Is there enough time to allocate to the need?

Desistance research shows us that interventions and support should be tailored for the individual.  This means that any interventions and support are as effective as possible.

Probation staff have an allocated amount of time set to spend working with an individual based on the assessed need.  This isn’t based on that particular individual
but instead on the level of risk of serious harm and the risk of re-offending.  The theory of this is that generally that those with the higher risk of serious harm or re-offending require more intervention and practitioner time.  In discussions today it was raised that sometimes the people who “on paper” require less time, in reality require more time and support. 

If we are to tailor interventions to the individual this also means that as practitioners we tailor the amount of time we spend carrying out tasks associated with them.  The tasks can be face to face interactions, the dreaded paperwork, referrals, making enquiries, or attending meetings.  If we only spent the allocated amount of time on each case, this could prevent the necessary work being carried out.  Of course in reality, practitioners don’t have an egg timer measuring how long they spend; stopping when you reach the allocated time.  Instead you borrow (not rob) from Peter to pay Paul.  I know that at times I’ve felt that I’m trying to be a magician in balancing an imaginary time sheet.

The reality is that we need flexibility so that we can spend the time where it is needed.  The increased autonomy in the revised National Standards is helping with this, but it also needs to be supported from management, senior management and beyond.  What is becoming increasingly clear to me is that supporting change, especially in incorporating desistance, cannot be successful unless you support the practice.