Community Corrections

April-June 2015

Community Corrections Officers as Change Agents Motivational Interviewing Addressing Attitudes

1

2

Contents

Introduction 3

About the newsletter Community Corrections Officers as change agents

Research and Literature 4

Effective community-based supervision of young offenders Motivational Interviewing as a Supervision Strategy in Probation: A Randomized Effectiveness Trial No Illusions: Offenders and Organizational Change in Maryland’s Proactive Community Supervision Efforts

Keeping them off the corner: how probation officers steer offenders away from crime opportunities Utilizing Behavioural Interventions to Improve Supervision Outcomes in Community-Based Corrections Discussion

In Practice 6 Interviews as intervention

Using Motivational Interviewing (MI) Addressing different types of resistant offender What might a case plan with supervision as an intervention look like? Offence mapping

Statistical trends 8

Offender populations Offender Management Activity in the Community Practice Guides

From the Field 10

Using SMS to motivate offenders and improve compliance Managing grief in relapse prevention Rationalisation or reluctance? Questions that can support effective supervision Patchwork

Office Profiles 13

Leichhardt Dubbo

Standards and KPIs 15

Overview Assessment Integrity

General information 16

Joined Up Justice Community Corrections / PPOA Conference

New Legislation Memoranda Probation and Parole Officers Association Public Service Association

Contacts 18

3

Introduction About the newsletter The purpose of the newsletter is to provide a mechanism for communicating relevant research, statistics, updates and ideas, as well as information about Community Corrections and other areas within CSNSW. More detailed information, such as the full text of research articles, will be made available on the intranet. All staff are encouraged to review this material, and to provide any feedback or suggestions. The newsletter is issued quarterly. To access current and previous editions of the Community Corrections newsletter online, go to Justice Intranet >> Divisions >> Corrective Services >> Community Corrections >> Newsletter

Community Corrections Officers as Change Agents Over time the emphasis on the role of Community Corrections Officer in NSW has shifted towards case management and organising referrals, rather than direct intervention. Whilst referrals are still important, there is a strong evidence base that suggests the intervention of the CCO can be one of the most effective means of reducing reoffending. This is not a case of going back to ‘how we used to do things’, or spending more time more often in interview with offenders. Changing offending behaviour is inexorably linked to specific skills and techniques that must be implemented properly for supervision to be effective. The research is equally clear that failing to do this properly can also result in supervision by a CCO having little or no impact on reoffending. The key skills to effect change revolve around implementation of Risk-Need-Responsivity principles and the use of cognitive behavioural interventions. The mention of cognitive behavioural therapy is sometimes interpreted as territory which can only be explored by psychologists, but the basic principles are not overly complex and are well within the skillset of the CCO; namely change how someone thinks and the behaviour will follow. This is demonstrated in the STICS model, detailed in the first edition of the Newsletter, which achieved a 47% reduction in offending from interviews with a supervising officer. There was no increase in how long CCOs saw the offender (27 minutes was the average interview), or how often, the key difference was that interviews became focused and targeted criminogenic factors and attitudes. The underlying reason why a CCO can be so effective is that the criminogenic factors which have the strongest association with reoffending are not accommodation, substance abuse or employment, but the offender’s anti-social attitudes. This is an area where intervention by the CCO should be one of the key strategies for change. Very few other service providers seek to directly address offence related attitudes even if they may target some of the symptoms, such as drug use. Attitudes associated with offending are not about whether the offender was remorseful. They are about the underlying beliefs and cognitive deficits that enable the offender to justify their offence to themselves and / or prevent the offender developing more pro social responses. This may include disrespect for the rights of others, or of particular groups of people (eg sexist or racist views), a belief in their own entitlement or that others owe them, or a belief that they are criminal by nature and unable to change for the better. Community Corrections has a key role to play in reducing reoffending, not just by assessing and referring offenders, but by the professional work that is done by CCOs in their interaction with offenders. With over 300,000 interviews with offenders carried out each year, the potential to leverage change is enormous. The challenge in achieving this potential is ensuring that each of these interactions remain focused on criminogenic needs, challenges anti social thinking, and provides pro social alternatives, using evidence based skills such as offence mapping, motivational interviewing, and pro social modelling. This is the direction which Community Corrections is moving towards in order to further improve reoffending outcomes.

4

Research and Literature

Effective community-based supervision of young offenders (Trotter and Evans, 2012, NSW) Method 117 interviews were observed between Juvenile Justice NSW counsellors or workers and juvenile offenders in NSW during 2009-2010. The interviews were coded according to the use of effective practice skills such as role clarification, pro social modelling and cognitive behavioural techniques demonstrated by the worker. Reoffending rates were then measured over 2 years.

Results An offender’s likelihood of reoffending was halved when supervised by workers who utilised effective practice skills. All practice skills measured were linked to a reduction in reoffending. The use of appropriate verbal rewards and encouragement by the worker and using a non-blaming approach had the greatest impact on reducing reoffending rates. Workers utilising all effective practice skills had the lowest recidivism rates for their offenders despite higher risk case loads. Comments This and other research reported here and in earlier editions underscore the point that supervision can be very effective in reducing reoffending, but only if interviews utilise evidence based techniques and target criminogenic need. A supervision interview without these in place has no effect.

Motivational Interviewing as a Supervision Strategy in Probation: A Randomized Effectiveness Trial (Walters, Vader, Nguyen, Harris and Eells, 2010, US) Method A group of 10 Probation officers were trained in Motivational Interviewing (MI), a second group (10) were placed on a waiting list for MI training. A third group (10) supervision-as-usual officers were selected as a control group. The study measured change in officer skill after undertaking a training program in MI as well as at probationer outcomes when supervised by officers with MI training. Poor probationer outcomes included positive urinalysis results, new criminal charges, probation revoked, and fail to report. Results Training in MI improved an officer’s ability to empathise. Further, a mere 1% increase in empathy by an officer was linked to a 29% decrease in poor outcomes for the offender.

Comments These findings suggest that even a small positive change by an officer can effect significant positive change for the offender. This emphasises the importance of revising and improving Motivational Interviewing skills. Nonetheless, the small sample size and small effect size on officer empathy means results should be treated with caution.

No Illusions: Offenders and Organizational Change in Maryland’s Proactive Community Supervision Efforts

(Taxman, 2008, United States) Method Treatment and control groups were identified each comprising 274 randomly selected offenders matched on key variables. Offenders were moderate-high risk, with a mandatory supervision order of six months or more during 2004. The treatment group was managed by officers who were trained in risk needs responsivity (RNR), motivational interviewing and associated skills, and pro social communication. Performance measures and quality control were also implemented to ensure adherence to evidence based supervision principles and provide feedback to staff which could be used to improve. Outcomes measured included re-arrest and breach. Results Community Corrections Officers who used the new model, adhered to RNR, and incorporated cognitive behavioural methods in interviews with the focus on facilitating offender change rather than referral had a direct and significant impact on reduction in re-arrest rates (12%) and technical breaches (6.3%) for offenders. During the observation period, 30% of offenders supervised according to evidence based supervision guidelines reoffended compared with 42% of the comparison group. Comments This study provides further evidence for the potential effectiveness of the supervising officer. It also adds performance measures and qualitative review to ensure integrity of the supervision provided. Particularly given that the integrity of supervision (or lack thereof) can mean the difference between significant reductions in reoffending and no change at all, critical review and performance measures provided in a constructive manner should not be seen as undermining the professionalism of staff but rather as a tool for enhancing it.

5

Research and Literature

Keeping them off the corner: how probation officers steer offenders away from crime opportunities (Miller, Copeland and Sullivan, 2015, US) Method 40 interviews between Probation Officers and offenders were analysed according to strategies used by officers to steer probationers away from day-to–day crime opportunities using Opportunity-Focussed Supervision (OFS), a model based around environmental crime factors.

Results Officers concentrated on unstructured time; time spent at crime prone places or with associates in ways that could encourage crime. Awareness of these opportunities increased as the officer spent more time with the probationer. Time limits, directions not to associate and directions to attend activities were strategies used by officers to encourage offenders away from crime opportunities. Secondary tools included identifying and engaging pro social influences. Getting to know the probationer and knowledge of what to avoid was based on analysis of the individual case rather than through a systematic analysis of crime data.

Comments

Much of the Opportunity-Focussed Supervision (OFS) overlaps with other evidence based practice such as RNR and cognitive behavioural therapy programs and social learning strategies. The qualitative surveys do not offer any greater insight into reduction in recidivism other than to note that associates, places and decision making by the offender can affect success on an order. Nonetheless the awareness of environmental and social triggers can be an important component of understanding and managing risk.

Utilizing Behavioural Interventions to Improve Supervision Outcomes in Community-Based Corrections (Wodhal, Garland, Culhane and McCarty, 2011, US) Method Records associated with a sample of 283 offenders supervised between 2000 and 2003 were reviewed to identify the use of sanctions and rewards. These included verbal reprimand / praise and reinforcement, as well as measures such as time in custody and reduction of time for good behaviour. Outcome measures were focused on successful completion.

Results Rewards were more effective than sanctions in achieving behaviour change; however the most effective approach was the combined use of rewards and sanctions. The ideal ratio was four rewards to every sanction, although higher rates were just as effective. This was more than twice as effective as the use of sanctions alone, and one and a half times as effective as the use of rewards alone.

Comments

Although the sanctions and rewards in this study included variables that cannot be applied on many of the orders managed in NSW, one of the most commonly used methods to both reward and sanction was verbal feedback from the supervising officer. As a basic learning principle, immediate feedback is more effective than delayed. An officer providing immediate feedback, even if just via a verbal warning or praise, is likely to be much more effective in achieving behaviour change than a more significant reward or sanction which is delayed (eg early termination, waiting for a warning from SPA, or breach outcome from the court). The NSW Drug Court evaluation found that acknowledging positive progress through simple applause was often more effective and significant to offenders that giving more tangible rewards such as movie tickets.

Discussion One of the most effective interventions for reducing risk of reoffending can be the Community Corrections officer. However as these and other articles (in particular the Black Box and STICS articles outlined in the Jul-Sep 2014 edition) highlight, this is only the case where evidence based techniques are employed. Simply sitting down with an offender or referring them to other service providers is by itself not effective; interviews must be focused on factors related to offending, in particular offence related attitudes and beliefs, and use techniques such as motivational interviewing, pro social modelling and reinforcement. Using offence mapping early on in supervision can provide a sound basis for this, by exploring the offence in a way that gives both the officer and offender a common understanding of what the risk factors are, and therefore what will be discussed over subsequent supervision interviews. The appropriate and balanced use of rewards and sanctions is also highlighted in the research but it is worth emphasising that these don’t need to be large events such as return to custody or reductions in reporting frequency. Simple verbal or written feedback can work to both praise and congratulate the offender on progress, and confront them appropriately when they transgress. The key benefit of this approach to rewards and sanctions is that it can be used at every interview, providing an immediate feedback response to both positive and negative attitudes and behaviours.

6

In Practice

Interviews as intervention Over the past three months, Community Corrections Refresher workshops have been convened across the state for all Community Corrections officers. The training focussed on the skills that underpin Risk, Need, Responsivity evidence based practices and complement the service delivery standards. These skills comprise accurate risk assessments of offenders, development of plans, and engagement with offenders to promote behavioural change. Effective practice skills including Motivational Interviewing can have a direct positive effect on a reduction in re-offence rates for supervised offenders, especially in the higher risk categories. Reductions of up to 47% are possible simply by changing how interviews are conducted, but only if the interview focuses on key criminogenic factors, in particular attitude. Structuring interview sessions with offenders that focus on the “Big Four” factors of anti-social behaviour has the greatest impact on reduction in recidivism. These factors are all strongly correlated with anti-social attitudes and beliefs, including associating with peers who are themselves anti-social. The impact of attitude on reoffending is almost twice as significant as more ‘obvious’ factors such as drug and alcohol abuse. This is one reason why the Community Corrections officer can have such a profound impact when targeting attitudes.

Using Motivational Interviewing (MI) Motivational Interviewing (MI) is a style that works to facilitate and engage intrinsic motivation within an individual to promote behaviour change. It is a goal-oriented, client-centred approach for eliciting behaviour change by helping individuals explore and resolve ambivalence. MI does not need to take any more time to use as it is a skill that can be used both in short interactions with offenders as well as lengthy interviews.

MI employs four basic interaction skills:

ask open questions, let the offender have their say

provide affirmations and positive feedback

use reflective listening

periodically provide summary statements

The 5 principles of MI are to:

Roll with resistance

Express empathy (but don’t sympathise)

Avoid arguments

Develop discrepancies and highlight inconsistencies

Support self-efficacy

Addressing different types of resistant offender Reluctant; The individual lacks knowledge about the problem or personal impact that the behaviour can have and thus does not consider change necessary. Reluctant offenders can often respond well to sensitive feedback about how the behaviour is actually affecting their lives.

Rebellious: The individual is afraid of losing control over their lives and have a large investment in their choices. Strive to shift this energy into making more positive choices for themselves. Putting emphasis on personal control can work well.

Resigned: The individual feels hopeless and overwhelmed. They may have been in treatment many times before or have tried repeatedly to quit on their own. Promote self-efficacy to help regain hope, focus on small achievements, and use failures to learn.

Rationalisers: The individual has all the answers. They may express the idea that the behaviour may be a problem for others, but not for them. Work through discrepancies in what they say. Don’t discount any benefits they may get from the behaviour, but weigh them against the cost.

Getting Ready for Change

Use open questions

Listen for change talk

Support self-sufficiency

Deploy discrepancy

Ready for Change

Support self-sufficiency

Explore confidence and priorities

Build confidence and resilience

Be patient

Changing

Affirm efforts to change

Explore options and services

Develop achievable goals

Provide monitoring and support

Maintenance

Support behaviour change

Discuss hurdles, be realistic

Support self-sufficiency

Reinforce confidence

Discuss plans for possible relapse

After Relapse

Build confidence

Discuss what has been learnt

Strategies for next time

Reframe the situation as learning experience and empathise

7

In Practice

What might a case plan with supervision as an intervention look like?

Reporting to the office is not just to ‘meet service delivery standards’. The interaction with an offender can be one of the most powerful interventions in reducing reoffending, but only if it has clearly defined objectives to be achieved. The purpose of reporting should therefore be reflected clearly in the case plan. Relate this step to the process of effecting change, and articulate the strategies that will be used. An example of how this might look is provided below.

For brevity, this example doesn’t include the factors – which will provide important information on what his high risk triggers look like. It identifies some of values the offender has identified as important to him which may be useful in moving the offender toward change (ie he values his children and autonomy). It also anticipates what steps will be taken once the offender becomes more cooperative. The specific skills to be used in each interview, such as motivational interactions, are not detailed as how these are used will depend on how the offender presents at each interview. A clear picture of the directions for interview is more important to ensure the interview meets supervision goals. Remember that a single step can address multiple factors. Supervision interviews could be targeted to address several criminogenic needs, particularly where those needs are closely related to each other.

Offence Mapping

Offences don’t “just happen”. Many factors can contribute to offending behaviour, but it is essential to understand how these work to cause offending for each individual. Many people have relationship breakdowns, lose their jobs, experience disadvantage or abuse substances without becoming violent, stealing, or committing other offences. Exploring how and why an individual offender reacts in an anti-social manner to these situations is critical in developing strategies that place the offender in control of their actions and give them pro social alternatives. Awareness of their offence cycle is a protective factor which can be increased by exploring the offending behaviour in an offence map.

Build-up What happened in the 24-48 hours leading up to the offence?

The offence Who was there, what happened, what the offender did, thought and felt.

Afterwards How did they react, what did they feel, why did they respond that way

Use visual tools such as a whiteboard where available to create a timeline of the offender’s responses. At each key point in the story identify what the offender was thinking and feeling, and link each behaviour to the next. Once this is complete, look at the offender’s broader history, in particular where there is a pattern of behaviours, relationships or environments that might enable the offence cycle to arise.

Lifestyle / Background Ongoing anti-social behaviours or attitudes eg towards other people, drug use.

High Risk Situations What situations often lead to offending eg stressed, conflict with others, peers.

Completing an offence map with an offender early in their order provides the supervising officer with an opportunity to build rapport, utilise motivational interviewing skills and centre case plan objectives on issues articulated by the offender themselves. Risk factors identified in the offence map can provide a prompt in interviews throughout supervision to keep them focused on offence related needs, and help in spotting circumstances that might indicate increased risk.

8

Statistical Trends

Community population As at 1 June 2015 Male Female Total**

Total offenders* 14,135 2,395 16,564

Active offenders only* 11,930 2,041 13,995 Court based parole 2110 253 2363

SPA parole 1335 79 1415

S9 4295 957 5267

S10 93 44 139

S12 1442 246 1688

Bail supervision 57 6 74

Intensive correction order 1161 159 1322

Community service order 2147 363 2513

Home detention 71 15 86

Drug court 195 57 252

All other (eg federal recog, interstate) 420 61 483

Total supervision Total community service work

*Total offenders is the count used in the Offender Population Report, and counts all orders active in OIMS, including suspensions, expired orders, and orders that have not yet commenced. Active offenders excludes these orders. Note that some offenders may have multiple orders, and are counted once in each category, and once in the overall total. **Includes a small number of offenders where gender has not yet been recorded.

Institutional population As at 1 June 2015 Male Female Total

Total offenders in custody* 10,926 862 11,788 Sentenced 7493 556 8049

Remand 3398 301 3699

*All offenders in custody, including those with no Community Corrections contact

Reports Average reports per month, July 2014 to June 2015 Total

Court advice Full pre-sentence 7849

Short pre-sentence 10804

ICO assessment 2359

HD assessment 275

Pre release Full pre release 1501

Supplementary 862

9

Statistical Trends Offender Management Activity in the Community Contact levels for supervised offenders are determined by the Service Delivery Standards and the offender’s assessed level of risk. The data below shows total offender contacts, by type, in 2015 as recorded in case notes. Most contacts are by Community Corrections Officers (CCOs) but also include activities undertaken by Client Service Officers and other roles, whilst program activities are primarily provided by staff from Offender Services and Programs.

In 2014, including field visits Community Corrections Officers had over 300,000 face to face contacts with offenders in the Community each year in relation to supervision, community service and court assessments. In addition, there were over 240,000 contacts established with offenders via phone.

Practice Guides The large number of contacts with offenders underscores the potential that the Community Corrections Officer has to effect behavioural change and reduce reoffending. Contact with a CCO in the community occurs at over 10 times the frequency of program sessions. This is one reason that Community Corrections will be introducing practice guides as a tool to assist CCOs in their one to one work with offenders. An example of an early draft of one of these guides was included in recent refresher training, and examples have been sent out to several locations for testing and feedback. Further development work is continuing to refine the exercises based on this feedback, and at this stage it is anticipated that the guides will be finalised in early 2016. The practice guides will support the work already being undertaken by many CCOs, by providing exercises and worksheets that can be used to assist in structuring and implementing behaviour change strategies using evidence based techniques. The exercises will be brief, and assist officers to implement intervention strategies in a relatively short interview. They have been developed in conjunction with Offender Services & Programs, and are linked to the content and philosophies of the EQUIPS programs. Basing the guides on the content of the EQUIPS program will have the additional benefit of maximising consistency of the messages being provided between supervision and programs. Although based around EQUIPS these will provide an additional tool to be used where appropriate with all supervised offenders whether they are undertaking programs or not. Similar tools are currently used in other jurisdictions and by Juvenile Justice.

10

From the Field A nudge in the right direction - using SMS to motivate offenders Senior Community Corrections Officer Nicola Kidston was nominated by a colleague for her success in using the Message Media SMS service to improve program delivery and offender engagement. Nicola identified a need for programs in Nyngan, a remote community 165km west of Dubbo. With these large distances CSNSW programs were not available so with the assistance of the local Aboriginal Client Service Officer, Guy Naden, she co-ordinated a 2 day anger management program to be delivered by an appropriate local Indigenous service provider. To try and maximise attendance, Nicola utilised the new SMS text messaging system to send encouraging reminders to the offenders both early the night before and on the morning of the program. 10 offenders were scheduled to attend, and 11 showed up (including one offender who was not expected but messaged just in case), with all of them successfully completing. Nicola and Guy have also been using the text messaging to assist with managing individual offenders with poor reporting histories. One particular medium-high risk Aboriginal man who was about to be breached for failure to maintain contact has started reporting consistently since she commenced using SMS to remind him of appointments. Similarly, other staff at Dubbo office have also begun using the tool to improve program attendance and completion, and as a means of providing messages of positive reinforcement particularly for individuals who are not always comfortable communicating in face to face interaction.

Managing grief in relapse prevention

Chris Hughes at the Newcastle Drug Court team was nominated by a colleague for his approach to dealing with an offender who had recently experienced the loss of his mother. This unexpected event triggered significant grief for the offender, and was identified as a high risk period for relapse into drug use. Chris responded in a positive and supportive manner, working in conjunction with the offender’s family and partner to motivate him to remain on track despite a lapse to cannabis and statements by the offender that he thought he might be better returning to custody to remain abstinent. Managing the situation included multiple home visits and contacts with the offender’s family, and working closely with other service providers to coordinate responses. In his interactions with the offender Chris used techniques in interview such as short term goal setting to try and motivate the offender by making success seem achievable despite his situation. Recognising that the reaction to his mother’s death was negatively impacting the offender’s responsivity to intervention, Chris related these goals back to how she might have wanted him to act in order to maintain engagement. The offender has managed to stay in the community and has since stabilised and obtained full time employment with an employer who has been supportive of assisting the offender to remain engaged with the Drug Court program. Chris is also a member of the Hunter Homlessness Connect Team, trying to reduce homelessness in the Hunter Region.

Both Nicola and Chris will receive a $25 book voucher, awarded by the Assistant Commissioner. If you would like to make a submission to show an example of your work or that of a colleague that may assist in developing skills or knowledge, e-mail jason.hainsworth@dcs.nsw.gov.au with the subject line of ‘newsletter’.

11

From the Field

Rationalisation or reluctance?

Based on an interview with an offender who had recently relapsed.

I am concerned that you will start offending again to support your drug use.

. The drugs are not an issue. My dole money covers them.

It’s the food, rent, and all the other bills that I can’t afford.

Consider what sort of attitudes might be underpinning the offender’s thinking, and how the CCO could begin to address these. Also think about what other questions might help to further elicit whether the offender is deliberately rationalising their behaviour, or lacks insight and is demonstrating reluctance.

Interview questions that can assist with supervision Submitted by Grahame Chaseling, Coffs Harbour Community Corrections Adapted from ‘Staff Survey – Relationships for Effective Supervision’, originally published in the Academy journal (AJCSD) At initial contacts engage the offender by using open questions such as;

“How did you come to be involved in the offence?” “What were you thinking about at the time?”, “What have you thought about since?”

Listen attentively and draw the story out until you understand their thinking, behaviour and experience. Do not judge, but also avoid affirmation of their behaviour or thinking. This is consistent with a Socratic engagement style using empathy and objectivity, as opposed to sympathy or advocacy. Once their story is out, questions might include;

“Notwithstanding what you were thinking about at the time of the offence, what have you thought about since your arrest?”, or “Which bits do you feel able to accept responsibility for?”

Move into introducing issues of personal responsibility, also laying foundations for supporting commitment and ownership of supervision outcomes;

“In order for you to see supervision as meaningful, it is important for me to understand how you came to be here, and what would help you to look back on supervision as having been a positive experience”.

“Thinking about what might have made a difference to prevent your offence, what might a good supervision outcome look like for you?”

As an example, some variations that might be useful in domestic violence matters may include;

“When you and your partner got together ten years ago, my guess would be that facing Court on these charges was not the outcome you were looking for. What did you want your relationship to be like then?”

“What do you think a good supervision outcome might look like to your partner / children?”

12

From the Field

Community Resources - Patchwork Patchwork is an online application that has been commissioned by the Department of Family and Community Services (FaCS). It is a contact directory to find and get in touch with clients, agencies and workers. Case workers or CCOs can quickly and easily connect to new clients and build a team that works with the client. The experience of FaCS in using the tool in a pilot roll out has been very positive to date, and Community Corrections is looking at utilising it. It offers time saving potential by linking all agencies, connecting directly to the individual case worker rather than the agency, and being able to access everyone at once through online communication. Patchwork does require some commitment at the local level to get established. It is necessary to engage with other service providers and get them on board to use the system, as well as ensuring that the local office is using the system appropriately so that information in it is up to date and comprehensive. Example A CCO is supervising a high risk offender for domestic violence offences who is subject to a Family Court order limiting contact with his children, he has drug and alcohol issues and a current housing application.

Patchwork would allow the CCO to log on to an online application,

Invite FaCS child protection worker, Housing NSW, the area health service and any other relevant providers to join a group focussed on this client and share information.

Access up to date information on the most relevant contact person at each agency and their details;

Contact and share information as per usual via phone and e-mail;

Simultaneously contact all associated providers if needed;

Create or receive alerts to / from any service provider in relation to the offender which will alert everyone associated with the offender if a significant event occurs

How to register? Community Corrections is looking for willing participants to trial use of this service in a limited number of locations prior to any wider rollout. If there is interest at your location please speak with your manager and ask them to send an email to jason.hainsworth@dcs.nsw.gov.au. If sufficient interest is generated in your area logins will be arranged. As part of the trial, you will be contacted from time to time by a project officer.

13

Community Corrections Offices

Leichhardt Location Leichhardt Community Corrections is located in the inner western suburbs of Sydney. The office covers approximately 30 suburbs with a diverse range of demographics including Alexandra, Annandale, Balmain, Beaconsfield, Birchgrove, Camperdown, Chippendale, Darlington, Dulwich Hill, Enmore, Erskineville, Forest Lodge, Glebe, Hurlstone Park, Leichhardt, Lewisham, Lilyfield, Marrickville, Newtown, Petersham, Redfern, Rozelle, St Peters, Stanmore, Sydenham, Tempe, Waterloo and Zetland. Staff Manager – Nicole Cleary Unit leaders x 3 Community Corrections Officer x 17 Psychologist x 1 Aboriginal Client Service Officers x 2 Administration staff x 4 Community Service team x 2

Offenders Leichhardt office manages over 500 offenders per month on a variety of orders/assessments including the completion of more than 60 pre sentence and court duty reports per month.

Leichhardt office supervises a high number of offenders with complex needs and a range of challenging behaviours, including increased levels of mental health, drug and alcohol addiction, transience and Aboriginal offenders.

Major issues and challenges The key challenge for Leichhardt office is servicing clients in crisis. The inner city areas in particular have a high representation of offenders with chronic mental health, drug and alcohol addictions, and challenges such as lack of family support and stable accommodation. This provides a highly dynamic work environment where long term planning with offenders who live day to day can be especially challenging. The district covered by Leichhardt Community Corrections includes Nunyara COSP, numerous boarding houses, the Haymarket Centre, and three of the Transitional Supported Accommodation funded services including Rainbow Lodge, Glebe House and Guthrie House and other rehabilitation centres such as WHOs in Rozelle. With high levels of transience and homelessness, Leichhardt accepts a significant amount of offenders placed in temporary accommodation with drug summit funding and works with these offenders to find stable and longer term accommodation options in the community. Local initiatives and achievements Through the funded partnerships program Leichhardt office administers the placement of offenders at Rainbow Lodge, Guthrie House, Glebe House and manages case management placements through CRC. The coordination of these services has been challenging within the broader context of the complex offender demographic, but provides valuable services to offenders in need. The goals and aspirations of Leichhardt Community Corrections are to provide a quality service to clients that enables effective reintegration into the community and to ensure an increased level of community safety and to enable us to provide quality culturally appropriate services. Leichhardt office continues to support and to offer a variety of programs to offenders, this includes fostering and maintaining working relationships with key stakeholders and service providers in the area. Staff at Leichhardt office endeavour to encourage one another by creating a harmonious and supportive work environment.

14

Community Corrections Offices

Dubbo Location Dubbo is located some 400 kms west of Sydney. It is a large inland city which boasts a population of 48,000. The name Dubbo comes from the Wiradjuri word meaning ‘red ochre’. Dubbo Community Corrections covers the communities of Nyngan, Warren, Gilgandra, Dunedoo and Narromine, as well as other towns accessed from these regional centres. Staff Manager - Narelle Jeffrey Unit Leaders x 2 CCO’s/Case Managers x 10 ACSO x 2 Administrative assistants x 2 CSO AA x 1 Offenders Dubbo Community Corrections manages all types of orders including Good Behaviour Bonds, Home Detention, Electronic Monitoring, Parole and Community Service orders. Offender numbers subject to supervision can fluctuate; however on average Dubbo has approximately 350 to 400 offenders under supervision at any time. Presently, Dubbo has high numbers of offenders subject to Good Behaviour Bonds which illustrates the most common sentencing preference from the regional courts. Most orders are conditioned for intervention to address Domestic Violence and substance abuse issues. The main offence types are offences relating to substance issues (Break and Enter, Stealing, Goods in Custody) to Assaults on person (non-DV) and Domestic Violence offences. Dubbo has a disproportionate number of Aboriginal offenders subject to supervision. Many offenders identify as belonging to different Aboriginal nations. Over the past several years, there has been a steady increase in the relocation of families from remote communities to Dubbo.

Major issues and challenges Dubbo is a large regionally positioned office in Western NSW. The Aboriginal nation is the Wiradjuri nation. Dubbo is regarded as the ‘Hub of West’ due to the service provision offered from the city to more remote western communities, this often results in offenders from more western locations visiting the city or temporarily re-settling in Dubbo. This can see Dubbo supervision numbers swelling throughout the year, dependent upon sporting and other community events occurring within the city. Access to services to target substance abuse/dependency issues is limited within the Dubbo area. Considerable wait periods exist for offenders seeking access to mainstream counselling services or admission to full time residential rehabilitation services. While Dubbo Community Corrections has a well-developed relationship with health and community services who provide support and assistance to those struggling with dependency/addiction issues, resourcing constraints can impede referral pathways. Dubbo Community Corrections offers late night reporting each week, usually coinciding with program facilitation, and performs weekly after-hours and weekend visits to identified higher risk offenders. Local initiatives and achievements Dubbo Community Corrections has contributed to the beatification of the Dubbo community through the Community Service Scheme. Dubbo has had a long standing Community Service Consultation Committee which meets monthly at the Dubbo office. Representatives from a wide range of agencies and organisations have membership on this committee and it is from here that decisions in relation to work projects are discussed and prioritised. Currently the committee comprises of representatives from West Dubbo Rotary, Lions, Scouts, CWA Talbragar, Dubbo and Wongarbon branches, Dubbo Rescue Squad, Rawsonville Hall and Rawsonville Pony Club to name a few. In addition Dubbo has long standing partnerships with Dubbo City Council and Taronga Western Plains Zoo who have provided work placements for offenders for over a decade. In 2014, Dubbo Community Corrections completed work projects to the value of $156, 000 for the benefit of the local community. In addition to labouring work opportunities for offenders, Dubbo Community Corrections manage a supervised work group with assistance from members of the CWA who teach offenders to knit and crotchet. Offenders with medical limitations or specialist needs are still able to fulfil their work obligations by attending the knitting program. This program has seen the completion of many knee rugs which are dispersed through Rotary to local and international aid efforts, as well as the production of beanies for premature babies. Dubbo Community Corrections is always eager to receive donations of wool (8 ply acrylic is preferable) in order to continue this worthwhile project.

15

Standards and KPIs

Overview of Standards and KPIs The Standards for Community Operations (the ‘Standards’) and Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) were first developed in 2012 to assist managers and staff to enhance quality service delivery to offenders in the community. They also form the basis for assessment during reviews undertaken by the Operational Performance Review Branch. Standards and KPIs are grouped into six key areas, including Assessment and Planning, Supervision, Reports, Community Service Work, Administration and Record Keeping, and Office Management. The Standards are outcome focused and are intended to assist staff in moving away from process driven work practices to a culture of contemplating why they are performing a task, and what they are trying to achieve. The Standards have been developed to allow scope for personal work practices and professional judgement and do not generally provide a prescriptive framework for offender management. In some areas such prescription may however be given within policy. The Standards and KPIs should be viewed as complementary measures of performance, with common outcomes. Below is an overview of the Standards and KPIs relating to verification of information. The full Standards documents provide more detail regarding the purpose and evaluation of the Standards, and can be found online via the Community Corrections homepage.

Initial Interviews

Outcome Interviews with offenders are directed towards the development and then implementation of the case plan, with a clear

understanding held between the offender and officer of their respective roles and responsibilities. Benefits

- The supervision of an offender which is driven by a thorough and verified risk assessment and case plan represents the most effective and accountable management strategy for reducing reoffending.

- Adhering to the approved case plan provides integrity and accountability to case management decisions and activities.

- Supporting the offender to make lifestyle changes within offence related domains contributes to reducing their risk of re-offending.

- Promoting changes in offence related attitudes and beliefs has been shown to be one of the most effective means of reducing risks associated with offending.

Risks - Failure to manage risk factors related to offending behaviours is unlikely to contribute to any reduction in re-

offending. - Supervision which is primarily focused on order compliance may be associated with increased recidivism.

- Failure to properly manage an offender in an accountable manner may result in adverse consequences to the community and to the organisation.

Standards 2.2.S.1.1 The purpose and requirements of the legal order are explained to the offender at the earliest opportunity. 2.2.S.1.2 Relevant information is gathered early on to inform and drive supervision 2.2.S.2.1 Continuity of offender management is maintained during supervision 2.2.S.2.2 Offender interviews are targeted towards implementation of the case plan.

KPIs 2.2.K.1.2 Face to face contact occurs within supervision standards

16

General Information

Joined Up Justice After a hiatus of around 2 years due to limited funding, there has been significant development on the Joined Up Justice project over the last few months. The project will enable court data to be sent instantly into OIMS, ultimately removing the need to register orders and requests or receive them via e-mail or fax. The work undertaken in the last few months has involved Community Corrections working closely with Sentence Administration, Courts and Tribunal Services, and Syscon on both technical elements to ensure systems are working properly, as well as resolving business rules to support the new processes. It is anticipated at this stage that the new system could be active as early as September 2015, however to minimise the risk of error changes will be implemented slowly and the initial rollout will involve minimal impact on current processes. Further information will be provided as the details of the new system are finalised.

Community Corrections / PPOA Conference CSNSW, in collaboration with the NSW Probation and Parole Officers Association (PPOA), is convening a two day staff development seminar for Community Corrections on 15 -16 October 2015. The theme for the event is Defining the Role of Community Corrections in 2015 and Beyond. This theme will enable field and academic experts to explore the complex role and inaccuracies in the perception of conflict between achieving community protection and utilising evidence based practice. Speakers will include Dr Guy Bourgon, Professor Chris Trotter, Dr Don Weatherburn, the Honorable James Wood, and Professor James Ogloff. The idea for the seminar stemmed from feedback provided in a state wide staff survey of Community Corrections staff in September 2014 and through quarterly consultation meetings with the PPOA. The speakers will be filmed and able to be viewed by staff unable to attend the two day seminar and the event will culminate in the 40th Anniversary formal dinner celebration of the PPOA.

New Legislation On 29 May 2015, His Excellency the Governor approved a variation of the proclamation of the Kariong Juvenile Correctional Centre to change its name to the Kariong Correctional Centre. Kariong is to become a specialist correctional centre tasked with reducing re-offending by young adult males, with a priority for Aboriginal offenders. On 29 May 2015, the revocation of the proclamation of the Campbelltown COSP as a residential facility under the Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (CAS Act) was approved by His Excellency the Governor. Under the CAS Act, residential facilities must be managed by a person employed under the Government Sector Employment Act 2013. This precludes a private operator from managing residential facilities. As part of the Funded Partnership Initiative, management of the Campbelltown COSP site is being outsourced to a private or not-for-profit organisation. The proclamation of the COSP as a residential facility must therefore be revoked to allow this to occur.

Recent Memoranda 2015/06 Quarterly performance reporting requirements 2015/07 Update to institutional workload model 2015/08 The working with children check and community service workers 2015/09 Sending reports to court via email 2015/10 Staff survey: Quality Service Delivery in Community Corrections 2015/11 Addition of Section E: Extended Supervision Orders to the Community Corrections Policy and Procedures Manual 2015/12 Urinalysis drug screening 2015/13 Format of Case Numbers and Change IDs for entry into OIMS

17

General Information

Probation and Parole Officers Association The Probation and Parole Officers Association meets on a quarterly basis with Community Corrections senior management to champion the aims of professional development for all Community Corrections staff. As a result of this ongoing, positive engagement, senior management approached the PPOA with the prospect of collaborating to provide a two day staff development seminar in place of the originally planned one day development day. The PPOA has agreed to this exciting collaboration and is working closely with CSNSW to develop a program of international and national field and academic experts to present on the theme of Defining the Role of Community Corrections in 2015 and Beyond. The reasons why PPOA NSW has agreed to collaborate with CSNSW for this two day seminar are:

- the opportunity to be involved in planning, influencing and delivering a professional development event which

would at this stage be outside the capacity of PPOA alone

- the opportunity for increased representation from regional members to attend, engage and benefit from a two day seminar

- the opportunity to invite international, as well as interstate, academic and field experts to speak - in acknowledgement that PACCOA will not be convening a national conference this year.

The staff development seminar will be held at Rydges, World Square on Thursday and Friday 15-16 October 2015. CSNSW is seeking equal representation from regional and metro locations and it is expected that with provision for travel and accommodation for regional staff, many of the regional members will endeavour to attend this event. In the event that some PPOA members miss out on the first round of selections in their locations but are still keen to attend, contact can be made with Vice President PPOA NSW, ingrid.pedersen@dcs.nsw.gov.au. It must be noted that operational requirements at each Community Corrections Office will need to be maintained. The previously announced PPOA 40th Anniversary dinner has been relocated to the Menzies Hotel 14 Carrington Street, Sydney on the evening of Friday 16 October 2015. There will be a formal dinner with awards and entertainment from 6pm – 11:30pm. More information will be sent to members upon finalisation of the dinner arrangements and accommodation rates. Nominations will be sought within the coming months for 1st year officer award and the Alan Brush award. Details of the criteria are available by emailing julie.cannon@dcs.nsw.gov.au Further to the above event, the partnership between PPOA NSW members and the University of Western Sydney Social Science faculty is underway. Lectures are being recorded in preparation for second semester tutorials in the undergraduate course unit on community corrections. Members who expressed an interest in this opportunity are being engaged as tutors at various UWS campus.

For more details please visit www.ppoansw.com.au, and follow us on Facebook for updates.

Public Service Association The Community Corrections (Vocational Branch) Advisory Group met with the Minister for Corrections on 6 May 2015, which was a great opportunity to discuss issues pertaining to Community Corrections including staffing, resources and the positive work done by Community Corrections. The Community Corrections (Vocational Branch) Advisory Group met with Community Corrections Senior Management on 18 June 2015. The next meeting is scheduled for 9 September 2015.

18

Contacts

Community Corrections Offices Albury (02) 6058-8100 Armidale (02) 6772-2073 Bankstown (02) 9707-2144 Batemans Bay (02) 4472-4987 Bathurst (02) 6332-2737 Bega (02) 6492-3144 Blacktown (02) 9854-5250 Bourke (02) 6870-8000 Bowral (02) 4861-3777 Broken Hill (08) 8082-3000 Burwood (02) 8775-4800 Campbelltown (02) 8796 1900 Casino (02) 6662-4311 Cessnock (02) 4991-1702 City (02) 9265-7500 City - court duty (02) 9287-7118 Coffs Harbour (02) 6652-6933 Cooma (02) 6452-1903 Coonamble (02) 6822-1988 Dee Why (02) 9982-7266 Dubbo (02) 6883-5000 Fairfield (02) 8717-4600 Forbes (02) 6851-9900 Glen Innes (02) 6732-2644 Gosford (02) 4324-3744 Goulburn (02) 4824-2299 Grafton (02) 6643-2585 Griffith (02) 6964-2242 Gunnedah (02) 6742-5220 Hornsby (02) 9479-2100 Hurstville (02) 9579-6200 Inverell (02) 6721-0309 Kempsey (02) 6561-3100 Lake Macquarie (02) 4956-5533 Leichhardt (02) 9508-2500 Lismore (02) 6623-7200 Lithgow (02) 6352-1555 Liverpool (02) 9612-0800 Long Bay Parole Unit (02) 9289-2172 Maitland (02) 4933-4333 Moree (02) 6750-7800 Mt. Druitt (02) 8886-6000 Muswellbrook (02) 6549-0600 Newcastle (02) 4918-7998 Nowra (02) 4424-6700 Orange (02) 6361-4666 Parramatta (02) 9685-2666 Penrith (02) 4777-8400 Port Macquarie (02) 6583-6677

Queanbeyan (02) 6229-7500 Silverwater (02) 9289-5945 Sutherland (02) 9521-3544 Tamworth (02) 6763-3700 Taree (02) 6552-7599 Tumut (02) 6947-4104 Wagga Wagga (02) 6932-7400 Wellington (02) 6845-4311 Windsor (02) 4571-6000 Wollongong (02) 4267-6500 Wyong (02) 4355-7700 Young (02) 6382-3599

Other Academy (02) 9804-5444 Balund-A (02) 6660-8600 Child Protection child.protection@dcs.nsw.gov.au ESO team (02) 9854-5200 IC&T helpdesk (02) 8346-1245 Miruma (02) 4993-2212 Nunyara COSP (02) 9289-2950 OPRB (Standards/KPIs) (02) 8346 1403 Policy Unit comcor.policy@dcs.nsw.gov.au Statewide Disabilities sds@dcs.nsw.gov.au Staff Support 1300 363 202 StaffSupport@dcs.nsw.gov.au