Abstract
Appreciating service user views on their own supervision is crucial, both to aid service users in their path towards desistance and to create effective supervision. The SEED training programme for probation staff in England concentrated on one-to-one supervision and how it was being delivered. As part of the evaluation of SEED, we asked those on licence and those on community orders about their own experience of their supervision (both those whose supervisors were trained on the SEED programme and control groups). All those service users commencing supervision in selected areas of three Probation Trusts were asked if they would like to complete an anonymous questionnaire about the general running of their licence/order, what was talked about in their supervision sessions, and their views on their supervisor and supervision—and 482 service users took the opportunity to do so. Key positive elements included having a good relationship with one’s supervisor, the supervisor behaving as a role model and the supervisor motivating the service user towards desistance. Being given skills to solve problems (and encouraging service users to contact other agencies) were also important—though no supervision can tackle all the practical obstacles facing those trying to desist. We supplemented these questionnaires with in-depth interviews with a small number of service users, near the beginning of their order and then again six months or so later. We saw that, though similar positive elements emerged, both setting tasks to be done between supervision sessions and setting goals seemed to diminish over the course of the supervision. We conclude that there is a need for both supervisors and service users to think afresh near the end of supervision as to how the service user could focus on the next steps on the desistance path.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
In this article, we shall use the term ‘supervisors’ to include all probation staff who took on the role of supervising service users, whether probation officers or probation service officers, or managers with a service user caseload. An equivalent term in England and Wales would be ‘offender manager’.
- 2.
Some probation areas (then Probation Trusts) separated caseloads so that some staff primarily supervised people released on licence, particularly life licence, but most used relatively generic caseloads, such that staff supervised both those released from prison on licence and those serving their whole sentence in the community (community sentences).
- 3.
Part of SEED training involved managers observing individual supervision sessions for their own team of staff. As part of the evaluation, a number of supervision sessions were video’d using automatic recording, initiated by the supervisor with the service user’s agreement, and subsequently sent to the evaluation team. A small number were recorded during the early, middle and late parts of the SEED training year for each SEED-trained team. Technical difficulties meant a significant proportion of these sessions were only successfully recorded in part, but 73 whole or part recordings are available. These are currently being analysed.
- 4.
For one case the data on this were missing.
- 5.
STICS included several similar elements to SEED.
- 6.
Wald = 6.088, p = 0.014. No other variables were included in the model as none showed a significant relationship. Pseudo R 2 = 0.016 (Nagelkerke). Model x 2 = 6.012(1), p < 0.014. The parallel lines assumption was not violated.
- 7.
The principal components analysis used oblimin rotation, because we were not able to assume that the factors were independent of each other.
- 8.
Hence the sample was divided into those who scored above the median (the point on the scale at which half the respondents were above that point and half below) and those which scored below the median.
- 9.
These were analysed using three –way ANOVA tests, controlling for gender, as the content of sessions was linked to the gender of the service user, and there were differences between trained and comparison groups.
- 10.
Wald = 4.479, p = 0.034. Other significant variables in the model were age Wald = 9.320, p = 0.002, and gender Wald = 7.924, p = 0.005. Pseudo R 2 = 0.053 (Nagelkerke). Model x 2 = 18.402(3), p < 0.001. The parallel lines assumption was not violated.
References
Bottoms, A.E., & Shapland, J. (2011). Steps towards desistance among male young adult recidivists. In S. Farrall, M. Hough, S. Maruna & R. Sparks (Eds.), Escape routes: Contemporary perspectives on life after punishment (pp. 43–80). London: Routledge.
Bourgon, G., Rugge, T., Guiterrez, L., Simpson, K., Bonta, J., Scott, T., Yessine, A., Li, J., & Helmus, L. (2008). Strategic training initiative in community supervision (STICS). Presentation to the Canadian Psychology Association’s 69th Annual Convention, Halifax, Nova Scotia.
Chui, W. (2003). Experiences of probation supervision in Hong Kong: listening to the young adult probationers. Journal of Criminal Justice, 331, 567–577.
Farrall, S. (2002). Rethinking what works with offenders: Probation, social context and desistance from crime. Cullompton, Devon: Willan.
Farrall, S., Hunter, B., Sharpe, G.H., & Calverley, A. (2014). Criminal careers in transition: The social context of desistance from crime. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jersey Probation and After-Care Service (2016) Probation Client Feedback Questionnaire Results 2015. St Helier: Jersey Probation and After-Care Service, http://probation.je/annual-report-for-2015-and-business-plan-for-2016/. Accessed 10 March 2016.
McNeill, F., & Weaver, B. (2010). Desistance research and offender management. Review for the Ministry of Justice. Glasgow: Glasgow School of Social Work & Scottish Centre for Crime and Justice Research, Universities of Glasgow and Strathclyde.
Shapland, J., Robinson, G., & Sorsby, A. (2011). Restorative justice in practice. London: Routledge.
Shapland, J., Bottoms, A.E., Farrall, S., McNeill, F., Priede C., & Robinson, G. (2012a). The quality of probation supervision—a literature review. Sheffield: Centre for Criminological Research, University of Sheffield, Occasional Paper 3. http://www.sheffield.ac.uk/polopoly_fs/1.159010!/file/QualityofProbationSupervision.pdf
Shapland, J., Bottoms, A.E., & Muir, G., with Atkinson, H., Healy, D., & Holmes, D. (2012b). Perceptions of the criminal justice system among young adult would-be desisters. In F. Losel & A.E. Bottoms (Eds.), Young adult offenders: Lost in transition? (pp. 128–145). London: Routledge.
Shapland, J., Farrall, S., & Bottoms, A.E. (Eds.), (2016). Global perspectives on desistance: Reviewing what we know, looking to the future. London: Routledge.
Sorsby, A., Shapland, J., Farrall, S., McNeill, F., Priede, C., & Robinson, G. (2013). Probation staff views of the Skills for Effective Engagement Development (SEED) project. Sheffield, Centre for Criminological Research Occasional Paper no. 4. Sheffield: University of Sheffield. http://www.sheffield.ac.uk/polopoly_fs/1.293093!/file/probation-staff-views-seed.pdf.
Trotter, C., & Evans, P. (2012). An analysis of supervision skills in youth probation. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 45(2), 255–273.
Ugwudike, P., Raynor, P., & Vanstone, M. (2014). Supervision skills and practices: The Jersey study. In I. Durnescu & F. McNeill (Eds.), Understanding penal practice. London: Routledge.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2016 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Shapland, J., Sorsby, A., Farrall, S., Priede, C. (2016). Experiencing Supervision in England—On Licence and on Community Sentences. In: Armstrong, R., Durnescu, I. (eds) Parole and Beyond. Palgrave Studies in Prisons and Penology. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-95118-5_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-95118-5_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-95117-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-95118-5
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)