Since the split into NPS and CRCs, the NPS have begun to explore resourcing issues associated with their predominantly ‘high risk’ caseload. In essence they are looking to refine tiering within the NPS according to risk levels and additional associated activity undertaken with key offender groups in order to enable them to allocate resources appropriately and proportionately.
This work is being undertaken by a sub-group (Tiering Working Group) which has been reporting to the WMT (Workload Management) working group. The latter group has just been effectively disbanded, certainly insofar as there is a consultation forum with the unions, since the work of the group is apparently being transferred to E3. For members in CRCs, E3 is a programme – the Effectiveness, Efficiency and Excellence Programme aimed at improving the organisation by reviewing service delivery. Deputy Directors in the NPS will be the senior business owners for identified workstreams and priorities.
Napo’s expressed concerns have been firstly that this re-tiering exercise will be used as a means of reducing the workload weightings for high risk work and secondly that it will cause confusion at the interface with CRCs.
Factors to be considered for inclusion include risk levels using existing validated tools, complexity factors which will be reflected in ROSH rating or MAPPA level and vulnerable individuals as assessed using OASys. Multi-agency working also features and ‘need’ and ‘responsivity’ have also been considered.
The result of these deliberations is that 7 tiers are proposed against which have been modelled the percentage of NPS offenders in each tier. Most come in the four middle tiers. For example, tier C has an RSR score of 3-6.8% or an OGRS of 75-89% or a medium ROSH. Tier C2 is just this and tier C1 is C2 plus additional factors such as safeguarding or vulnerability issues. Total percentage of offenders in this tier – 35% (14.1% for C1 and 21.6% for tier C2). And so on. Resources and timings will be assessed accordingly – when the related operating model is finalised. Napo has suggested that this proposed model might be a bit too complicated. So that would be our third concern.
As to the future
As to the future for tiering in the CRCs, that currently remains a relative mystery to Napo bar what has been published by Sodexo in their Service Delivery Solution with green, yellow, blue and red packages of support. At least this model describes and quantifies contact between supervisors and supervisees.
This document came to the attention of Napo around Easter-time and is the subject of ongoing consultations. Napo’s Professional Committee have taken a look at it and prepared a critical analysis. This has been considered by representatives from our affected branches. It is available on application (email firstname.lastname@example.org). In its current form it only really makes sense when read against the Service Delivery Solution itself. Napo is currently considering whether to make it more widely available as a public document in reworked form but this decision is linked to the ongoing consultations with Sodexo.