Introduction:

Following the publication of the Independent Sentencing Review's final report and the Government's subsequent acceptance of 45 out of its 46 recommendations, a sentencing bill is now expected to come before Parliament following the Summer Recess.

This will be in addition to ongoing work to operationalise further policy recommendations contained within the ISR, including the curtailing of short custodial sentences (to be used only in exceptional circumstances), reforms to the recall process, and an expansion in the use of Suspended Sentence Orders (SSOs) and deferred sentencing.

Implementation of the Sentencing Review’s recommendations must also be viewed within the context of concurrent work on the Independent Review of Criminal Courts and the Independent Review of Prison Capacity.

The Bill:

The proposed sentencing bill will give effect to a number of the core proposals within the Review that require legislation, including the new three-staged, progression model that will enable people serving standard determinate sentences (SDS) to become eligible for release after serving a third of their sentence. There will be exemptions, and certain people serving SDSs will have to serve 50% of their sentence in custody.

The exact details of this model have yet to be finalised, but the broad parameters - to date - indicate that the model will establish a three-part sentence, with release to be determined by behaviour while in prison, particularly, constructive engagement with the prison regime. Under the model, the first third of the sentence will be spent in custody.  This will be followed by an intensive supervision phase in the community, with an uplift in tagging and new restrictive measures (the second third). The final third will be the license stage with risk of recall combined with restrictive measures.

The Government has also been proceeding with other elements of the review, including developing plans for expanded provision of Intensive Supervision Courts (ISCs). They are looking to expand the existing pilot, with a focus on 'prolific offenders', and have released an EOI for potential applicants.

Facilitating voluntary sector engagement:

Over the course of the Summer, we have been holding a number of roundtables to give the voluntary sector an opportunity to engage with officials on the review's recommendations. The focus has been on how to make a success of implementation and how best to leverage the expertise of the sector in order to ensure that what comes next, works.

Initially, we looked at treatment in the community and gathered feedback from many of our members on the recommendations related to drug and alcohol and mental health treatment. We also heard from organisations with a specialism in supporting older people in the criminal justice system - particularly important given the growing number of people in prison who are over the age of 50. 

Across August, we convened three further roundtables: on resettlement and through-the-gate provision; diversion and alternatives to custody; and the role of the probation service and its relationship with the voluntary sector.

Below, we have set out some of the views expressed by participants at these roundtables. These are practical recommendations from the sector designed to support in the implementation of the Review’s own recommendations. There will be ongoing work to advocate for the implementation of these recommendations.

The findings, so far (a snapshot):

Treatment in the community:

Participants inevitably reinforced that voluntary organisations are critical to ensuring that people in contact with the system receive the support that they need. Where this support is most effective, it is both sustained and holistic, in order to address complex and often overlapping needs. Short-term contracting models therefore create significant difficulties for the sector.

Additionally, organisations warned of shifting the crisis in prisons to a crisis in probation and community services. Just as prisons are overcrowded and under resourced, the probation service is also creaking. If we are to successfully reduce the size of the prison population, there will need to be more resources for community justice services. This includes the requirement for sustained investment, through increased funding for treatment providers (an ISR recommendation) so that more people can receive either drug, alcohol or mental health treatment as part of a community sentence.

Participants at our drug, alcohol and mental health roundtable provided a number of practical recommendations regarding the implementation of the Sentencing Review's recommendations. These included:

• Incorporating existing models of support in order to avoid any duplication
• Establishing intensive treatment pathways for women
• Exploring the potential to embed incentives for in-prison progress through treatment
• Strengthening collaboration between statutory and non-statutory stakeholders in order to boost confidence in the effectiveness and availability of treatment requirements. 

Older people in the criminal justice system:

The Sentencing Review recommended the development of a new strategy for older people in contact with the criminal justice system, in addition to exploring the distinct health and social care needs of this cohort. 

At a roundtable focused on the older cohort, we looked at previous work on the strategy and whether the 'four pillars' examined at the time, remain appropriate today. Participants with expertise in supporting older people in contact with the CJS highlighted a number of areas that should be incorporated into any ongoing strategy development:

• Peer support and social prescribing
• Tailored regime planning
• Appropriate staff training
• Digital training 
• Post-release planning

There will be further opportunities to support this strategy development process, to ensure that it is informed by the sector’s expertise in supporting older people in contact with the criminal justice system.

Resettlement and through-the-gate:

The question explored was: what does the sector need to work most effectively with people through-the-gate and then to support people in the community?

Much of the focus was on establishing accessible pathways of support from prison into the community. Participants considered the following elements as essential:

• Longer lead-up times ahead of release
• Timely access to information and systems to support integrated release planning between statutory and non-statutory stakeholders
• Voluntary sector engagement with pre-release boards
• Voluntary sector co-location in probation settings
• The commissioning of holistic, post-release support focused on relational working and incorporating sustained through-the-gate, peer mentoring and support models

On reforms to recall, it was urged that a more effective data-collection process is implemented to better understand the factors driving recalls to prison. To avoid recalls in the first instance, it was highlighted that intensive support immediately following release should be the primary objective. Further measures were also explored including instituting a ‘suspended recall’ process instead of immediate recall.

Diversion and alternatives to custody:

This session focused on how to bolster community provision, with participants exploring effective alternatives to custody and how to successfully divert people away from the criminal justice system. Areas covered also included the use of deferred sentencing, increasing the number of people receiving CSTRs, L&D pathways, Intensive Supervision Courts (ISCs) and gender-specific services.

To address need in the community, a range of practical measures were proposed that included:

• Reforming commissioning processes in order to empower local commissioners and probation regions to directly commission local, specialist voluntary organisations
• Increase co-commissioning opportunities to allow services to support more coordinated, multi-agency responses
• Incorporate co-location into service provision
• Ensure sentencers have the right information regarding what support is available locally and how it can be accessed
• Increased provision of peer support, including through its incorporation within the contracted delivery of rehabilitative services

On diversion, it was agreed that building more effective partnerships with local police forces is essential to ensuring that a greater volume of arrests lead to successful diversionary activity.

To increase the number of people sentenced to CSTRs, participants highlighted the following elements as key to success:

• Access to information – particularly around the availability and accessibility of local services
• Effective referral mechanisms understood by those referring people into them
• Clear lines of responsibility around which agency/stakeholder is responsible for which aspect of support as part of a person’s community order
• Establishing multi-agency models

On ISCs, the core argument was that funding for ISCs cannot be restricted to probation and the courts but must also go to voluntary sector organisations supporting the work of the ISCs.

Finally, on how to best support women via women’s centres, participants alighted on three core elements: appropriate funding; co-location of services; and a relational approach.

The role of probation and working with the voluntary sector:

This roundtable – covering the role of probation and working the voluntary sector – produced similar themes to the sessions on resettlement and alternatives to custody. Namely, those of increasing the use of co-commissioning to more effectively address complex and overlapping need, expanding co-location of services, establishing placed-based and locally funded services, and establishing stronger relationships between probation and the voluntary sector.

Participants put forward a range of practical measures, grounded in the expertise of delivering frontline services and designed to both better support people in the community and to reduce demand on probation. These measures included:

• Reforming referral processes (including CRS referrals) to reduce bottlenecks to accessing support
• Reforming current commissioning processes to enable the more flexible delivery of services and allow need to be addressed in a more holistic, and less rigid manner
• Enabling voluntary organisations to more easily reinvest contract underspends
• Providing greater clarity on the funding pots available to Probation Delivery Units
• Incorporate a greater number of peer-led services into existing and future contracts

Next steps:

We will be facilitating further opportunities for the sector to engage with officials as we reach the next stage of the ISR’s implementation phase, including on the contents of the bill once it comes before Parliament.

Additionally, we will be publishing an explainer on the bill with a focus on its implications, and the opportunities for the sector.

In the meantime, we will continue to advocate with and on behalf of the sector, so for those organisations with practical ideas regarding implementation, and evidence of best practice, get in touch!