News

The mission of the new National Offender Management Service (Noms) - should it choose to accept it - is to reduce reoffending by 10 per cent. Noms involves a merger of the prison and probation services into a single, integrated service responsible for managing and supervising offenders in custody and the community.

The service didn't get off to a great start. Just weeks before it came into existence last month, about 1,000 probation staff lobbied parliament, urging MPs to sign an early day motion expressing concern about the lack of detail surrounding the new service. Days later, Noms chief executive Martin Narey issued a statement setting out his vision for the service, in which he acknowledged that prison and probation staff were "understandably nervous about the future".

Detail about Noms is still thin on the ground. What we do know is that the service will be developed over five-years, replacing the previous system under which the prison service was responsible for prisons, and the probation service for community punishments and interventions. As a Home Office spokesperson says: "It's not a big bang launch but an evolutionary process. People on the ground won't see real differences for a couple of years." A good illustration of this is Narey's desire for a 10 per cent reduction in reoffending to be achieved by the end of this decade.

Meanwhile, former chief probation officer Christine Knott has recently been appointed to the imposing post of national offender manager. She will be responsible for reducing reoffending, controlling the budget for offender services, and managing 10 regional offender managers, based in nine English regions and in Wales.

Hand in hand with its remit to reduce reoffending, Noms is also tasked with expanding the use of community penalties so that sentencers are encouraged to use custody less frequently.

Noms applies to services for over-18 year olds, so will not affect juvenile offenders. The Youth Justice Board, which deals with this age group, will remain as a separate correctional agency (also under Narey) for the juvenile estate.

In future, Noms is intended to operate primarily at regional level. This is still some way off - Narey doesn't expect regional budgets to be set until 2006-7 and until then, regional offender managers cannot contract on a regional basis. But there are already concerns about the system.

First, some opponents have argued that the proposal to reorganise what are currently 42 different probation boards and a plethora of other criminal justice agencies into 10 regional commissioning boards could weaken the effective local links that are already established. Paul Cavadino, chief executive of crime reduction charity Nacro, acknowledges that this is a concern: "The consultation paper on Noms recognised this and said that beneath the regions there would need to be arrangements for local links and partnerships. But there is no detail of that yet, so it's important to press for effective local links."

Second, Nom's regional emphasis means it could be ideally placed to ensure prisoners are placed closer to home. This should help the resettlement process, which may mean more offenders are supported on release and might be less likely to reoffend. But limited numbers of young offender institutions mean a place nearer home might be unlikely for young offenders. Adam Sampson, director of homelessness charity Shelter, says: "There are structural difficulties with a prison system already stretched to breaking point. If there isn't an adequate regional coverage of YOIs it creates difficulties.

"There are two responses," Sampson continues. "One is to build new prisons. The government has traditionally done this but - like the road system - we have learned that the more capacity we create, the more demand there is. The other is to limit the use of custody."

It is widely agreed that the latter is the more intelligent approach. According to Cavadino: "One of the biggest issues for Noms is simply the pressure of numbers. If there were fewer people in custody we could move to a system where it would be possible to put more young offenders in smaller establishments nearer their homes."

Third, there are doubts about the contracting process. For the first time, public, private and voluntary sectors will compete for contracts to provide custodial and community services. This process will introduce a purchaser and provider split, separating the management of offenders from the provision of services. The theory is that this open market will drive up standards because services won't automatically be provided by the prison and probation services.

Rob Allen, director of voluntary group Rethinking Crime and Punishment, says: "This notion of 'contestability' means that a greater role for the private and voluntary sector is envisaged. Regional offender managers will be looking at a broader range of providers, but I doubt that enough providers will be able to provide the right services."


In addition, these contests will also be replayed at regular intervals, as contracts will no doubt be renewed every few years. According to Allen, sentencers want consistent relationships with the service providers offering alternatives to prison. "They don't want them chopping and changing every three years," he adds.

Allen foresees another, unintended, consequence of the new contracting arrangements. "We may move to a situation where local authorities and health might provide services like housing, education and treatment for offenders only if they are contracted to do so. What we should be doing is encouraging mainstream service providers to see work with offenders as part of their normal duties. It's pushing it into a pseudo-commercial world. We might lose our ability to lever in services and resources from mainstream sources."

Regional offender managers will be responsible for commissioning services to reduce reoffending. But there is a danger that innovative ideas will be stifled because they plump for tried-and-tested services to ensure they meet targets. It will be crucial that regional offender managers commission services that work with offenders' other problems, such as housing, addiction, mental health, and employment, as this is the most effective way to successfully resettle offenders and prevent reoffending.

Ultimately, if Noms is to stand a chance of working, it has to be accompanied by a concerted effort to reduce the prison population, says Cavadino. "This means that instead of indulging in tough rhetoric, government ministers have to strongly sell the case for reducing custody. And guidance from the new sentencing guidelines council must have an explicit emphasis on a reduction in the use of prison."

It's a tall order. We'll have to wait to see if it is mission impossible. 

Good practice in Portland

 The first in a regular series of columns accompanying features supporting our Back on Track campaign and describing best practice

Advice on what to eat with a baked potato and a request to accompany a newly released young offender to a sexual health clinic are just two of the text messages that John Bayley has received recently. "This is where the real personal side to mentoring comes in," says the Nacro development worker at the charity's On-side Project at Portland Young Offender Institution, Dorset.

The project was set up five years ago to work with juveniles at the YOI, offering pre- and post-release support. Juveniles have now been moved out of the YOI, and the project has switched its attention to the most vulnerable young offenders aged between 18 and 21. Risk factors include family breakdown, drug and alcohol problems and mental health problems, says Bayley. Invariably the most crucial need is housing.

The project takes referrals from the prison's multidisciplinary resettlement team - a project worker sits on this - from the chaplaincy and from wing officers. As so much of the support is post-release, the project works only with those young offenders who will live within a two-hour journey from Portland. Those living further afield receive support from the prison team.

The project refers the young men to different agencies for post-release support, as well as providing practical support. This support starts on the day they leave the YOI. Project staff take them to the local Safeway for a fried breakfast and then home and to their probation meeting, rather than leaving them to bump into local drug dealers.

"Post-release work is probably the most vital thing they can have," says Bayley. "Once they are out it gives them someone to turn to. We spend a lot of time taking them out, and supporting them in reaching goals."