Published 21st May
Public Accounts Committee says don't sell probation until it's safe
On 20th May the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) published its scrutiny report into NOMS’ Transforming Rehabilitation agenda and their planned privatisation of the Probation Service. The PAC make seven key observations or recommendations and insist the programme remains under close scrutiny to maintain public protection and value for money to the taxpayer. Critically the PAC say NOMS must report back explaining how it has tested the programme’s readiness to sell off and why they think it is safe to do so before any sale of the 21 Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRCS). Napo fully support the PAC and want parliamentarians help to ensure NOMS meet the PAC’s recommendations.
Why Napo supports the PAC's concerns
- The professional driver behind the Offender Rehabilitation Act and NOMS justification for the creation of the CRCs was extending probation supervision to those serving less than 12 months custody, an increase of around 50,000 extra cases p.a. This is a large part of the work bidders are competing for but the Act has not yet been implemented. Napo believes that until new work is at least part tested and evaluated it will be impossible to sensibly price and unsafe to sell off the management and delivery of complex work.
- The PAC recognise, “The scale, complexity and pace of the reforms give rise to risks around value for money which need to be carefully managed.” These are so great the PAC indicates these risks need to be identified and publically assessed before any sale takes place. Napo is especially concerned that NOMS will not meet this expectation. They have refused to publish any details or results from the programmes three previous Test Gates. They have told the unions they are yet to decide what Test Gate 4 needs to analyse, either in regard of service delivery or value for money. Napo believes safe testing needs to happen in a real environment to ensure it is safe and bidders know what they will be taking on in contracts.
- The PAC then recognises both the excellent current performance across probation, with all Trusts measured as “good” or “exceptional” and a significant increase in caseloads for probation staff arising from a 22% expected increase in offenders under supervision. NOMS have been “unable to articulate” how additional caseloads will be managed and warn against “repeating mistakes”. Understandably, the PAC expect performance metrics to be in place “during the transition process and beyond” to monitor performance against current “benchmark” standards. Napo knows that this isn’t happening currently and isn’t in place.
- The PAC recognise NOMS’ poor track record of managing procurements and is concerned by the scale of the TR programme. Napo believes negotiating 21 decade long contracts in record speed (e.g. in half the time NOMS is currently taking to assess bids and let four prison facilities management contracts) will lead to errors that can put public safety and the public purse at unnecessary risk.
- The PAC recognises that probation is “…an essential public service that must be maintained in the event of a supplier failing or withdrawing from the contract.” NOMS currently says the NPS would step in but this looks unsustainable. The NPS budget will already be under huge pressure from austerity measures, higher than anticipated start-up and staff transfer costs and a higher CRC sale price as bidders respond to high risk and an uncompetitive market.
- The PAC is concerned by the proposed mechanism for payment by results (PbR) in CRC contracts. These are complex, untested and remain subject to agreement with suppliers. The Social Market Foundation (SMF) has said the model incentivises companies to cut costs and push PbR risks onto subcontractors, including financially vulnerable charities. The SMF also talks about perverse incentives to see reoffending rates initially rise because of PbR.
- The PAC doubts NOMS’ assertion that implementing this programme and sale will save money and is worried about “more bureaucracy and demands on managing offenders”. Napo is already aware of concerns about rising bureaucracy and the already evident impact on service delivery - e.g. Pre-sentence Reports completed on the day at Court have already reduced by a third due to more complex paperwork and accountability arising from their being two local probation services instead of one (the CRC and the NPS) - impacting on Court efficiency and sentencing as well as staff stress and workloads.
How you can help Napo
- Write to the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Justice, Ursula Brennan, asking her to explain how she plans to address the many concerns shared by the PAC and Napo.
- Meet with your local Napo representatives to talk through the mounting evidence about these risks surfacing in your local area.
- Write to the Secretary of State for Justice, Chris Grayling, asking him to confirm:
- A list of tests that will form the TR programmes Test Gate 4 which will need to be passed before it is safe to sell CRCs
- A list of the tests that formed part of previous Test gates and the evidence showing these were met, allowing the project to be safe to proceed.
- The number and names of bidders still declaring an ongoing interest to buy the CRC contracts in your area and that there is still a genuine competition.