The Scottish Government

Social Work and Criminal Justice: Early Arrangements

National Objectives and Standards for Social Work Services in the Criminal Justice System and the 100% funding initiative (`the policy') were introduced in l991 [ National Standards for Community Service had been introduced in l989.] in order to secure the provision of services which have the confidence of both criminal justice decision-makers and the wider public. This study is part of the social research programme designed to evaluate policy implementation. It examines the initial responses of key criminal justice decision-makers and Scottish Office officials to early arrangements for policy implementation.

Main findings

• Three facilitators of implementation were identified: the protection of resources through the funding initiative; the development of specialist services integrated into service delivery systems as a whole; and the framework of the National Standards.

• Impediments to early implementation included: the change to specialist organisational structives; tensions over the relative priority of services and monitoring; concurrent introduction of other social work policies and the fact that 100% funding arrangements did not cover all services.

• Sheriff interviewees endorsed the model of criminal justice embedded in the Standards, but when sentencing offenders at high risk of custody, punishment and public protection rather than the quality of social work services were the primary considerations.

• Sheriffs were generally satisfied with probation services and considered that policy implementation had made a major impact in some areas. Their views on community service, however, were more polarised.

• Throughcare was believed by Scottish Office officials to be the least well developed service prior to policy implementation and the policy had, thus far, had limited impact.

Introduction

The National Objectives and Standards (the Standards, 1991) set out a framework within which local authorities are required to provide social work services where costs are met by the 100 per cent funding initiative (initially, social enquiry reports and associated court services, community service, probation, parole and other aspects of throughcare).

Prior to the development of the Standards, local authorities had to fund most social work services out of their general income. Criminal justice services were, therefore, in competition for resources with other local authority services and as a result were not always of sufficient quantity and quality to meet the requirements of the courts.

The main aims of the policy are:

• to reduce the use of custody by increasing the availability, improving the quality and targeting the use of community-based court disposals on those most at risk of custody, especially young offenders;

• to enable offenders to address their offending behaviour and make a successful adjustment to law-abiding life.

The purpose of this study was to examine the initial responses of key criminal justice decision-makers and Scottish Office officials to the principal objectives of the policy and the early arrangements for its implementation.

Findings are based on an analysis of the Standards and interviews in 1992-1993 with: twelve sheriffs (two from each of the six Scottish sheriffdoms); one procurator fiscal from each sheriffdom; two members of the Parole Board for Scotland; and four Scottish Office officials.

Planning and management

The research identified a tension in the policy between the framework of the Standards and the need to develop services within available resources. This is reflected in differences of view between central government officials over: the adequacy of early strategic planning arrangements; and the relative priority given to developing service delivery and the National Core Data System which was established for monitoring purposes.

Three facilitators of policy implementation were identified: the protection of resources through the 100 per cent funding initiative; the development of specialist services integrated into service delivery systems as a whole; and the framework of the National Standards.

Impediments to early implementation included: differing priorities within central government; the policy context; organisational factors; and the nature of the 100% funding initiative.

Sentencing

Three factors were identified as increasing shrieval confidence in a disposal: feedback on the process and outcome of supervision in individual cases; a well written social enquiry report; and guaranteed funding for services. However increased confidence in disposals did not necessarily guarantee that a particular disposal would be used more frequently and may have no part to play in decisions taken about serious categories of offence.

The research found that although sheriffs were willing to endorse the model of criminal justice which informs the Standards, they indicated that, when sentencing offenders at high risk of custody, punishment rather than the nature or quality of social work input to community-based disposals, was a major consideration. They believed that this was compatible with public interest and protection.

Social enquiry reports

The majority of sheriffs commented that there had been major improvements in recent years in social enquiry report writing, especially in respect of the recommendations and conclusions. Reports were generally delivered on time although they were often only available on the morning of the court. Where dissatisfaction was expressed it was because reports contained unnecessary detail and recommendations were sometimes thought by sheriffs to be unrealistic.

Probation

Sheriffs were generally satisfied with the provision of probation services. Implementation of the Standards was considered to have had a major impact in some areas. Greater information was now available about services and the range and quality of programmes were believed to have improved.

Nevertheless, sheriffs generally thought that there was further scope for development of intensive probation projects aimed at offenders at high risk of custody and services aimed at young people involved in less serious offences.

Throughcare

Throughcare was believed to have been the least well developed social work criminal justice service prior to policy implementation and therefore to have the most progress to make. Though some interviewees thought that the quality of prison social work reports and home circumstance reports was variable and linked this to the experience and ability of individual social workers, others thought that the quality had improved, reflecting more thorough input from social workers and increased co-operation between agencies.

The implementation of "Continuity Through Co-operation" a national framework of policy and practice guidance for social work in prisons, (Scottish Prisons Service/Social Work Services Group, 1989) was believed to have enhanced co-operation between different service providers in a number of prison units. However, some interviewees thought that the provision of prison-based social work was patchy and prisoners in some units lacked contact with social workers.

Parole board members considered that they had insufficient information about available community-based services and that better liaison with social work administrators could address this. However, interviewees generally thought that community-based throughcare was improving although there was greater scope for inter-agency collaboration.

Conclusion

Responses of key criminal justice decision-makers to early arrangements for policy implementation would suggest that progress was more advanced in some areas of service delivery than others. These issues have been examined in more detail in the other studies in the research programme.

The study was carried out by The Scottish Office Central Research Unit as part of the programme of research to evaluate social work criminal justice policy. The research programme was conducted by The Scottish Office Central Research Unit in collaboration with the Social Work Research Centre at Stirling University and with Edinburgh University. It was funded by the Home Department of The Scottish Office.

Social Work and Criminal Justice Volume 2: 'Early Arrangements'; the report of the research programme summarised in this Research Findings is published by The Stationery Office. It may be purchased from The Stationery Office, price £13 per copy.

Lesley McAra

Reports of Individual Studies on this programme are also available:

Social Work and Criminal Justice Volume 1: 'The Impact of Policy'.
Social Work and Criminal Justice Volume 3: 'The National and Local Context'.
Social Work and Criminal Justice Volume 4: 'Sentencer Decision-Making'.
Social Work and Criminal Justice Volume 5: 'Parole Board Decision-Making'.
Social Work and Criminal Justice Volume 6: 'Probation'.
Social Work and Criminal Justice Volume 7: 'Community-Based Throughcare'.

Cheques should be made payable to The Stationery Office and addressed to:

The Stationery Office Ltd,
Mail Order Department,
21 South Gyle Crescent,
Edinburgh, EH12 9EB.

Telephone: 0131-479-3141 or Fax 0131-479-3142.

The following Research Findings for other studies on this programme are also available:

Findings 13: 'The Impact of Policy'.
Findings 15: 'The National and Local Context'.
Findings 16: 'Sentencer Decision-Making'.
Findings 17: 'Parole Board Decision-Making'.
Findings 18: 'Probation'.
Findings 19: 'Community-Based Throughcare'.

Research Findings may be photocopied, or further copies may be obtained from:

The Scottish Office Central Research Unit
Room 53
James Craig Walk
Edinburgh EH1 3BA

Telephone: 0131-244-5397 or Fax: 0131-244-5393