That HMI report really does make for very uncomfortable reading and the following gives an eloquent flavour of how the command and control civil service ethos is the real problem here:-
Personally what the HMIP report has highlighted for me is the sheer lack of investment in post-qualification training, and particularly training about delivering supervision sessions and sentence plans and reflective practice in a meaningful way....indeed the bedrock of social work practice we were only just discussing here a few weeks ago. The whole ethos of the organisation has been "refer to another organisation" and lo and behold, there are few which deal with the issues of helping people to deal with traumas associated with racism or overcoming barriers to racism.
The little training there is has become focussed on processes...do your CRISSA in this way; make sure your risk assessment looks like that; you MUST it's MANDATORY to do a very basic child protection training online, or a very brief electronic overview telling you what "unconscious bias" is. Their solution to everything has either been investment of millions in electronic solutions such as "my learning", the Parole writing tool or the EPF tool and whatnot; or commissioning services via "other agencies". The solution is never to equip staff with skills they so sorely lack.
When was the last time we had meaningful ongoing professional training which facilitates and engages in reflective practice about race, dealing with racism and cultural prejudice; investing in us, as a staff group, in how to work with people to overcome these barriers and other barriers and the trauma experienced by so many, in this case relating to those of BAME backgrounds; when are we equipped to address these things directly rather than farming them off to "keyworkers" in other agencies? When was the last time we had such ongoing professional training? And then they say our expertise is in "managing risk" - how exactly? By writing a CRISSA entry?
I fear what's coming - a massive round of "let's talk diversity" sessions (they've already been advertised in London), massive pressure to "update statistics in Delius", coupled with a new round of commissioning so that volunteer mentors "specialised" in working with BAME people can do work that we are so poorly equipped to deliver directly, or possibly a "ten session toolkit" chucked on the intranet. Just think - when was the last time you had training in skills for delivering work with your supervisees or in reflective practice so sorely called for from HMIP? And if you were around long enough, did SEEDS really provide that to you?
How painful to read comments of service users in the report: “I wanted support for my childhood trauma, but I have not been referred to anyone or anything”.....and another, who pretty much sums up his feelings about attending probation as:
"I have no idea of their purpose. I just turn up. I tell them a bunch of lies and I go home”.
So sad.
Showing posts with label CRISSA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CRISSA. Show all posts
Thursday, 18 March 2021
Sunday, 17 January 2021
Food For Thought
Prologue
A colleague I haven't spoken to for some time rang me the other day and we were musing on what the future might have in store for probation in a post-Covid world. Our discussion very much reflected a similar conversation with another colleague of even greater experience. The view was that probation is becoming increasingly irrelevant, a situation hastened by civil service bureaucratic control and the de-personalised effect of Covid operation. Effectively its no longer serving any meaningful and useful purpose and in a post-Covid world of inevitable government spending cuts, its further decline in relevance, begun with separation from a social work base, would see its effective disappearance.
--oo00oo--
******
I have just found out that my colleague who sits within two meters of me tested positive for coronavirus on the weekend. No one from management informed me or the rest of the team of the potential increased risks. No increased cleaning. Hot desking is a daily occurrence. I have no faith in my employer protecting me. As a result I have had to stop providing care for a relative whom is shielding. There is a perception that as prisons provide opportunities for testing that no other precautions are now needed. I fear raising this issue and being redeployed.
*******
Oh I'm so, so, sorry to hear this...so stressful for you and others involved no doubt. Yes, the fear we all feel raising legitimate concerns is extremely sad and very worrying...why else do we all ensure our comments are anonymous on these blogs? The fear engendered comes from those at the top, who constantly scratch their heads wondering why their staff are so disenchanted, while issuing diktats about recording, CRISSA, OASYS reviews, risk registers, HETE data, with seemingly little care for the people involved, both staff and service users alike.
*******
I am - if I survive it - going to wait till the pandemic is at least on the wane before I make any decision about my future in the Probation Service. I realise that the anxiety and, frankly, despair at what my job has become, might be amplified by Covid anxiety and gloom. All the probation officers in the room I work in are at various stages in this: one has got his early retirement pension forecast, I am asking for mine, and another is actively looking for alternative work. That is over a century of experience looking to walk out of the door at first opportunity. The micromanagement and the utter failure of policy makers to recognise the pragmatic reality of our work is soul destroying. Telling me that the increasing layers of recording and scrutiny are "for my protection if anything - SFO - happens" is so not reassuring.
******
I'm with you, a post degree CQSW was always, and a 12 month probationary period, a good foundation for learning - oh how this has been diluted. I so remember the broad church of colleagues, some of whom I disagreed with politically but never doubted their integrity, the fountains of knowledge of many SPO's (granted not all) and CPO's willing to challenge govt policy even under Thatcher. I used to respect my management because they welcomed challenge and wanted POs to think outside the box. I am also tired of this but it is not Covid, which I can rationalise but the shit from above 6th.
******
Your so right so must be nearly 60 to recall those days as I do. Working with modern qualified staff who are POs but really they are nothing much more than over paid typist clerks. Talking to them in supervision they type into the PC while still talking at you. It is not what we know which is why they could never picture returning [to] professional practice. Old lot out soon as.
******
I'm with you, a post degree CQSW was always, and a 12 month probationary period, a good foundation for learning - oh how this has been diluted. I so remember the broad church of colleagues, some of whom I disagreed with politically but never doubted their integrity, the fountains of knowledge of many SPO's (granted not all) and CPO's willing to challenge govt policy even under Thatcher. I used to respect my management because they welcomed challenge and wanted POs to think outside the box. I am also tired of this but it is not Covid, which I can rationalise but the shit from above 6th.
*******
We are cannon fodder. Frontline so needed at work, "hidden heroes" - thanks for the management clap. But not worthy of a priority jab or a pay rise. Probation in a parlous state: Graylings omnishambles has meant we have attention of policy makers, when actually the mission is much best served when it is off grid. So now we have fuck all resources, and running interference from ambitious fast track numpties in the civil service whose ignorance and ambition will quite possibly snuff out the glimmering embers of what was a valuable service and a joyful place to work.
We are cannon fodder. Frontline so needed at work, "hidden heroes" - thanks for the management clap. But not worthy of a priority jab or a pay rise. Probation in a parlous state: Graylings omnishambles has meant we have attention of policy makers, when actually the mission is much best served when it is off grid. So now we have fuck all resources, and running interference from ambitious fast track numpties in the civil service whose ignorance and ambition will quite possibly snuff out the glimmering embers of what was a valuable service and a joyful place to work.
*******
Why is CRISS crap? Seems reasonable outline for a meeting (Check in, Review, Intervention / Issue, Summarise, Set task). I don't use the same myself in my profession but similar and pursue a collaborative agenda with my clients. It allows for an efficient and focussed use of time.
Why is CRISS crap? Seems reasonable outline for a meeting (Check in, Review, Intervention / Issue, Summarise, Set task). I don't use the same myself in my profession but similar and pursue a collaborative agenda with my clients. It allows for an efficient and focussed use of time.
*******
Great question, but you have to understand the background and context. In principle, the idea of a more structured and focussed way of engagement is not what staff resist....CRISS was initially rolled out via a 3 day training programme, SEEDS, which allowed the time for staff to engage with the material and its rationale.
However, this "way of engagement" quickly got replaced by a "recording convention" - so staff recording exactly what they did and what was said under the various "headings" of check-in, review, implement and so on with prescribed guidance re-designing what CRISS actually means to fit the process of recording. The mantra became "did you record using CRISS" format, "has CRISS been used?", "let's do audits of staff to check if they are recording correctly", irrespective of whether the sessions themselves used that format or how well a session was or was not performed. Staff soon realised they were spending double the amount of time transcribing out their appointments, coupled with organisational diktats from senior managers which essentially said "you MUST use CRISSA in your case recording - it's MANDATORY - we will monitor its use".
Somewhere along the line, the "I" (which was initially "implement the sentence plan"), became "intervention", with managers chucking bundles of 121 worksheets and exercises onto the intranet. The mantra now seems to be "deliver some form of exercise, print out a worksheet, we don't particularly care what it is and for god's sake just, record, record, record".
When you couple the above with other layers of "recording" which have come about over the past few years, you'll get a sense of the hostility CRISS operates within: HETE data, personal circumstances data, professional judgement entries, NSI updating, risk registers, officer diary, OASYS QA standards....all of these require entirely separate processes, within a "case recording system" that is not intuitive, with each entry being in disparate parts of the system, with meaningless "check boxes" which must be filled out each time, otherwise your entry gets rejected. Then of course, couple this with manager's favourite mantra: If you didn't record it, it didn't happen!
You'll see in various posts recently staff referring to themselves as "typist clerks". I see myself as a data entry officiant. The pandemic has brought in this idea that "supervision sessions can only be 15 minutes long", with people scratching their heads as to how that can possibly be meaningful and the organisational response is "we are delivering vital public protection work" which pays no attention to people's lived reality. Lo and behold loads of staff are currently saying "actually, I've noticed some of my people engaging MUCH better on the phone rather than in the office" - no shit sherlock, because you are actually listening to the person and meaningfully responding, one of the most powerful "interventions" known to man, rather than chucking exercise 6.2.9 from "targets for change" in their face.
So please appreciate that staff feel overwhelmed with data entry and data recording, and managers push the data recording agenda aggressively, pandemic or not. Staff's fingers worn to the bone, and meanwhile people have lost a sense of whether any of this has any meaning - does any of this have any impact onto the re-offending rates of the people we are working for.....?
Great question, but you have to understand the background and context. In principle, the idea of a more structured and focussed way of engagement is not what staff resist....CRISS was initially rolled out via a 3 day training programme, SEEDS, which allowed the time for staff to engage with the material and its rationale.
However, this "way of engagement" quickly got replaced by a "recording convention" - so staff recording exactly what they did and what was said under the various "headings" of check-in, review, implement and so on with prescribed guidance re-designing what CRISS actually means to fit the process of recording. The mantra became "did you record using CRISS" format, "has CRISS been used?", "let's do audits of staff to check if they are recording correctly", irrespective of whether the sessions themselves used that format or how well a session was or was not performed. Staff soon realised they were spending double the amount of time transcribing out their appointments, coupled with organisational diktats from senior managers which essentially said "you MUST use CRISSA in your case recording - it's MANDATORY - we will monitor its use".
Somewhere along the line, the "I" (which was initially "implement the sentence plan"), became "intervention", with managers chucking bundles of 121 worksheets and exercises onto the intranet. The mantra now seems to be "deliver some form of exercise, print out a worksheet, we don't particularly care what it is and for god's sake just, record, record, record".
When you couple the above with other layers of "recording" which have come about over the past few years, you'll get a sense of the hostility CRISS operates within: HETE data, personal circumstances data, professional judgement entries, NSI updating, risk registers, officer diary, OASYS QA standards....all of these require entirely separate processes, within a "case recording system" that is not intuitive, with each entry being in disparate parts of the system, with meaningless "check boxes" which must be filled out each time, otherwise your entry gets rejected. Then of course, couple this with manager's favourite mantra: If you didn't record it, it didn't happen!
You'll see in various posts recently staff referring to themselves as "typist clerks". I see myself as a data entry officiant. The pandemic has brought in this idea that "supervision sessions can only be 15 minutes long", with people scratching their heads as to how that can possibly be meaningful and the organisational response is "we are delivering vital public protection work" which pays no attention to people's lived reality. Lo and behold loads of staff are currently saying "actually, I've noticed some of my people engaging MUCH better on the phone rather than in the office" - no shit sherlock, because you are actually listening to the person and meaningfully responding, one of the most powerful "interventions" known to man, rather than chucking exercise 6.2.9 from "targets for change" in their face.
So please appreciate that staff feel overwhelmed with data entry and data recording, and managers push the data recording agenda aggressively, pandemic or not. Staff's fingers worn to the bone, and meanwhile people have lost a sense of whether any of this has any meaning - does any of this have any impact onto the re-offending rates of the people we are working for.....?
******
Thank you. That explains the hostility. It must be demoralising. What you describe sounds like you are all very busy achieving very little other than producing a record to be audited.******
Well it's not been a real job since we lost social work it's all admin and order now.
******
I know many social work qualified officers believe DipPs and PQUIP qualified staff have little understanding of 'the real job' but that's simply untrue. I'm DipPs qualified but it was by working with social work trained colleagues that I was inspired to become a PO in the first place. I had then - and retain now - many of the same values as earlier qualified officers, and the notion that I don't do a 'real job', or only do admin tasks is frankly insulting. And it's getting tired. There is much valid discussion of the deskilling of officers but please don't assume that there aren't still staff out here doing the best we can for our clients. It's demoralising to hear those with more experience belittle a job into which many still put a huge amount of work and commitment.
******
Hello Xxxxx and others....I'm so relieved to hear you have the values and ethics which matter, and hope you are surrounded by trainees who have the same - that is not, however, my experience. I also trained via the DIPS route; as I recall it we (or at least in my area) did training on skills like CBT, solution focussed work, Trotter's working with involuntary relationships, pro-social modelling and the famous "motivational interviewing" - the involvement of the service user in their own "journey" via meaningful sentence plan goals became the bedrock of my day to day sessions; at that time I felt I had a good grounding in skills, with academic background, coupled with 1-2-1 support via a PTA who really encouraged/discussed both my ethos, attitude, skills and I was able to work with a relatively small group of service users whose offence/risk profiles were on the "lower" end of the risk scale...not to mention of course we would write regular PSRs, and built up to more complicated matters towards the end of our 2 year period.
What I find now is that within weeks PQUIPS are suddenly dealing with DV, sex offences, and gangs, with little support and lots of ego.... Sentence plans have become little more than stock phrases about "addressing my drugs use" or "managing my risk", and one to one appointments deliver little meaning other than "monitoring", "interrogating" and "questioning", "checking" they have done certain things, or "referring" them off elsewhere. Is it me, or has probation become little more than a referral and triage service, pushing the person's issues off to another organisation "with more expertise". The ethos of probation training has become about completing wonderfully well written OASYS, marking CRISSA entries, and ensuring "risk is managed"....god forbid that people are encouraged to get to know the wider family unit, involving those individuals in the sentence plan or the person's "journey", or involving the person as their own agent of change.
Please people tell me if I'm wrong, but that's how I see it. Just take a look at the "mandatory" training we are all threatened with sacking if we don't do - what a pile of shite! Did any of the modules on DV, child and adult safeguarding encourage any meaningful supervision sessions, or any of the social work ethos and skills which many of us lament the loss of. Nope! It was all "soundbites" and "acronyms" - we all knew we could pass the test at the end without wasting our time reading the shite which preceded it, and it's this kind of thing (in my view) that angers and belittles the workforce and creates the resentment so palpable on this blog.
The competency of the people is not the issue, but the training ethos very much creates the officers values and ethics.
Well it's not been a real job since we lost social work it's all admin and order now.
******
I know many social work qualified officers believe DipPs and PQUIP qualified staff have little understanding of 'the real job' but that's simply untrue. I'm DipPs qualified but it was by working with social work trained colleagues that I was inspired to become a PO in the first place. I had then - and retain now - many of the same values as earlier qualified officers, and the notion that I don't do a 'real job', or only do admin tasks is frankly insulting. And it's getting tired. There is much valid discussion of the deskilling of officers but please don't assume that there aren't still staff out here doing the best we can for our clients. It's demoralising to hear those with more experience belittle a job into which many still put a huge amount of work and commitment.
******
Hello Xxxxx and others....I'm so relieved to hear you have the values and ethics which matter, and hope you are surrounded by trainees who have the same - that is not, however, my experience. I also trained via the DIPS route; as I recall it we (or at least in my area) did training on skills like CBT, solution focussed work, Trotter's working with involuntary relationships, pro-social modelling and the famous "motivational interviewing" - the involvement of the service user in their own "journey" via meaningful sentence plan goals became the bedrock of my day to day sessions; at that time I felt I had a good grounding in skills, with academic background, coupled with 1-2-1 support via a PTA who really encouraged/discussed both my ethos, attitude, skills and I was able to work with a relatively small group of service users whose offence/risk profiles were on the "lower" end of the risk scale...not to mention of course we would write regular PSRs, and built up to more complicated matters towards the end of our 2 year period.
What I find now is that within weeks PQUIPS are suddenly dealing with DV, sex offences, and gangs, with little support and lots of ego.... Sentence plans have become little more than stock phrases about "addressing my drugs use" or "managing my risk", and one to one appointments deliver little meaning other than "monitoring", "interrogating" and "questioning", "checking" they have done certain things, or "referring" them off elsewhere. Is it me, or has probation become little more than a referral and triage service, pushing the person's issues off to another organisation "with more expertise". The ethos of probation training has become about completing wonderfully well written OASYS, marking CRISSA entries, and ensuring "risk is managed"....god forbid that people are encouraged to get to know the wider family unit, involving those individuals in the sentence plan or the person's "journey", or involving the person as their own agent of change.
Please people tell me if I'm wrong, but that's how I see it. Just take a look at the "mandatory" training we are all threatened with sacking if we don't do - what a pile of shite! Did any of the modules on DV, child and adult safeguarding encourage any meaningful supervision sessions, or any of the social work ethos and skills which many of us lament the loss of. Nope! It was all "soundbites" and "acronyms" - we all knew we could pass the test at the end without wasting our time reading the shite which preceded it, and it's this kind of thing (in my view) that angers and belittles the workforce and creates the resentment so palpable on this blog.
The competency of the people is not the issue, but the training ethos very much creates the officers values and ethics.
Saturday, 31 October 2020
Something's Got To Change
Absolutely nobody wanted CRISSA from the outset, except the 2 people that created it. They pushed and push and pushed, until it was made mandatory. That’s how probation works nowadays, no evidence base, no collaboration, Just Effing Do It because the HMIP might give us a gold star.
******
******
Agree CRISSA is for automatons! Probation over assesses and over records but massively under delivers meaningful work with offenders. I genuinely believe that Probation has no identity now and bends to the will of others like a tree in the wind. The offenders know this and don't trust Probation any more than they trust any other professionals. Sigh. It was not always like this. Sigh
******
A quick google bought up this shite. I feel sorry for the offenders having to go through this scripted conveyor belt every week and for the POs that buy in to this drivel then type it all up.
“During the session, we will also talk about the offence and explore deeper into why it happened and how we can help them to not be in a situation again. The session framework that I, and most other officers use is the CRISSA model. In English this means, Check in, Review, Implement/ intervention, Summarise, Set tasks, appointments.
This basically means, I check in with them, see if any circumstances have changed since the last session, and go through their general engagement with the order. I review the previous session and any learning, and tasks set from the last time. We sit down and implement and come up with interventions that focus on a criminogenic need, linked to the sentence plan, for example thinking skills and attitudes. We then summarise the session we have had, set tasks if necessary that will be reviewed in the next session and finally set an appointment for the next session, whether is either weekly, fortnightly or monthly.”
“During the session, we will also talk about the offence and explore deeper into why it happened and how we can help them to not be in a situation again. The session framework that I, and most other officers use is the CRISSA model. In English this means, Check in, Review, Implement/ intervention, Summarise, Set tasks, appointments.
This basically means, I check in with them, see if any circumstances have changed since the last session, and go through their general engagement with the order. I review the previous session and any learning, and tasks set from the last time. We sit down and implement and come up with interventions that focus on a criminogenic need, linked to the sentence plan, for example thinking skills and attitudes. We then summarise the session we have had, set tasks if necessary that will be reviewed in the next session and finally set an appointment for the next session, whether is either weekly, fortnightly or monthly.”
******
Absolutely agree. HMIP have indicated for years now that our work with offenders in supervision sessions is piss poor, but they stop short at exploring why. The organisation has focussed so much on case recording and completing OASYS under impossibly exacting QA standards, that it has forgotten who we are working for. Think back to the last time you had training on skills associated with meaningful engagement and delivery of supervision sessions, versus training in risk and OASYS completion.
The organisation has lost its way and reinforces matters by bringing in recording initiatives like CRISSA, officer diary, risk registers, constant pressure to update OASYS, constant pressure to complete this against standards which talk about meticulous completion of evidence boxes, assessor comments....and then the senior leaders scratch their heads and say "we just can't understand why employees say we don't listen, we offer a TEAMS meeting once a month, we don't get it??"
Absolutely agree. HMIP have indicated for years now that our work with offenders in supervision sessions is piss poor, but they stop short at exploring why. The organisation has focussed so much on case recording and completing OASYS under impossibly exacting QA standards, that it has forgotten who we are working for. Think back to the last time you had training on skills associated with meaningful engagement and delivery of supervision sessions, versus training in risk and OASYS completion.
The organisation has lost its way and reinforces matters by bringing in recording initiatives like CRISSA, officer diary, risk registers, constant pressure to update OASYS, constant pressure to complete this against standards which talk about meticulous completion of evidence boxes, assessor comments....and then the senior leaders scratch their heads and say "we just can't understand why employees say we don't listen, we offer a TEAMS meeting once a month, we don't get it??"
******
"come up with interventions that focus on a criminogenic need, linked to the sentence plan, for example thinking skills and attitudes." Linked to a sentence plan from an OASys system built on the premise that the client needs to be "fixed", it demeans both the professional and the client. Both of us insulted in a stroke.
"come up with interventions that focus on a criminogenic need, linked to the sentence plan, for example thinking skills and attitudes." Linked to a sentence plan from an OASys system built on the premise that the client needs to be "fixed", it demeans both the professional and the client. Both of us insulted in a stroke.
******
I do love how corporate bullshit tells us how we need to more reflect the community we serve. Well if that really were the case, the service would employ 95% men!! Which is clearly ridiculous and not required!! What is required is to start thinking about why we are unsuccessful at working with about 50% of our users, and I'm suggested tailoring services around what men actually need is one of many ways to achieve this...or we simply be more honest as a service that we are here to punish and enforce and that is our end goal.
******
Probation is unsuccessful because it doesn’t reflect the community we serve. This doesn’t just mean more male POs, but more difference across all probation jobs;
More men
More Black, Asian and ethnic people, especially men..
More working class people who didn’t go to university.
More people with criminal records.
More people that have overcome addictions.
More people that have migrated from other countries.
More people that have lived life.
Probation is unsuccessful because it doesn’t reflect the community we serve. This doesn’t just mean more male POs, but more difference across all probation jobs;
More men
More Black, Asian and ethnic people, especially men..
More working class people who didn’t go to university.
More people with criminal records.
More people that have overcome addictions.
More people that have migrated from other countries.
More people that have lived life.
Friday, 30 October 2020
Too Much Clickety Clicking
Yesterday's post and spirited discussion serves to highlight just how much feeling and unease there is around the issue of the extraordinary and growing gender imbalance within probation. We have discussed this many times before, the reasons are varied and complex but include selection, training, salary, professional judgement, discretion and job satisfaction. Surely this exasperated contributor put their finger on much of the problem?
"I agree with comments about "command and control" - OASYS has GOT to go to be replaced with an assessment system which makes sense, CRISSA has got to go, Risk registers (or at least updating them every five minutes) has got to go - and can someone please make that bloody box in Delius larger so I can actually see what's in it - actually fuck it, Delius has got to go, I spend too much time clickety clicking and not enough time WORKING. We need to chose ONE of these issues and band together and say "enough is enough - we are NOT doing this anymore"....the person is more important than the CRISSA notes I write about them."
"Just love that risk management economy created by The Centre so their on-message chums in academia could sell sackloads of shit, politicians could scare the public witless & NOMS/HMPPS could control the probation narrative."
"I agree with comments about "command and control" - OASYS has GOT to go to be replaced with an assessment system which makes sense, CRISSA has got to go, Risk registers (or at least updating them every five minutes) has got to go - and can someone please make that bloody box in Delius larger so I can actually see what's in it - actually fuck it, Delius has got to go, I spend too much time clickety clicking and not enough time WORKING. We need to chose ONE of these issues and band together and say "enough is enough - we are NOT doing this anymore"....the person is more important than the CRISSA notes I write about them."
And these:-
"Just love that risk management economy created by The Centre so their on-message chums in academia could sell sackloads of shit, politicians could scare the public witless & NOMS/HMPPS could control the probation narrative."
******
"The current Probation service that sucks up to the police, creates little security units to please Tory ministers and buddies up with prison governors by unnecessarily vetting it’s own staff."
"The current Probation service that sucks up to the police, creates little security units to please Tory ministers and buddies up with prison governors by unnecessarily vetting it’s own staff."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)