope. The changes in behaviour may be: To reduce the likelihood of re-offending after release To improve institutional behaviour, e.g. to reduce assaults and bullying To improve inter-personal behaviour, including respect for diversity To improve resettlement prospects, e.g. through education and training A3 Regime interventions which may in themselves be insufficient to achieve change in prisoners‟ behaviour, but are stages towards this, are in scope, e.g. Awareness raising Motivation enhancement Not in Scope A4 Interventions validated by appropriate external independent bodies, including the Correctional Services Accreditation Panel (formerly Joint Prison-Probation Accreditation Panel) and professional bodies such as in medicine and psychology, are not in scope. The relevant criteria are set by the appropriate body, along with procedures to maintain standards such as inspection or audit. Use of such external bodies is preferred, where available. A5 An intervention which has been rejected by an external body must not be re- submitted for internal validation unless it has been revised and feedback from the external body is added to the business case. A6 Interventions provided for prisoners by statutory bodies (or by authorised bodies on their behalf) are not in scope if they are identical to those provided in the community and if they are subject to the arrangements for quality assurance that apply in the community. The Prison Service‟s resettlement strategies seek to ensure that prisoners are included within the mainstream service responsibilities of these agencies, to reduce social exclusion.13 Partnerships are being developed, 13 See PSO 2300 Resettlement nationally and regionally, with the Department for Education and Skills (DfES), the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP), the Department of Health (DH) and others. A7 Regime elements whose primary objectives concern the following are not in scope: Preserving the rights, decency and dignity of prisoners Enabling the establishment to function Serving the interests of the establishment rather than the prisoner Such regime activities may have beneficial spin-off effects in prisoners‟ behaviour and attitudes but they are not justified by reference to these potential outcomes. They are subject to other Prison Service Standards and Orders. Their importance is not diminished by being outside scope. A8 Structured stand-alone one-to-one work with prisoners to assist them to understand their offending, cope with custody and relationships, and prepare for offending behaviour programmes will not be within scope. The important contribution made by such interventions is recognised but it would not be practicable to complete business cases to cover the wide diversity of such work, which is normally carried out by professionally qualified staff, such as psychologists, working to professional standards. A9 Similarly, stand-alone one-to-one work by Chaplaincy or CARATs workers or drop- in „surgeries‟ providing one-to-one advice for housing, employment or money and debt management will be outside scope. Personal officer work and day-to-day one-to-one interactions of staff with prisoners, although often intended to change prisoners‟ behaviour and attitudes, is not within the scope of this PSO. „Befriending‟ work, e.g. by Listeners or Prison Visitors, is outside scope. Training for Listeners is outside scope as the behaviour change sought is not the trainees‟. However, the criteria for validation set out in Annex B are appropriate as benchmarks for such provision. Other issues of scope A10 The distinction of what is and what is not in scope is not always clear-cut and discretion will need to be exercised, by reference to the principles set out in Table 114. For example: The workplace may serve a variety of objectives, including keeping prisoners occupied and raising funds to offset costs. Where resettlement is a major purpose and structured training is introduced to assist prisoners‟ future employment prospects, then the activity will come within scope, unless externally validated. A weekly act of worship is a routine element of the regime and is not within scope. Additional religious activities, such as bible study, Alpha courses 14 In Section 1 and Islamic classes, where the main aim is to provide religious teaching (although they may also influence prisoners‟ attitudes and behaviour) are not within scope. But a course run by, or under the auspices of, the Chaplaincy which is designed primarily to change prisoners‟ behaviour will come within scope, e.g. a course on victim awareness intended to affect understanding of the impact of their offending and attitudes towards victims. Basic health care, including mental health care, is not within scope. But additional group interventions, such as promotion of a healthy lifestyle or treatment of substance abuse, which have primary aims of changing prisoner behaviour, are within scope, unless externally validated. A11 The form of the regime intervention may vary. It is likely to involve some learning and practice of new skills, but may be one or a combination of the following, if delivered in a group: A programme, i.e. a systematic and reproducible set of activities, following a structured manual A course, i.e. a sequence of learning to reach a specified standard of attainment A general service, such as employment, financial or housing advice. A12 This PSO applies to all who provide regime interventions which are in scope, whether paid or unpaid. This includes any of the following: Prison Service staff Staff of companies contracted to manage Prison Service establishments National Probation Service staff seconded to Prison Service establishments Contractors, e.g. education providers Statutory agencies, e.g. local education authorities, local authority housing departments, Job Centre Plus Voluntary organisations Individuals A13 Contracts and Service Delivery Agreements relating to regime interventions must include the relevant criteria. Where Prison Service funding is provided to develop regime interventions, copyright must be held by the Home Office. A14 It will be good practice, in line with the Prison Service strategic framework for working with the voluntary and community sector15, for establishments to work with their current and potential partner agencies to ensure that: they understand the requirements of this PSO they have a reasonable timescale over which to review current provision and to prepare business cases for continuation of current provision or for new provision 15 “Getting it right together”, December 2001 in appropriate cases, where it is apparent from current provision or from an outline proposal that benefits to prisoners‟ behaviour and attitudes are likely to be achieved and in the light of resources available to the partner agency concerned, Prison Service staff are able to offer assistance or to work jointly in the preparation of business cases Similarly, policy units will brief current and potential national partner agencies. A15 Particularly careful consideration must be given to whether services provided by outside organisations are within scope or not, so that they are not required to do the additional work specified in this PSO unless it is mandatory. ANNEX B QUALITY ASSURANCE CRITERIA Introduction B1 The nine quality assurance criteria are set out briefly at para. 1.2. All nine criteria must be covered when completing a business case for approval of an internally validated regime intervention. The pro-forma for a business case is at Annex C. The mandatory requirements set out here constitute a Code of Practice. B2 The nine criteria are based on What Works principles and are drawn from the evidence of what contributes to the effectiveness of interventions to reduce re- offending. But they are equally applicable to optimising the effectiveness of other regime interventions that have the objective of changing prisoners‟ behaviour. B3 As evidence from the evaluation of interventions becomes available, these criteria will be supplemented by guidance and, if appropriate, instructions relating to the appropriate content of interventions. Criterion 1: Objectives B4 All interventions must have written objectives, which must be made available to all relevant staff and prisoners. There may be a single objective or a number of objectives. The objective(s) must be SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and time-bound).16 The other features of the intervention must be consistent with and proportionate to the written objectives. B5 A variety of objectives are appropriate. They must be related to the Prison Service‟s objectives and principles and they must be designed to change prisoners‟ behaviour. A given activity may have a number of objectives. B6 Examples of types of group work with prisoners where appropriate objectives for internally validated regime interventions could be set are17: Raising awareness or improving self-esteem/motivation, in relation to specific factors related to the prisoner‟s history of offending, including denial, minimisation or justification Advice, information and assistance, in relation to specific factors related to the prisoner‟s history of offending and intended to promote resettlement Raising drugs awareness, reducing harm associated with drug use and reducing drug dependence Raising awareness in identifying and managing stress Improving institutional behaviour 16 Exceptionally, the requirement to be time-bound will not be appropriate. See para. B12 for how this must be handled in the Structure. 17 These examples are not comprehensive and do not indicate that existing activities with objectives relating to these types would necessarily gain approval, nor that they have demonstrated effectiveness in meeting their objectives. They will need to go through the approval process set out in this PSO. Improving family and social relationships Improving social interaction Improving physical, emotional and/or mental health, fitness and welfare Promoting constructive use of leisure B7 The objectives for the individual partaking in a regime intervention will not necessarily accord with the objectives for the intervention. Example: A drama programme may be arranged with the primary purpose of providing a setting where prisoners with deficits in basic education who are not willing to attend traditional classes may develop self-confidence and begin to improve their communication skills. However, there may not be enough prisoners who meet these criteria to make the programme viable. If other prisoners are keen to join and their participation will enhance the learning of the target group; provide them with relevant skills; not detract from their priority needs; and contribute towards good order in the establishment; then the shortage of appropriate prisoners is not an absolute bar to the intervention being approved. Criterion 2: Rationale B8 All interventions must have a written rationale, which sets out why the methods adopted to run the intervention are appropriate to achieving the objectives and to the target group. B9 Where available, reference to research findings may be used to support the rationale criterion. The Area Psychologist may be able to offer advice on meeting this criterion. Example:For an empowerment course for prisoners experiencing difficulties in prison, structured group discussion is a suitable method to achieve the objective of improving coping abilities because the presence of other people with similar problems that they wish to tackle is a powerful motivating factor for individuals; it offers opportunities for learning from the shared experience of group members; it allows a greater awareness of others and their predicaments; it enables the acquisition of insight through exposure of an individual‟s views and experiences to the scrutiny of others; it enables an appreciation of self in relation to others; it provides mutual support; given the right atmosphere, it can foster a willingness to work and learn together. The Rationale could refer to evidence of the benefits of group work from research literature or textbooks. Criterion 3: Structure B10 There must be a brief written structure for the intervention, which must be made available to all relevant staff and prisoners. It may be appropriate to provide different versions for prisoners and for staff responsible for delivery, to take account of different perspectives. The structure must set out: a clear indication to staff and prisoners of what is entailed; a clear brief to staff or others who may be responsible for delivery; the content, method(s), sequence and intensity of the intervention; in the case of groups, the minimum and maximum number of places necessary to make them viable and effective; the number of sessions, which may be in the form of minimum and maximum, required to meet the objective(s); the purposes of specific sessions or modules; the duration and frequency of sessions, which may be in the form of minimum and maximum. B11 In the case of substantial interventions, a full manual may be appropriate. B12 Exceptionally, an intervention may not be time-limited. Where this is the case, it must be stated in writing in the business case; a notional maximum amount must be included in the structure; and provision must be made to review and justify continuing participation by individual prisoners beyond the notional maximum. Criterion 4: Selection B13 A target group of prisoners for whom the intervention is designed must be written in the business case. All interventions must respond to needs that have been identified. B14 A method or methods of assessment, to ascertain whether the prisoner fits into the target group, must be prescribed. The basis of assessment of the prisoner’s risks and needs must be appropriate to the objectives of the intervention. Relevant and available assessment tools must be used. The prisoner’s wishes and any self- assessment must be taken into account. The assessment process must be proportionate to the scale of the intervention, i.e. a modest intervention does not need substantial assessment. The Area Psychologist may be able to offer advice on this criterion. B15 All prisoners receive basic health assessments, including assessment of risk of self-harm, and risk assessment on suitability for cell sharing, on reception. For all prisoners, assessment is part of induction. Specialised assessments currently available include: Counselling, Assessment, Referral, Advice and Throughcare services (CARATs) assess all prisoners who have self-referred or been referred by a member of staff or an external body for drug-related needs; Basic skills assessments, to identify deficits in literacy, numeracy and communications skills18; Dispersal Induction Assessment, a package of assessments being rolled out in the high security estate; Psychometric tests, used in specified circumstances only; they may be used only by qualified assessors. B16 Sentence planning is the most readily available and comprehensive assessment tool for eligible prisoners. It co-ordinates the efforts of different individuals and agencies involved with the prisoner and provides the framework for assessing the prisoner, planning his or her sentence, and setting targets and reviewing progress, based on the risks and needs identified. For young offenders with a month or more in custody post-sentence and for adults serving a sentence of 12 months or more with 6 months or more in custody post-sentence, sentence planning is required. For lifers, a specialised Life Sentence Plan is being rolled out. There is currently no assessment and sentence planning system for short term prisoners, with sentences of under 12 months; some establishments are using local assessment systems. B17 OASys has been developed as a joint prison-probation offender assessment system to assess likelihood of re-offending and risk of serious harm to self or others and to determine appropriate interventions to reduce risk. It will trigger specialist assessments where required. Existing specialist assessments are being reviewed and their links with OASys will be specified. An IT-based version is being developed and OASys will be rolled out to replace current sentence 18 Specialised educational assessments, eg. to screen for dyslexia, may also be available planning arrangements for prisoners aged 18 and over. Roll-out across the Prison Service is scheduled to begin in April 2003 and will take 12 to 18 months. 19 B18 New assessments in development include: identification of dangerous and severely personality-disordered; practical checklist of accommodation and employment resettlement needs. B19 Risk assessment is also a core part of other processes, such as: categorisation, re-categorisation and allocation; HDC; ROTL; parole reviews; recall and revocation of licences. B20 Pending availability of OASys, for interventions with relevant objectives, it may be helpful to note the risk factors which have been identified as related to re- offending for a significant number of people and which may be improved by an appropriate intervention: accommodation; education, training and employability; finance; relationships; lifestyle; drug misuse; alcohol misuse; emotional well-being; thinking and behaviour; attitudes. B21 Where a prisoner is on an open F2052SH, consideration must be given to the timeliness of a proposed regime intervention. Risks of heightened anxiety in the prisoner which might increase the risk of self harm must be avoided. Similarly, increased risk to others must also be avoided. Prisoners who present a significant risk of serious harm to others must not be permitted to undertake an intervention which is inappropriate. Example: Prisoners who have committed sexual or violent offences against children must have a specific risk assessment by relevant professionals as part of the selection process for a course in parenting skills which is approved under the validation procedures set out in this PSO or externally validated. Such prisoners will not attend the course in parenting skills unless this specific risk assessment recommends it. B22 Participation in any intervention must be considered within the context of the individual’s career as a whole, particularly their period in custody or under 19 Further information on the roll-out of OASys will be available in due course. The current PSO and Standard on Sentence Management and Planning will be rewritten. sentence, including any licence period and post-release supervision. Some interventions may need to be sequenced with others to enable them to be effective. Example: An intervention may require a minimum level of literacy in its target selection of offenders. An appropriate basic skills course will then need to be taken first by prisoners who do not meet that minimum. B23 There must be no bias in the opportunities and processes for selection within the specified target group on irrelevant grounds. The means by which prisoners will be informed about and have opportunities to attend the regime intervention must be set out. Criterion 5: Achievement B24 The method(s) for assessing and recording what prisoners have achieved on completion of the intervention must be written in the business case 20. This must include seeking prisoners’ own feedback on what they have learned and what benefits they will continue to apply in their lives in custody and on release. B25 Provision may also be made for assessing and recording progress at stages. This may be valuable for comparing drop-outs and completers and for improving design and delivery. Reasons for drop-out must be recorded. The business case must specify what action may be taken to minimise drop-out, including avoidance of transfer to another establishment. B26 Where appropriate, tools to assess changes in attitudes may be used. Completion of such tests before and after the intervention may provide an indicator of what has been achieved. The selection of such tests must be informed by professional advice. Some tests may only be used by qualified staff. Criterion 6: Scale and costs B27 The business case must specify details of the scale and costs of the intervention: Scale - number of places, starts, and/or completions to be provided over a given time period, normally the financial year; Costs - some measure of costs must be provided as a guide to investment decisions e.g. grade of staff and cost per hour; rate of prisoner pay that applies. B28 Where possible and appropriate, additional cost information should be provided: for new interventions, including interventions new to the establishment but previously available elsewhere: total start-up costs; 20 Existing documentation such as the National Record of Achievement (NRA) produced for education and the F2055c Inmate Record of Training may often be appropriate. direct costs incurred, both in total and per unit (i.e. place, start, completion), and what they consist of (e.g. staff, materials, premises etc.); indirect and estimated costs, both in total and per unit, and what they consist of (e.g. overheads for management, utilities, depreciation, staff training, advice and support, administrative support, monitoring and audit etc.). B29 Where an intervention is provided by an external supplier 21, correct procurement and accounting procedures must be applied. Contracts must specify: duration of contract and provision for re-negotiation; scale of provision; total and unit costs and which party is responsible for which costs; action in the event of non-delivery; procedures for monitoring delivery and for resolving disputes relating to responsibility for non-delivery. B30 Where an intervention is provided by an external supplier at nil cost to the Prison Service, a Service Level Agreement must specify: scale of provision; procedures for monitoring delivery and for resolving disputes relating to responsibility for non-delivery. Criterion 7: Staff selection, competence, management and support B31 The business case must specify staffing requirements necessary to ensure that the intervention is delivered as designed and is effective in meeting its objectives. These must include: staffing levels, related to scale of provision, including whether staff are dedicated for the regime intervention or drawn from a pool with other responsibilities22; job specification(s), including competences and any required qualifications; how staff will be selected and trained (if necessary), including any voluntary or mandatory booster training how staff will be managed and supported, including frequency and level of supervision and time allowed for preparation, debrief, supervision etc. how staff providing management and/or support will themselves be selected, trained (if necessary), managed and supported in the case of contracted provision, how staff managing the contract will be selected, trained (if necessary), managed and supported 21 The Prison Service Management Board (PSMB) has decided that public funds must not be used for interventions that are based in religious beliefs and provided by religious bodies, other than through the chaplaincy. 22 In the interests of quality and to ensure staff training is cost-effective, where a pool of staff is used, the minimum commitment of each member of staff must be specified and monitored. Criterion 8: Records, Monitoring and Audit Records B32 The minimum prisoner record requirement23, to be specified in the business case, is: prisoner number (to enable linkage to other information, pending availability of fully-electronic system); has prisoner been assessed? has prisoner been found to be suitable or not? has prisoner been selected? has prisoner started the activity? complete record of attendance has prisoner completed the activity? what has the prisoner gained from participation? A simple card index system will suffice if no IT-supported system is available. The following Prisoner Record pro-forma is available on the Prison Service Intranet: Regime Interventions: Prisoner Record Pro-Forma Name of intervention Prisoner name Prisoner number Age Gender Ethnic Group Foreign National Yes No Suitability assessed Yes No Found suitable Yes No Date started Sessions attended Number Sessions not attended Number 23 LIDS provides the means to record and analyse some of these data. Completion Yes No Achievement Monitoring B33 Arrangements to reproduce and collate data from the general prisoner record - such as age, gender, ethnic group, offence, sentence - will be necessary to enable effective monitoring and evaluation to take place. B34 These records must be collated routinely, to enable monitoring by management of take-up rates, drop-out rates, completion rates, and records of achievement. Governors and Directors of contracted-out establishments must monitor to ensure that there is no unfair or irrelevant discrimination on ethnic or other grounds in access to every intervention and that delivery is free of unfair or irrelevant discrimination on ethnic and other grounds, so that all participants are equally able to benefit. The frequency of review must be specified; it will vary according to the scale and frequency of the programme, course or other activity, but must be at least annual. The business case must specify responsibility for review24. Where findings cause concern, management must prepare and implement an action plan to deal with the problem(s); options may include ceasing delivery. B35 Financial records must be kept which, alongside the prisoner records required, will enable Governors, Directors of contracted-out establishments, Area/Operational Managers and relevant policy units to determine whether delivery has been cost- efficient and to compare the efficiency of different interventions. This will be a consideration in deciding which activities will continue to be funded and which will cease. Audit B36 Self-audit will apply. This PSO supports the Regimes Standard, to which SAU audit applies. The Regimes Standard will not be revised to incorporate the requirements of this PSO. Criterion 9: Evaluation 24 For example, the Resettlement Policy Committee. Where the intervention is delivered by an external provider, monitoring may be a shared responsibility. B37 The business case must indicate how the intervention will be reviewed to establish that it is meeting its aims and objectives and is having a positive impact. Evaluation is necessary in order to draw conclusions about effectiveness. RDS advice on evaluation is available. Where possible, appropriate measurable indicators of impact must be chosen and specified in the business case. For example, a course on anti-bullying might be reviewed annually by reference to records on bullying or assaults on prisoners. B38 Conclusive evaluation of effectiveness depends on adequate numbers of cases and suitable comparators. This will be outside the normal capacity of establishments to provide, but such studies may be conducted periodically on a national basis. ANNEX C PRO-FORMA FOR BUSINESS CASE AND APPROVAL OF REGIME INTERVENTIONS This pro-forma is available through the Prison Service Intranet. Pro-formas of all applications for approval must be retained by Area/Operational Managers and made available when required for purposes related to audit, evaluation or reports to or on behalf of the What Works in Prison Strategy Board and PSMB. 1a. Establishment or lead establishment or sponsoring establishment or 1b. Policy unit or working group or sponsoring policy unit or working group 1c. Outside body or bodies if applicable 2. Title of intervention 3. Intervention Manager Name Position Tel. FAX E-mail ID 4. Name(s) of provider(s) if not delivered by staff of the establishment 5. Nature of intervention Please tick all that apply GENERAL PURPOSE(S) Information giving Raising awareness Developing skills Increasing motivation Other(s) – please specify: OFFENDING-RELATED FACTOR(S) ADDRESSED Please tick all that apply Accommodation Education, training, employability Finance Relationships Lifestyle Drug misuse Alcohol misuse Emotional well-being Thinking and behaviour Attitudes OTHER FACTOR(S) ADDRESSED Please specify: Intervention history 6. Date the intervention was introduced at this establishment if applicable 7. Date of any previous review at this establishment if applicable 8. Has the intervention been approved for delivery at another Yes establishment? Please tick appropriate box No 9. If yes, name of establishment Date If known, date and/or ID of approval ID 10. Date submitted to Governor/Director of contracted-out establishment for support 11. Date submitted to Area/Operational Manager for approval 12. Decision by Area/Operational Manager Please tick appropriate box Yes No Changes required Date Signature ……………………………………. Name (printed) ……………………………………. Area/estate ……………………………………. 13. If yes, any variation in scale and costs approved, which Approved scale differs from business case (Number p.a.) Please leave blank if no variation from business case Approved costs (£) FOR WWPU USE ONLY: ID allocated Date entered How quality assurance criteria are met Note: If a criterion is fully met by the business case prepared by another establishment and approved by an Area/Operational Manager, please: tick the box in the left-hand column provide the name of the establishment and/or the ID of the approval in the right-hand column Annex B of this PSO sets out the quality assurance criteria in detail and must be read before completion of this part of the pro-forma Criterion 1: Objectives Clear objectives for the intervention must be specified. They should be SMART and related to Prison Service objectives and principles. Tick box Give details below of the objectives (or attach If met documentation if prepared previously and note below before references therein to the objectives). Criterion 2: Rationale The rationale must set out why the methods for delivering the intervention are appropriate to the objectives and to the target group. Tick box Give details below of the rationale (or attach If met documentation if prepared previously and note references before therein to the rationale). Criterion 3: Structure The structure should be brief and set out what is entailed, the content, methods, and sequence of the intervention and, for groups, the viable minimum and maximum number of places, number of sessions, purposes of specific sessions, duration and frequency of sessions. Tick box Attach or give details below of the structure (or attach if met documentation if prepared previously and note references before therein to the structure). Criterion 4: Selection A target group of prisoners for whom the intervention is designed and the method of assessment to fit the target group must be specified, including any assessment tools used. Tick box Give details below of prisoner selection (or attach documentation if if met prepared previously and note references therein to selection). before Criterion 5: Achievement The method(s) for assessing and recording achievement on completion of the intervention must be specified including how prisoners‟ feedback is to be obtained and recorded Tick box Give details below of assessing/recording achievement (or attach if met documentation if prepared previously and note references therein to before achievement). Criterion 6: Scale and Costs The number of places, starts, and/or completions in the financial year (or other specified period) must be specified together with costs. Tick box Give details below of scale and costs (or attach documentation if if met prepared previously and note references therein to scale and costs). before Criterion 7: Staff Selection, Competence, Management and Support Details must be specified of staffing levels, job specifications, competencies and qualifications required, staff selection and training process, support and supervision. Tick box Give details below of staff selection etc (or attach documentation if if met prepared previously and note references therein to staff selection). before Criterion 8: Records, Monitoring and Audit Records – specify details of prisoner records kept. This should include prisoner number, informed or requested, assessed, selected, suitability, started, attendance, completion and gains. Also financial records (to determine cost effectiveness). Monitoring - specify methods and frequency of checks for unfair or irrelevant discrimination, access and delivery. Also collation and analysis of records on take- up, drop out, completion and achievement. Audit – self audit arrangements to be specified. Tick box Give details below of records, monitoring and audit (or attach if met documentation if prepared previously and note references therein to before records etc). Criterion 9: Evaluation It must be specified how achievements against objectives will be assessed in order to draw conclusions about the effectiveness of the intervention. Tick box Give details below of evaluation (or attach documentation if prepared if met previously and note references therein to evaluation). before ANNEX D PROCEDURES FOR APPROVAL OF REGIME INTERVENTIONS: FLOW CHART Is the intervention an accredited offending behaviour programme? BEHAVIOUR PROGRAMME? NO YES Is the intervention validated by an The programme must have been accredited independent external body? by the CSAP or its predecessors; or has been included in the Prison Service’s programme development portfolio NO YES If above applies, the only action required The intervention must have under PSO 4350 is to record details of the been validated by a recognised intervention in the database of regime Is it an intervention interventions – see Annex E . independent external body designed to change which includes site inspection prisoner behaviour? or audit OR standards of professional body. NO YES If above applies, the only action Decide if it is within the scope of PSO 4350 - refer to table 1 required under PSO 4350 is to record No and annex A for details. details of the intervention in the Action database of regime interventions – See Annex E. NO YES No action A business case pro-forma must be completed as at annex C, to demonstrate how the intervention meets the nine quality assurance criteria in annex B ANNEX E DATABASE OF REGIME INTERVENTIONS E1 The database set out below is being established to ensure a central record of regime interventions that: i. have been validated under the procedures set out in this PSO; or ii. are in development or under review, with the intention of seeking approval under the procedures set out in this PSO; or iii. have been accredited by the Correctional Services Accreditation Panel (CSAP) or its predecessors; or iv. have been accepted as part of the development portfolio for future accreditation by the CSAP25; or v. have been accredited by other independent external bodies; or vi. (optionally) are in development or under review, with the intention of seeking approval by other independent external bodies. E2 WWPU is seeking IT-assisted business change to support efficient operation of this PSO. If agreed, his will provide: direct read-only access to the database for establishments; and direct write-in access to Area/Operational Managers and their teams, and appropriate Headquarters policy units. E3 Until this is available, returns will be sent to WWPU via e-mail26, or by FAX to 020 7217 5750 or by mail to room 129, Abell House. The database form is on the Prison Service Intranet. The responsibility for returns is as follows: Area/Operational Managers are responsible for i. and ii. The relevant HQ policy unit is responsible for iii. WWPU is responsible for iv. Area/Operational Managers are responsible for v. and may also use the database for vi. E4 Information must be recorded on the database quickly and no later than 4 weeks after the relevant decision has been made. 25 The development portfolio is approved by the Prison Service Management Board (PSMB) on the recommendation of the What Works in Prison Strategy Board (WWPSB). See PSO 4360 (forthcoming) for details. 26 A dedicated WWPU e-mail address is being arranged. Until this is notified, any WWPU contact may be used. See para. 19 of the Introduction to this PSO. DATABASE OF REGIME INTERVENTIONS: PRO-FORMA Please tick boxes that apply 1. ID (WWPU to allocate) 2. Title of intervention…………………………………………………………….. 3. Validating body Internal CSAP Other independent external: specify ……………………………………………………… 4. Status In development Under review Approved Modified 5. (Lead) establishment……………………………………………………………… (Lead) area/estate……………………………………………………………… OR (Lead) policy unit………………………………………………………………. 6. Intervention manager contact details Name ………………………… Position ………………………… Tel. ………………………… Fax ………………………… E-mail ID ………………………… 7. Name of provider(s) Internal External: specify ………………………………. 8. Nature of intervention General purposes: Information giving Raising awareness Developing skills Increasing motivation Offending related factors addressed: accommodation education, training and employability finance relationships lifestyle drug misuse alcohol misuse emotional well-being thinking and behaviour attitudes 9. Approved by name ……………………………….. position ……………………………….. 10. Date approved…………………………………………………………. 11. Scale per annum approved: places …………………… starts …………………… completions …………………… 12. Costs per annum approved £ ……………………………………. ANNEX F REGIME INTERVENTIONS VALIDATED BY INDEPENDENT EXTERNAL BODIES General F1 Where there is an appropriate external validating body for the type of regime intervention, then the requirements it sets will be sufficient as evidence of quality. It is desirable that the requirements of appropriate external validating bodies are used where they are available, because: this demonstrates to the public that the quality of Prison Service interventions is high this contributes to reducing social exclusion by providing prisoners with a standard of provision which is available in the community and by enabling released prisoners to demonstrate that their knowledge and skills are comparable to those of others F2 Many regime interventions, particularly those offered by education contractors, are already externally verified. Examples of such regime interventions are: pre-release courses or programmes courses designed to raise awareness of drugs, victims, bullying, etc. short treatment programmes that would not be appropriate for Correctional Services Accreditation Panel (CSAP) accreditation. F3 It is not necessary for externally validated regime interventions to meet the criteria set out in this PSO. Nor is it necessary for the business case pro forma at Annex A to be completed. Quality assurance is provided through meeting the requirements of the independent external body. Validating bodies F4 Prisoners‟ Learning and Skills Unit can advise on the processes involved in accreditation through an Awarding Body. Advice on educational bodies and their requirements is available from the education contractor to the establishment, from the Learning and Skills Adviser for the area or function, and from Prisoners‟ Learning and Skills Unit. Advice on other bodies is available from the relevant policy unit or area specialist. F5 It is important that any independent outside body used to validate a regime intervention provides, authorises or contributes to site inspection or audit. The following recognised validating bodies all incorporate this: CSAP National Open College Network ASET NVQ awarding bodies such as City and Guilds Guidance Council Accreditation Board Central database of regime interventions F6 The only mandatory requirement for externally validated regime interventions under this PSO is that they must be recorded on the database of regime interventions, as set out at Annex E.
Pages to are hidden for
"PSO 4350 - Effective Regime Interventions"Please download to view full document