{"id":9001,"date":"2018-05-16T17:11:33","date_gmt":"2018-05-16T16:11:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ounews.co\/?p=9001"},"modified":"2018-05-16T17:11:33","modified_gmt":"2018-05-16T16:11:33","slug":"charities-out-of-pocket-probation-scheme","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.open.ac.uk\/blogs\/news\/business-law\/charities-out-of-pocket-probation-scheme\/","title":{"rendered":"Charities left out of pocket by probation scheme for ex-offenders"},"content":{"rendered":"

Governments generally like charities and voluntary organisations. Time and again ministers say they want to harness the voluntary sector to improve public services. In 2014, the British government said <\/span>the sector<\/a> would be \u201cat the forefront of a new fight against reoffending\u201d. But the reality is sharply different, according to our <\/span>new research<\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n

We\u2019ve found that the voluntary sector has been sidelined and under resourced in the government\u2019s new system for managing offenders once they leave prison \u2013 yet it\u2019s propping that very system up at the same time. As a result, there\u2019s a risk charities may decide to withdraw or boycott these public service schemes in the future.<\/p>\n

Recent high-profile scandals<\/a> have put charities and voluntary organisations under the spotlight. But the voluntary sector is still frequently praised for its work and encouraged to get more involved in turning around the lives of society\u2019s most vulnerable people.<\/p>\n

A prime example is the Transforming Rehabilitation<\/a> programme, started by the Conservative-led coalition government, to change the way offenders are supervised before and after they leave prison. In 2015, the existing system of probation was dismantled<\/a>, and the bulk of the work was transferred through 21 contracts across England and Wales to new Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRCs).<\/p>\n

The government told the voluntary sector that its involvement in the new system would be part of a \u201crevolution\u201d in working with offenders, such as in programmes to extend mentoring schemes for prisoners nearing release. The CRCs are now paid for the results they achieve in reducing reoffending.<\/p>\n

Read more:
\nCracks are growing in the UK’s prison and probation service<\/a>
\n<\/strong>
\n<\/em>The programme was heavily criticised<\/a> when it was introduced and has continued to come under fire<\/a> as the system has settled down. MPs on the Justice Select Committee are currently holding an inquiry<\/a> into the Transforming Rehabilitation programme.<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, performance in reducing reoffending rates has been underwhelming<\/a>. Yet the government has continued to pump more money into the CRCs<\/a> to support the work.<\/p>\n

Charities on the margins<\/h2>\n

Over the last three years we\u2019ve carried out surveys tracking the role and experience of voluntary organisations in the new rehabilitation system as part of a project called TrackTR, in association with Clinks<\/a>, the umbrella body for voluntary organisations working with offenders and their families, and the National Council for Voluntary Organisations<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Despite the government\u2019s official rhetoric, the voluntary sector finds itself at the margins of the new system. When it comes to the organisations which have led winning bids for CRC contracts<\/a>, private companies dominate. Very large voluntary organisations appear to have found a role in these contracts as junior partners or sub-contractors, but smaller organisations are largely overlooked. And many of the partnerships with voluntary sector organisations appear unsustainable.<\/p>\n

Half of the sub-contracted voluntary organisations say their contracts are unsustainable, 37% say they\u2019ve had to subsidise service delivery with other funding sources, and 35% have used their own reserves to support services.<\/p>\n