normal dot (rev02 january 2009) · help them do that. the ultimate aim is to help reintegrate women...

Job number ; Title of document : Draft status 1

February 2015

Mentoring Service Final report

Evaluation - Final report - February 2015 1

Contents

Executive Summary ...................................................................................................... 2

1 Background and Methodology................................................................................ 6

1.1 Background ............................................................................................................................... 6

1.2 Aims of Shine ............................................................................................................................. 6

1.3 Aims of the evaluation .............................................................................................................. 7

1.4 Methods ..................................................................................................................................... 7

2 Participation ............................................................................................................. 8

2.1 What was the size of the original target group? ...................................................................... 8

2.2 Achieved levels of participation............................................................................................... 8

2.3 Key findings on participation .................................................................................................. 10

3 Activities ................................................................................................................. 11

3.1 Assessment .............................................................................................................................. 11

3.2 Matching .................................................................................................................................. 12

3.3 What is mentoring? ................................................................................................................. 12

3.4 Controlled exits ....................................................................................................................... 19

3.5 Do mentors feel equipped to deliver the activities to a high standard? .............................. 20

3.6 Key findings on activities ........................................................................................................ 22

3.7 Areas for action/improvement ............................................................................................... 23

4 Outcomes ............................................................................................................... 24

4.1 Progress against specific outcomes ....................................................................................... 24

4.4 .................................................................................................. 39

4.5 ................................................................................................. 42

4.6 Key findings on outcomes ....................................................................................................... 44

5 Engagement ........................................................................................................... 45

5.1 Factors facilitating engagement ............................................................................................ 45

5.2 Reasons for disengagement ................................................................................................... 47

5.3 What might improve engagement? ........................................................................................ 47

5.4 Key findings on engagement .................................................................................................. 48


Executive Summary

Background

Shine is a Public Social Partnership which provides a one-to-one mentoring service for

women who offend serving short-term prison sentences, on remand or subject to

Community Payback Orders at high risk of custody. The service is designed to empower

women to identify and achieve their goals - and to engage with other services which can

help them do that. The ultimate aim is to help reintegrate women who offend back into the

community and reduce reoffending.

The Scottish Government Reducing Reoffending Change Fund provided funding for the

design and development of the service (in 2012) and for the running of the service from

April 2013 to March 2017. Beyond that, Shine will require to secure funding from

elsewhere.

Evaluation aims and methods

Shine commissioned Ipsos MORI Scotland to undertake an independent evaluation of the

service. The aims were to evaluate: the levels of participation in the service; whether the

activities in the service logic model had been undertaken as planned and whether

mentors felt equipped to deliver the activities to a high standard; progress against short

and medium term outcomes. is

reasons for disengagement and what might increase engagement.

The evaluation was conducted between July 2014 and January 2015 and was based on

monitoring data provided by Shine and depth interviews with mentees, mentors and

referrers.

Participation

meet Shi target of 720 women per year. Over the first 20 months, there has been an

average of 727 referrals per year.

target of 60% of women who engage in prison continuing to engage in following

release has been met: 60% of women who engaged in prison continued to engage in the

community for 2 months or more.

46% of mentees progressed to a planned exit. This is somewhat short of 60%

target. However, we would expect the proportion of planned exits to increase over time as

cases with unplanned exits were more likely to have closed by August 2014.


Mentoring activities: aspects working well

Assessment and matching is working well.

One of the main strengths of the service is that it is personalised and tailored to the needs

and goals of the individual mentee. Because of this personalisation, activities vary

considerably from case to case but the following qualities, skills and behaviours were key

to building relationships and were consistently demonstrated by mentors:

Regular contact

Being non-judgmental

Being easy-going

Being a relaxing, calming influence

Listening

Encouraging the mentee to set goals

Encouraging mentees to think through consequences

Praising and building self-esteem

Challenging

Being persistent

Caring

Encouraging engagement with other services.

a mentor. Most mentors were satisfied with the level and quality of training they had

received.

Mentoring activities: areas for action/improvement

Provide feedback and guidance to referrers on the level of detail required in referral

forms.

Provide on-going guidance and advice on the extent to which mentors should be

providing intensive support.

There is a need to improve practice around preparing mentees for exit. Part of the

problem may be a lack of clarity among mentors about the circumstances in which

mentees can be seen for longer than 6 months and whether/how closed cases can be re-

opened. Providing clarification on this may help mentors prepare mentees better for exit.

Ratings of the level and quality of support provided are mixed. Although none of the

with the quality of support. There appeared to be an issue with excessive caseloads in


Outcomes

Mentees who took part in the depth interviews were overwhelmingly positive about their

mentors and the impact that the service had on their lives.

There is evidence that a considerable proportion of mentees made progress on short and

medium term outcomes. This should contribute in the long term to reduced reoffending,

increased integration and a reduction in gender inequalities of opportunity.

59% of all mentees who engaged made progress on at least one outcome and 39% made

progress on three or more outcomes. Among those who engaged for 5 months or longer,

78% made progress on at least one outcome, 65% made progress on three or more

outcomes and 53% made progress on five or more outcomes.

specific target of 60% of those who engage in the community achieving improved

motivation to change behaviour has been met.

specific target of 60% of those who engage in the community achieving increased

engagement with services has been met.

48% of all mentees who engaged and 77% of all those who engaged for 5 months or more

were referred to three or more different types of service.

In most cases, mentees who required a service were referred to such a service.

Criminal Justice Social Workers who had referred clients were also extremely positive

about the quality of the service and the impact it had on their clients. In particular, they felt

it had helped clients engage with other services and become less isolated in the

community.

Engagement

There were a number of factors which were thought to encourage women to agree to take

part in the Shine service, and helped with the initial engagement at the first few meetings:

Word of mouth recommendations and awareness of the Shine service

Personalising the introduction of the service

Good relationships between community referrers and mentors

Having already met the mentor

Engagement with the mentor pre-release.

Mentors and referrers felt that the main reason for women failing to engage or

disengaging was simply not wanting to change (enough) or not be ready to change.

There is therefore a limit to what Shine, or any other service can do, and there will always

be a significant minority who fail to engage - at least the first time - or who drop out.


However, there are a number of steps which might help minimise disengagement:

Sharing good practice on the factors which facilitate engagement

Continuing to publicise the Shine brand, maintain its coherence and raise

awareness of the service among women who offend and referrers

Where necessary, increase contact between mentors and mentees pre-release

Continue to liaise locally with prisons and with the SPS Head of Partnerships to

develop more effective ways to make contact in time with prisoners on remand

and prisoners released on Home Detention Curfew

Providing and publicising a central Shine telephone number and mobile number.


1 Background and

Methodology

1.1 Background

In 2012, the Scottish Government Reducing Reoffending Change Fund (RRCF) provided

Social Partnership (PSP). The PSP was led by Sacro and involved the following third

sector o

Circle, Apex Scotland and Turning Point Scotland. The partnership also includes the

following public sector bodies: the Scottish Prison Service, Social Work Scotland and

Community Justice Authorities.

The work undertaken by the PSP in Year 1 reinforced the requirement for, and the viability

of, a national mentoring service for women who offend. The PSP successfully applied for

Years 2 and 3 funding (April 2013 to March 2015) from the RRCF to set up and deliver the

March 2017. Beyond that, Shine will require to secure funding from elsewhere.

1.2 Aims of Shine

The Shine service is founded on an understanding of the distinct needs of women and the

inequalities and disadvantages they face. It seeks to:

bridge an identified gap in the support provided to women who offend serving

short-term prison sentences, on remand or subject to Community Payback

Orders, who present a high risk of custody

contribute to desistance, reintegrate women who offend back into the community

and reduce their reoffending behaviour in the longer-term

improve the quality and coordination of mentoring services and establish a

national standard for delivery

improve integration with the Criminal Justice infrastructure and complement

existing services for women who offend through strong links with core and

mainstream services

improve motivation for women who offend to positively engage with existing

services to address the identified needs that contribute to their offending

behaviour

assist women in addressing their social and health issues

promote financial independence and improved budgeting skills in the light of the

introduction of welfare reforms

assist women in securing and sustaining suitable accommodation


realise a level of benefits for women who offend, their children and families, and

communities that justify sustained investment and long-term support.

1.3 Aims of the evaluation

In 2014, Shine commissioned Ipsos MORI Scotland to undertake an independent

evaluation of the service. The aims were to evaluate:

the levels of participation in the service

whether the activities in the service logic model had been undertaken as planned

and whether mentors felt equipped to deliver the activities to a high standard

progress against short and medium term outcomes (the achievement of which

should, based on existing evidence, lead to the long-term outcomes of a

reduction in reoffending, increased integration and a reduction in gender

inequalities of opportunity).

In addition, the evaluation explored:

what is mentoring?

the reasons for disengagement and what might increase engagement.

1.4 Methods

The evaluation was based on:

data provided by Shine in the RRFC monitoring spreadsheets in September 2014.

This included:

o

of progress against RRFC outcomes for each case (855 cases in total,

418 closed cases and 437 live cases)

o exit surveys completed by 64 mentees

o mentor surveys completed by 23 mentors

8 face-to-face depth interviews with mentees in 3 different areas

7 face-to-face depth interviews with mentors from 5 different partner agencies

3 face-to-face depth interviews with prison champions

7 telephone depth interviews with referrers/potential referrers (Criminal Justice

Social Workers) in 6 different local authorities.

The qualitative fieldwork was conducted between July 2014 and January 2015.


2 Participation

2.1 What was the size of the original target group?

The Shine development work identified a target group of around 2,500 women per year

who were released from short-term prison services or remand or who were subject to an

application for breach of a community sentence (used as a proxy for being at risk of

custody). Existing mentoring services delivered by partners covered around 712 women,

revealing a potential gap in service provision for around 1788 women. Recognising that

the service would be voluntary and not all women would wish to engage, Shine aimed to

provide a service to 720 women per year (based on 24 full-time mentors, each mentoring

30 women per year for a minimum of six months).

In addition, the following targets were agreed:

at least 60% of women who engage with the service in prison will continue to

engage following their release

at least 60% of women who engage with the service in the community will

progress to a planned exit from the service.

2.2 Achieved levels of participation

Providing a service to 720 women per year for a minimum of six months would imply a

minimum of and, indeed, there were 437 live cases in the

monitoring data spreadsheet sent to Ipsos MORI for analysis at the end of September

2014. There were also 418 closed cases.

There were 680 referrals in the 12 months (April 2013 to March 2014). There were 1211

referrals in the first 20 months (April 2013 to November 2014) which is an average of 727

per year.

Among the 418 closed cases, 75 (18%) of the women referred had not attended any

meetings with the mentor they had been matched with and 84 (20%) had only had one

meeting before disengaging.

However, 259 women (62% of those referred) had met their mentor more than once and

could therefore be said to have engaged, at least to some extent, with the service. The

length of engagement1 is shown in Figure 2.1 below. Overall, 40% engaged for 2 months

or less, 35% engaged for 2-5 months and 25% engaged for 5 months or longer. Those

referred from prison were more likely to drop out within the first month (this is likely to be

1 Note that this is based on the length of time between the first meeting and the last contact it does not


on or soon after their release from prison). After that first month or so, those referred from

prison and those referred from the community have broadly similar engagement rates.

Over time, we would expect the proportion of closed cases where engagement is longer

to increase because cases where engagement was shorter are more likely to have closed

by August 2014 (15 months after the service started).

The target of 60% of women who engage in prison continuing to engage following release

has therefore been met: 60% have engaged for 2 months or more.

Among these 259 cases, there were 20 where the type of exit was not recorded. In the

remaining 239 cases, there were 110 planned exits (46%) and 129 unplanned exits (54%).

Those who engaged for less than three months were more likely to have an unplanned

than a planned exit, while those who engaged for more than three months were more

likely to have a planned rather than an unplanned exit. At 46%, the proportion of planned

exits is somewhat short of the 60% target but, again, we would expect this proportion to

increase over time because cases with shorter engagement and unplanned exits are

more likely to have closed by August 2014. Although it is clearly preferable for exits to be

planned rather than unplanned, an unplanned exit is not always as negative as the term

might imply: some women might disengage after making considerable progress, some

might feel they are doing well and no longer in need of the service and some might

disengage because they have a positive change in circumstances (e.g. starting a course

or moving to another area). Reasons for disengagement are discussed in section 5.2

below.


Figure 2.1: Length of engagement with the service (among those having more than one

meeting with their mentor)

All n=237 (mentees who had met their mentor more than once and for whom data on length of engagement is available); Prison n=117; Community n=110

2.3 Key findings on participation

By summer 2014

to meet the target of 720 women per year. Over the first 20 months, there has been

an average of 727 referrals per year.

The target of 60% of women who engage in prison continuing to engage in following

release has been met: 60% of women who engaged in prison continued to engage in

the community for 2 months or more.

46% of mentees progressed to a planned exit. This is somewhat short of the 60%

target. However, we would expect the proportion of planned exits to increase over

time as cases with unplanned exits were more likely to have closed by August 2014.

5

11

24

15

11

9

7

12

2

4 4

15

24

13 12

8 7

8

3

7

5

8

25

18

9 10

7

17

1 2

5

10

15

20

25

30

% m

en

tee

s

All

Prison

Community


3 Activities

In this section, we look at the different activities set out in the service logic model

(assessment, matching, mentoring and controlled exit) and whether mentors feel

equipped to deliver the activities to a high standard.

3.1 Assessment

One of the aims of the Shine referral and assessment process is to avoid the need for

mentees to be assessed multiple times and have to keep telling their story to different

people. There is a referral form and then each partner agency uses its own assessment

form.

This appears to have worked well and mentees were very positive about their first

contacts with their mentor (and those referred from prison who had first met a prison

champion were positive about that first meeting too). They felt that the mentor had listened

to them and was focused on understanding their needs and goals. There were no

complaints about paperwork or form-filling.

One of the prison champions said that she tried to fill in as much of the referral form as

she could before she met the potential mentee:

I want them to

them

Prison Champion

form with the mentee after their first meeting, so the mentee could see what areas it

covered, and feel in control of deciding what areas to work on.

However, mentors indicated that some referrers (including prison champions) were better

than others at completing the referral forms some provided as much information as they

could, which was very helpful, and others tended to be rather brief. One mentor said that

social workers in her area tended to tick every box, to indicate that the mentee needed

Overall, the initial assessment process is working well. It is important to note that this is

just the first stage other needs and goals emerge over the course of the mentoring

relationship and this is one of the strengths of the service.

Other aspects of the referral process are discussed further at section 5.1

.


3.2 Matching

The allocation of mentees is largely determined by the case-loads of the mentors in the

relevant area rather than on personalities/interests (as happens in some mentoring

schemes). To some extent, there has been matching based on the expertise of the

different delivery partners but this, again, has been limited by geography and case-load.

Nonetheless, the limited extent of individual matching did not appear to be a problem: all

mentees who took part in depth interviews felt they were well matched and were very

happy with their mentors. Similarly, in the exit surveys, 62 of 64 (97%) said their mentor

Although it could be argued that the mentees who felt they were not well matched would

be more likely to drop out and therefore not take part in the depth interviews or complete

an exit survey, there was no indication from referrers, prison champions or mentors

themselves that this was a reason for disengagement.

3.3 What is mentoring?

The following definition of mentoring was agreed by the Research Advisory Group for the national evaluation of the Reducing Reoffending Change Fund:

Although there is no single definition of mentoring, a common feature across different approaches is that the mechanism of engagement is based on a one-to-one relationship where two people come together to form a bond. The mentee brings to the relationship a set of expectations that particular needs may be met and the mentor brings to it a desire to meet the mentees needs in an atmosphere of positive regard (Social Mentoring Research Group, University of Brighton).

e interventions are unlikely to reduce reoffending on their own so mentoring should be seen as part of a holistic service where offenders are offered a range of interventions to meet their needs (Sapouna et al 2011). In this sense, by forming trusting and flexible relationships with offenders, a mentoring approach could contribute to reducing reoffending as part of a wider system of support.

Through observation and early evaluation it has emerged that the activities being undertaken within the RRCF mentoring PSPs have involved providing additional support in order to meet the needs of their users, which would reflect the understanding that an offender may often lack the resilience or self-motivation needed to engage fully with activities or services available to them. The RRCF has an expectation that the mentor can and should be pro-active and persuasive, in order to give the mentee the best possible opportunity to benefit fully from their relationship. The extent to which

needs; and by the particular role and responsibilities defined by the mentoring project for their staff. However, this would not change the fundamental point that the interaction would be voluntary, that plans would be mutually agreed, and that the mentor would not control or decide .


Shine partners have agreed to work within the following definition of mentoring:

mentoring is a structured one-to-one relationship that focuses on the needs of the mentee

encourages caring and supportive relationships

empowers women in the criminal justice system to meet their fullest potential

enables individuals to develop a vision for the future and supports them in actions to achieve it.

Shine is committed to working alongside women to:

foster relationships built upon dignity, respect and equality

encourage the achievement of goals, identified in individual Mentoring Plans

provide a safe environment to focus and address identified issues and challenges.

It was clear - from the qualitative interviews with mentees, mentors and referrers that

Shine is indeed providing a service in line with these definitions of mentoring. One of the

key strengths of the service is that it is personalised and tailored to the needs and goals of

the individual mentee so the level of contact and the activities undertaken vary

considerably between cases and, within the same case, at different points in time.

Nonetheless the development of a close one-to-one relationship was common to all.

This relationship of trust, built up over a period of time, means the mentor gets to know the

mentee very well. Referrers, in particular, noted that this enables mentors to identify needs

that might not otherwise have emerged.

The following qualities, skills and behaviours of mentors were repeatedly identified by

mentees, and appear key to building the relationship:

Regular contact. This tends to be a minimum of once a week for an hour (perhaps

reducing to once a fortnight after several months if the mentee was doing well) but is

often much more frequent than this, particularly in the early stages or at crisis points when

a mentee needs more intensive support. Then a mentor may spend several hours a day,

several days a week with a mentee. Mentees also know they can phone and text their

mentor (at any time of day) between scheduled meetings, and mentors also phone

mentees between meetings to update them on progress with something (e.g. dealings

with another service), find out how a meeting went, or simply to check how they are

doing.

The format and location of the contact varies depending on the needs of the mentee and

what they are comfortable with. Meetings might t

at the mentee s home or in a café. In some cases, much of the communication takes place

Meetings often take the form of

outings, such as going for lunch or coffee, taking a walk or going to the gym. These

activities provide an opportunity for the mentor and mentee to talk in a more relaxed


environment. The activities also encourage mentees to go out more often themselves (and

develop their confidence to that), make more constructive use of their time and promote a

more active lifestyle).

In the exit surveys, 55 of 63 mentees (87%) said the amount of time their mentor spent

Being non-judgemental. This was of vital importance to mentees. Knowing that they

they need to know

that they are not going to be judged.

Mentor

Being easy-going. The ability to make relaxed, easy conversation with mentees, and

being able to lighten the mood or make them laugh (and being able to judge when to do

this) helped mentees relax and enjoy being with their mentor.

Criminal Justice Social Worker


Being a relaxing/calming influence. This partly to do with being easy-going and easy to

get on with, but was also about helping mentees see problems differently: putting them in

perspective and working through how they could be dealt with.

2 made things sound easier.

Mentee

Listening. Being prepared to listen, at length if necessary, without judging and without

leaping in with suggestions, was very highly valued by mentees. It demonstrated that the

mentor was genuinely interested in them, respected them and reinforced the idea that the

service was about them and their needs.

Sharing personal experiences. A number of mentees and mentors talked about the

mentor sharing some of their own personal experiences and difficulties (such as not doing

well at school, previous addiction problems and marital breakdown). This helped build

trust and encouraged mentees to feel that change is possible and that they can overcome

their own difficulties.

2


Setting goals. Of the 64 mentees who had completed an exit survey, 59 (92%) said they

had developed a plan with their mentor. Of the five who had not, four had engaged for

less than two months.

Mentors said that they would usually discuss goals and what the mentee wanted to get

out of the service within the first couple of meetings. Early on, however, mentees often

struggled to know what it was they wanted (beyond, perhaps, getting to the end of their

order or not going back to prison) and part of the role of the mentor was to encourage the

mentee to think about themselves and what they wanted their lives to be like many had

never thought like this before or realised that they had choices. New goals often emerged

after several weeks or months.

Thinking through the consequences. Mentees indicated that mentors had encouraged

them think through the consequences of their actions and behaviours and consider how

different responses might impact on their goals.

Mentee

think

Mentee

Praising and building self-esteem. Mentees cited many examples of their mentor

praising them, giving them compliments and reminding them of their achievements. One

mentee had finally taken the difficult decision to leave her boyfriend, and when her mentor

that step) she said it helped build her resolve. One of the

mentors talked about the fact that knowing the mentee well knowing the good things

they have done as well as the bad things helps because they can then remind the

mentee about those good things.

thing, even when life was chaotic

Mentee

Challenging. It was very clear however, that in addition to the listening and the praising,

mentors were not afraid to challenge mentees when they felt it was appropriate. Mentees

valued this and saw it as a sign of honesty. Mentors challenged mentees about their

behaviours, their attitudes towards other people and their perspective on situations. They

would tend to challenge less at the early stages, and more once trust had been

established.

Persistence. This related not just to the persistent efforts to meet with and engage with

mentees in the early stages, but also their patience in sticking with mentees and

continuing to offer support and encouragement when mentees were not making progress

or suffering setbacks. Looking back, some mentees talked about the moment when

d been trying to get them to do


or understand for some time and they appreciated the mentor s persistence and not

having giving up on the issue.

Mentee

.


Caring. One of the things that mentees valued most was that they felt their mentor

genuinely cared about them as individuals and they gave many examples of things that

demonstrated this. One mentee talked about totally

con

referrer said that a client had phoned her mentor because she knew the mentor would be

worried about her if and the very fact that someone cared enough

about her wellbeing to be worried about her meant a lot.

A person-centred service. Referrers, in particular, felt that what distinguished mentoring

from other services was that it was a service focused solely on the needs and goals of the

individual mentee.


them play a complementary role.


As can be seen in Figure 3.1 below, like the mentees who took part in the depth

interviews, the mentees who completed an exit survey were extremely positive about how

they were treated by their mentor.


Base: All mentees who completed an exit survey (n=64).

Encouraging engagement with other services. There were several aspects to this

depending on what stage the mentee was at: ensuring attendance at appointments (by

physically taking them there, reminding them about appointments, and helping them set

up calendars/ways of keeping track of their own appointments); advocacy work on the

mentee s behalf; modelling behaviour in dealings with services; giving advice/talking

through strategies before meetings and reflecting on how things went after meetings;

being there for support; and helping the mentee identify other services that might be

helpful.

An important role, discussed by several mentees, was around

perceptions of professionals from other services (and social workers in particular). This

included challenging what family and friends said about services and building on the

people who genuinely want to help them too. One mentee said her mentor had explained

and once she understood that she got on much better with her. Another said her

mentor:

ld.

Mentee

But perhaps mentoring is best summed up by this mentee:

.

Mentee

72

22

2 0

88

11

0 0

97

2 0 0 0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

All of thetime

Most of thetime

Some of thetime

None of thetime

% m

en

tee

s

Do you think your mentorhad your best interests atheart?

Did your mentor listen toyou?

Did your mentor treat youwith respect?


3.3.1 Intensive support versus mentoring?

Shine mentors are providing a considerable amount of practical support to many of the

mentees particularly at the early stages and at crisis points. It emerged in the qualitative

research with mentors that there had been some confusion and tension, at least initially,

around how much practical support they should be providing and whether women who

require intensive support are really ready for mentoring.

One view is that practical support can be provided alongside mentoring, and that

providing this level of support at the beginning helps develop the relationship between

mentor and mentee and can be used to model behaviour and show mentees how they

can deal with issues the next time that they arise. Indeed, there was evidence from the

interviews with mentees that when mentors helped sort out practical issues early on, it

needs and that they

would follow through on what they said they would do and could therefore be trusted

Partly in response to this issue, the RRCF RAG definition of mentoring above includes the

f

be shaped by the

There appears to be less confusion and tension now - although the issue is not completely

resolved. One said:

A year ago, everyone had a different idea but not now

Mentor

She felt that the Scottish Mentoring Network training had been particularly helpful in this

regard. However, two other mentors felt that the service they were providing was not

mentoring:

Mentor

In the discussions with these mentors about their cases, and in discussions with their

mentees, it seems that they were doing very similar things to other mentors they were

indeed providing considerable amounts of practical support but they were also doing

much more than that. These mentors appeared to have particularly high caseloads and

this may have contributed to their sense that they were simply providing intensive support

and they did not have the time to go beyond than that. This issue is discussed further in

section 3.5 below.


3.4 Controlled exits

There is a need to improve practice around preparing mentees for exit.

Some mentors seemed reasonably happy with the way they dealt with exits. One

indicated that it was about preparation, and reassuring the mentee that they could always

phone if they wanted to talk. She also told mentees that she would get in touch with them

if she saw something (e.g. a new service) that she thought they would like. She felt this

gave the message that she still cared about them.

One mentee, who had been doing well and felt she was probably ready, gave this

description of her exit:

go

Mentee

In contrast, another mentee, who was interviewed at the end of October, had just found

out that her mentoring would end in January. She had not known how long it would last

and this appeared to have come as quite a shock to her. She said:

.

Mentee

Another mentor admitted if closing a case, she wanted to

be able to tell the mentee that they could always recontact her if they needed to and that

. However,

no lo do that, and she

close the case.

One of the referrers said that her main concern about the service (which, overall, she

thought was excellent) was that six months was too short. She said that her clients know

The Shine documentation refers to a minimum of six months so it is clear that, in

certain circumstances, mentees can receive the service for longer than six months.

However, it appears that part of the problem around exits is a lack of clarity among

mentors about the circumstances in which they can continue to see a mentee for longer

than six months: who decides? at what point should they decide? what happens to their

caseload? Similarly, there is a lack of clarity about whether/how someone whose case has

been closed can be taken back on again.

Providing more clarification and guidance on this may help mentors prepare mentees

better for exit.


3.5 Do mentors feel equipped to deliver the activities to a high

standard?

The survey of mentors3

about their skills and knowledge as mentor. One mentor

2 below.

Figure 3.2 ir skills and knowledge

Base: All mentors who completed a mentor’s survey n=23

3 below. Most

were satisfied with both the level and quality of the training received although there is

some scope for improvement. One mentor was dissatisfied with the quality of training.

Ratings of support are more mixed. Although around two-thirds were satisfied or very

-quarters were satisfied or very satisfied with the quality of

support they receive, but a quarter (6 of 23 mento

In the depth interviews with mentors, there were some contrasting experiences of support.

she felt, for

example, that she to taking someone on if she felt her caseload was too

much. However, from her contact with other mentors, she thought some seemed quite

isolated and

3 Mentors completed this survey at different points in time: 12 completed it in November 2013, 3 completed it between January and April 2014 and 7 completed it between May and August 2014. The date of completion of one is not recorded.

40

56

4 0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

how confident are you in your skills andknowledge as a mentor?

% m

en

tors

Very confident

Quite confident

Not very confident

Not at all confident


Mentors in one area seemed to have a particular issue with their caseload. They felt 15

cases at one time (which is the aim) was reasonable but they had almost double that. One

said that she had had to prioritise cases and therefore some women were only being seen

once a fortnight, which she felt was unfair. She had raised the issue with the management

There is a correlation between confidence and all four ratings of training and support:

those who were more confident tended to give higher ratings and those who were less

confident tended to give lower ratings.

Figure 3.3 ved

Base: All mentors who completed a mentor’s survey n=23

35

39

30 30

48

44

35

44

17

13

35

26

0

4

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

10

20

30

40

50

60

… level of training you

receive

… quality of training you

have received

… level of support you

receive

… quality of support you

receive

% m

en

tors

Very satisfied

Satisfied

Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Very dissatisfied


3.6 Key findings on activities

Assessment and matching is working well.

One of the main strengths of the service is that it is personalised and tailored to the

needs and goals of the individual mentee.

Because of this personalisation, activities vary considerably from case to case but

the following qualities, skills and behaviours were key to building relationships and

were consistently demonstrated by mentors:

Regular contact

Being non-judgmental

Being easy-going

Being a relaxing, calming influence

Listening

Encouraging the mentee to set goals

Encouraging mentees to think through consequences

Praising and building self-esteem

Challenging

Being persistent

Caring

Encouraging engagement with other services

knowledge as a mentor.

Most mentors were satisfied with the level and quality of training they had received.


3.7 Areas for action/improvement

Provide feedback and guidance to referrers on the level of detail required in referral

forms. Mentors could provide examples of ways in which this information helps in

their initial contacts with mentees.

There is more clarity now about the extent to which mentors should be providing

intensive support. However, the issue is not entirely resolved and there is a need to

provide on-going guidance and advice.

There is a need to improve practice around preparing mentees for exit. Part of the

problem may be a lack of clarity among mentors about the circumstances in which

mentees can be seen for longer than 6 months and whether/how closed cases can

be re-opened. Providing clarification on this may help mentors prepare mentees

better for exit.

Ratings of the level and quality of support provided are mixed. Although none of the

dissatisfied

excessive caseloads in one area and a perceived lack of management support on


4 Outcomes

4.1 Progress against specific outcomes

To measure outcomes, mentors provided

start of their involvement with the service and at their exit. This was done for 11 outcomes

related to the RRCF logic model: readiness to work on problems; believing they can

change; engaging with services; solving everyday problems; views towards offending

behaviour; accommodation; money; alcohol/drug problems; family relationships; leisure

activities; and work/education/training.

Figures 4.2 to 4.23 below show the progress made against each outcome for all those

who had more than one meeting with their mentor and also for those who engaged for five

months or more. The aim of the Shine service is to provide mentoring for a minimum of six

months, so the progress of those who engaged for that length (or almost that length) of

time is the best measure of whether when the service is delivered as intended it is

achieving its intended outcomes.

The majority (59%) of mentees made progress on at least one outcome and 39% made

progress in three or more different areas. Among those who engaged for 5 months or

more, 78% made progress on at least one outcome, 65% made progress in three or more

different areas and 53% made progress in five or more different areas. See Figure 4.2

below.

Assessing the areas in which mentoring has had the most impact is not straightforward.

One minus the proportion who

on each outcome. Table 4.1 shows the outcomes ranked on this basis. In

general, and as might be expected, more progress has been made on outcomes to do

with attitudes and motivations and those which are more in the direct control of the

mentee (outcomes which we might expect to see in the shorter term). Less progress has

been made on outcomes which relate to actual changes in situation and which require the

involvement of other people or services, as well as the mentee (outcomes which we might

expect to see in the medium term).

However, direct comparisons between different outcomes should be undertaken with

caution. The scope for progress on an outcome depends on where mentees were at the

beginning. In relation to views towards offending behaviour , for example, a relatively high

proportion (46% of those who engaged for 5+ months) were already in the highest

were in the highest category at the start.


Table 4.1: % of mentees who made progress on each outcome

Outcome % who got better minus

% who got worse

Believing they can change 53%

Readiness to work on problems 47%

Solving everyday problems 45%

Leisure/constructive use of time 43%

Money (including benefits) 42%

Views towards offending 30%

Engaging with services 27%

Family and relationships 26%

Accommodation 24%

Alcohol or drugs 22%

Work, education or training 22%

Figure 4.1: Number of outcome areas in which progress made

Bases: All (n=259) based on all those who had more than one meeting with mentor; All who engaged for 5+ mths (n=60) based on all those for whom length of engagement is recorded.

41

12

8 8

5 7

5 5 4 2 2

.4

22

12

2

7 5

12 12 13

3

7 5

2 5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

% m

en

tee

s

Number of outcome areas in which progress was made

All

All who engaged for 5+ mths


Figure 4.2: Readiness to work on problems - beginning and end states

Bases: All (beg.) based on all those who had more than one meeting with mentor and for whom beginning state is recorded (n=243); All (end) based on all those who had more than one meeting with mentor and for whom end state is recorded (n=199); All who engaged for 5 months or more and for whom beginning state is recorded (n=59); All who engaged for 5 months or more and for whom end state is recorded (n=48).

Figure 4.3: Readiness to work on problems progress among those who engaged for

5+ months

Based on all who engaged for 5 months or more and for whom progress is recorded (n=51). Corresponding figures among all those who had more than one meeting and for whom progress is recorded (n=206) are 38% better, 37% the same and 24% worse.

12

38 43

7

28 23 23

26

12

24

56

8 15 15

27

44

10

20

30

40

50

60

not ready orwilling to workon problems

and they denythe need to

change

ready to workon problems

but feeloverwhelmedby them anddo not know

how to change

willing toaccept workingwith a mentor

to work onproblems

recognise theyhave problems

and areactively

working onthem

% m

en

tee

s

All (beg.)

All (end)

All who engaged for 5+ mths(beg.)

All who engaged for 5+ mths(end)


Figure 4.4: Believing they can change - beginning and end states

Bases: All (beg.) n=242; All (end) n=199; All who engaged for 5+ mths (beg.) n=59; All who engaged for 5+ mths (end) n=51.

Figure 4.5: Believing they can change progress among those who engaged for 5+

months


24

40

31

4

21

33

27

20

27

36

31

7

12

22

37

29

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

don’t believe they can

achieve goals and/ or solve

problems. They can’t deal with

unexpected events in a

positive way

believe they canachieve goals,

solve problemsand deal withunexpectedevents in a

positive way butthey are not

convinced theycan do it.

believe theyshould achieve

goals, solveproblems and

deal withunexpected

events and haveshown some

ability to do so.

demonstratedthat they canachieve goals,

solve problemsand/or deal with

unexpectedevents and are

gainingconfidence from

this

% m

en

tee

s

All (beg.)

All (end)

All who engaged for 5+ mths (beg.)

All who engaged for 5+ mths (end)


Figure 4.6: Engaging with services - beginning and end states


Figure 4.7: Engaging with services progress among those who engaged for 5+

months


18

27

36

20

27

22

26 25

17 19

40

24

14 16

40

30

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

They are notengaging with

services (toaddress needs)

at all

They say theyare keen to

engage but havenot

They areengaging withservices butneed some

encouragementto do so

They areengaging

willingly withservices without

the need forencouragement

% m

en

tee

s

All (beg.)

All (end)




Figure 4.8: Solving everyday problems - beginning and end states


Figure 4.9: Solving everyday problems progress among those who engaged for 5+

months


43

52

5

36

46

18

47 51

2

24

52

24

10

20

30

40

50

60

They are not solvingeveryday problems

They are solvingeveryday problems

with help fromothers

They can solveproblems in daily lifeand deal effectivelywith issues as they

arise

% m

en

tee

s

All (beg.)

All (end)




Figure 4.10: Views towards offending behaviour - beginning and end states


Figure 4.11: Views towards offending behaviour progress among those who

engaged for 5+ months


13

50

36

9

46 44

22

32

46

6

39

55

10

20

30

40

50

60

They consistentlyexpress views that

offending isacceptable forexample thatoffending is a

justifiable means to anend; that victims are

responsible; andexpress negative viewsof the law, the police,

courts etc.

They expressinconsistent views onwhether offending is

acceptable or not

They consistentlyexpress views thatoffending is NOT

acceptable

% m

en

tee

s

All (beg.)

All (end)




Figure 4.12: Accommodation - beginning and end states


Figure 4.13: Accommodation progress among those who engaged for 5+ months


26

17

29 28

13 16

31

40

20 20

32

27

8

18

22

51

10

20

30

40

50

60

Noaccommodation

(homeless)

Currentaccommodation

unstable orunsafe

Currentaccommodation

providesrelatively

safe/stableenvironment but

room forimprovement

Has stable/safeaccommodation

% m

en

tee

s

All (beg.)

All (end)




Figure 4.14: Money - beginning and end states


Figure 4.15: Money progress among those who engaged for 5+ months


18

40

34

9 6

32

46

16 10

46

34

10

2

25

56

17

10

20

30

40

50

60

Seriousmoney

problemsand/or noapparentmeans ofsupport

Regularmoney

problemse.g. frequentissues with

benefitsclaims/bills,

money-lenders etc

No majordifficultiesbut needsadvice or

advocacy onsome money

issues

Pattern ofeffective

independentmanagement

of money

% m

en

tee

s

All (beg.)

All (end)




Figure 4.16: Alcohol or drugs - beginning and end states


Figure 4.17: Alcohol or drugs progress among those who engaged for 5+ months


27 29

22

5

16

20

27

24

10

19

22

34

22

5

17

9

26 28

15

22

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

seriousalcohol/drugsuse which is

linked tooffending and

interfereswith daily

functioning

use alcohol ordrugs which

cansometimes

interfere withdaily

functioningand is linkedto offending

use alcohol ordrugs but are

stabilisedthrough

medication ortreatment

use recreational

drug use only – not linked to

offending

No currentissue

% m

en

tee

s

All (beg.)

All (end)




Figure 4.18: Family and relationships - beginning and end states


Figure 4.19: Family and relationships progress among those who engaged for 5+

months


29

33

27

11

22

34

28

16

29 29 29

14 14

36 36

14

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

No family supportor poor family

relationships thatimpact on

behaviour and oremotional state(including family

that supportoffending

behaviour) orrejects influence of

prosocial familysupport

Some evidence ofproblems with

some familymembers; orsporadically

accepts/rejectinfluence of

prosocial family

Overall fairlystable

relationships withfamily members

Has active supportto desist from

family and goodfamily

relationships

% m

en

tee

s

All (beg.)

All (end)




Figure 4.20: Leisure - beginning and end states


Figure 4.21: Leisure progress among those who engaged for 5+ months


47

33

17

3

37

31

21

11

49

29

20

2

22

32

28

18

10

20

30

40

50

60

don’t do anything

positive in their spare time, say they are bored

and/or associate with people who

are linked to offending and

do not have any interests that

could be built on

don’t do anything

positive in their spare time, say they are bored

and/or associate with people who

are linked to offending but

have an interest that could be

built on

do fill their timewith positiveactivities butcould benefit

from morerewarding

activity

makeconstructive useof their time andfinds this really

rewarding

% m

en

tee

s

All (beg.)

All (end)




Figure 4.22: Work, education or training - beginning and end states

Bases: All (beg.) n=223; All (end) n=198; All who engaged for 5+ mths (beg.) n=56; All who engaged for 5+

mths (end) n=50.

Figure 4.23: Work, education or training progress among those who engaged for

5+ months


52

43

4

45

38

9 8

39

57

4

36

42

12 10

10

20

30

40

50

60

They are notworking or ineducation ortraining and

do not want tobe. They resistefforts to helpthe find work

etc

They are notworking or ineducation ortraining but

are making aneffort/ and oraccepting helpto find work or

courses

They areworking or ineducation ortraining butwould like

help to findsomething

morerewarding

They areworking or ineducation ortraining andthey find this

rewarding

% m

en

tee

s

All (beg.)

All (end)




4.2 Achievement of Target 2 (increased motivation to change

behaviour)

One of the specific targets was that 60% of women who engage with the service in the

community will achieve improved motivation to change behaviour. We do not have a

readiness to work on problems believing they can change views

.

Of those who had scope to improve (i.e. those who were not already in the highest

category at the beginning), 64% of those who engaged for 5+ months improved on

readiness to work on problems

views towards offending behaviour 4.

4.3 Achievement of Target 3 (increased engagement with

services)

Another specific target was that at least 60% of women who engage with the service in the

community will have increased engagement with services.

outcome. Of those who had scope to

improve (i.e. those who were not already in the highest category at the beginning), 65% of

those who engaged for 5+ months improved.5

just that Encouraging En in section 3.3 above).

Figure 4.24 below shows the number of different types of service that mentees were

referred to. Three-quarters (77%) of those who engaged for 5 months or more, and half

(48%) of all who had more than one meeting, were referred to three or more different

types of service. Note that this is just the number of different types of service referred to

the total number of services referred to might be more than this (e.g. someone might have

been referred to more than one type of healthcare service). Almost all (97%) of those who

engaged for 5 months or more were referred to at least one type of service.

4 Among all those who had more tha readiness to work on problems

vi . 5


Figure 4.24: Number of different types of service referred to

Bases: All who had more than one meeting (n=259); All who engaged for 5+ months (n=60)

Figure 4.25 below shows the different types of service/projects that mentees required and

were referred to. Across all mentees, the most commonly required services were drug or

alcohol services (required by 60% of all mentees), financial services/projects (required by

49% of all mentees) and social/leisure services/projects (required by 47% of all mentees).

The pattern among those who engaged for 5 months or more was similar although the

proportion requiring each type of service was higher which shows how needs emerged

over the course of mentoring.

In most cases, mentees who required a service were referred to such a service. Those

who engaged for 5 months or more were more likely to have been referred to services

they required. The biggest gaps (i.e. the mentor indicated that a service was required but

the mentee was not referred to such a service) were in relation to parenting services and

financial services, where around a third of those (who engaged for 5 months or more)

requiring the service were not referred to one. The smallest gaps were in relation to

accommodation (only 4% of those who required a service were not referred to one) and

social/leisure services (only 8% of those who required a service were not referred to one).

27

12 13

16 15

11

5

1

3

7

13

17

23

18

15

3 5

10

15

20

25

30

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

% m

en

tee

s

Number of different types of service referred to

All All who engaged for 5+ mths


Figure 4.25: Types of service required and referred to

Bases: All who had more than one meeting (n=259); All who engaged for 5+ months (n=60)

4.4

The mentees who took part in the depth interviews were overwhelmingly positive about

their mentors and the impact that the service had had on their lives:

Mentee

Mentee

Mentee

Mentee

More specifically, mentees felt that they were less likely to commit an offence in the future.

One talked about the fact the she was still drinking, but not bingeing as she had in the

past, and had therefore not offended again. Another mentee said there had been an

her if her

38 38 43

60

49 47

14

29 31 31

42

31 32

6

62

47

62

72

58 65

17

53

45 50

55

40

60

12

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

% m

en

tee

s

Required (All) Referred (All)

Required (All who engaged for 5+ mths) Referred (All who engaged for 5+ mths)


mentor had not been with her and persuaded her to turn around, walk away and calm

down. She felt that she would be able to do the same herself now, if she met the person

when she was alone. Similarly, other mentees felt that they were better able to deal with

their emotions and therefore less likely to offend:

Mentee

signs and

Mentee

Sixty-four mentees had completed an exit survey6. Figure 4.26 below show their

assessment of whether their situation in five areas (housing, money, drug/alcohol

problems, family relationship and work/education/training) had got better, stayed the

same or got worse. Two-thirds thought their housing and money situation had got better,

half thought their alcohol/drug problems and family relationships had got better and a

quarter thought their work/education/training situation had got better. Where mentees did

not think their situation had got better, they almost all thought it had stayed the same

(rather than got worse). It should also be noted that the survey simply asks whether the

situation has got better, stayed the same or got worse there is no scope for the mentee

to say that they did not have a problem in a particular area

also be a positive response in some cases.

Mentees assessment of their progress correlates quite closely with that of mentors (in

r

6 It should be noted that those who had completed an exit survey were, unsurprisingly, more likely to have a planned exit, to have engaged for longer and to have made more progress.


Figure 4.26

Base: All mentees who completed an exit survey (n=64)

The exit survey also asks who helped them change, and who helped them change the

most. The responses are shown in Figure 4.27 below. The results indicate that a range of

different people/services helped: more than half felt that they themselves, their mentor,

friends and/or family and other services (which their mentor helped them access) had

helped them change. But when asked who had helped the most, they were far more likely

to say their mentor than anyone else. Sixty-four per cent said their mentor had helped the

62 62

50 47

23

33 38

45 50

77

5 0 2 2 0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

housing moneyproblems

alcohol ordrug problem

familyrelationships

work,education or

training

% m

en

tee

s

got better

stayed the same

got worse


Figure 4.27 who helped them change

Base: All mentees who completed an exit survey (n=64)

Because they were so positive about it, when asked whether anything about the service

should change, mentees who took part in the depth interviews said they thought more

anything else about it:

.

Mentee

.

Mentee

4.5 Referrers views on outcomes

The Criminal Justice Social Workers who took part in the depth interviews and who had

referred clients were also extremely positive about the quality of the service and the

impact it had on their clients. In particular, they felt it had helped clients engage with other

services and become less isolated in the community.

62

73

53

77

30

3

64

8 13

2

8

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

You Yourmentor

Friendsand/orfamily

Otherservices the

mentorhelped you

access

Otherservices

youaccessedyourself

Other

% m

en

tee

s

Helped

Helped the most





Moreover, they thought Shine was providing something additional to what had been

available previously it was not replacing or duplicating existing services.






4.6 Key findings on outcomes

Mentees who took part in the depth interviews were overwhelmingly positive about

their mentors and the impact that the service had on their lives.

There is evidence that a considerable proportion of mentees made progress on short

and medium term outcomes. This should contribute in the long term to reduced

reoffending, increased integration and a reduction in gender inequalities of

opportunity.

59% of all mentees who engaged made progress on at least one outcome and 39%

made progress on three or more outcomes.

Among those who engaged for 5 months or longer, 78% made progress on at least

one outcome, 65% made progress on three or more outcomes and 53% made

progress on five or more outcomes.

The specific target of 60% of those who engage in the community achieving

improved motivation to change behaviour has been met.

The specific target of 60% of those who engage in the community achieving

increased engagement with services has been met.

48% of all mentees who engaged and 77% of all those who engaged for 5 months or

more were referred to three or more different types of service.

In most cases, mentees who required a service were referred to such a service.

The referrers (Criminal Justice Social Workers) who took part in the depth interviews

were also extremely positive about the quality of the service and the impact it had on

their clients. In particular, they felt it had helped clients engage with other services

and become less isolated in the community.


5 Engagement

The factors which facilitate engagement and the reasons for disengagement were

explored in the depth interviews with mentees, mentors, prison champions and referrers.

5.1 Factors facilitating engagement

There were a number of factors which were thought to encourage women to agree to take

part in the Shine service, and helped with the initial engagement at the first few meetings:

Word of mouth recommendations and awareness of the Shine service. Now that the

service has been in operation for well over a year, word is starting to spread and women

are hearing positive stories about Shine from other women. One mentee said she had

heard about Shine from another prisoner when she was on remand so when the Shine

mentor knocked on her door a week or so later, she knew what it was about. Another

mentee had clearly heard about it from several other women in prison and:

Mentee

This was confirmed by one of the prison champions who indicated that, when she is

introducing the service:

Q

Prison Champion

should be better advertised. She said that her social worker, during the period he was

Referrers and mentees were positive about the Shine leaflet and felt it helped promote the

benefits of the service.

Personalising the introduction of the service. Prison champions and referrers felt it was

important to personalise the introduction of the service to emphasise the fact that it was a

service tailored to the individual and to their needs. Ways of doing this included the prison

champion sending a hand-

just a standard letter that everyone is getting) and using the PR27 system to identify

specific issues that a mentor might be able to help with. As noted in section 3.1 above on

the assessment process, one of the prison champions felt it was important to minimise the

amount of form-filling at the first meeting/introduction so that the discussion was focused

7 The Scottish Prison Service prisoner records database.


In particular, she

tried to complete the fields on convictions in advance, so that

convictions at that first meeting and they were only discussed if the woman herself raised

them and wanted to talk about them.

Good relationships between community referrers and mentors. Depth interviews were

conducted with seven referrers/potential referrers from six different local authorities. In

four of the areas, referrers clearly had a very good relationship with the mentors in their

area. That meant they were enthusiastic about the service when they introduced it to their

client and could clearly communicate what it would involve and what the benefits might

be. They tended to introduce the client to the mentor in a three-way meeting with

themselves, the client and the mentor. This was less daunting for clients, many of whom

are very wary and anxious about meeting new people, and referrers could help clients talk

to the mentor about what was going on in their lives. Referrers also felt that if the client

sees them being relaxed and chatty with the mentor, it helps put the client at ease and

reassures them that this is someone that they too can trust and get along with.

In two of the six areas, however, there had been communication problems and

misunderstandings about processes, and the relationship between potential referrers and

mentors had not yet been established. In one of these areas, the potential referrers were

also concerned that the mentor was not based in the local area and therefore might not

know enough about local services. There had been a very recent meeting and an

agreement to continue to have regular meetings. The potential referrers hoped this would

resolve most of the issues, but it was too soon to tell.

In another area, communication problems and issues around the referral process in the

local prison had had a knock-on effect on perceptions of the service and community

referrals had not yet been established. Again, there had been some recent meetings but

there is further work required to agree processes and build relationships.

Having already met the mentor. There were a few cases where the mentee had

previously worked with mentor and this clearly helped with engagement. But even just

previous involvement with their agency) helped. This was mentioned by both mentees and

referrers.

with her


Engagement with the mentor pre-release. For women referred from prison, meeting their

mentor pre-release was seen by prison champions and mentors as very important in

establishing the relationship and increasing the chances of engagement post-release. The

thought that the earlier this happened, and the more contact there was, the better.


5.2 Reasons for disengagement

Mentors and referrers felt that the main reason for women failing to engage or

disengaging was simply not wanting to change (enough) or not be ready to change.

This was echoed by some of the mentees who looked

engaged with services. Mentors felt it was important to be to give people every chance to

engage and re-engage to be patient, to be persistent, to try and make it clear that they

had relapsed or disengaged for any other

reason but at the end of the day they felt that the individual has to want to change and

be ready to change, otherwise, there is very little that Shine or any other service can do.

Younger women were seen as harder to engage - perhaps because they were less likely

to have got to the point where they felt they needed to change. It was also suggested that

those who feel they have something to lose (such as custody of their children or their

house) are more likely to be motivated to change and, conversely, those who feel they

have nothing to lose have less motivation.

Drug or alcohol relapse was seen as a common reason for disengagement at any point

in the process but release from prison is a particularly vulnerable point: some women (and

-

release.

Linked to this is peer-pressure and the negative influences of some

partners/boyfriends, family and friends.

Some mentors felt that women sometimes signed up for Shine because they saw it as a

free taxi service or a way to get housing or benefits etc. arranged without really wanting

to change. When mentors started to challenge them on this and make it clear that they

had to commit to work on things too, then they disengaged.

5.3 What might improve engagement?

If the main reasons for failing to engage or disengaging are not wanting to change or not

being ready to change, there is clearly a limit to what Shine (or any other service) can do.

In discussion of particular cases where mentees had disengaged, referrers and mentors

felt that the mentor had tried very hard to re-engage the mentee and there was nothing

more they could have done. Realistically, among this population, there is always likely to

be a significant minority who fail to engage (at least the first time) or who drop out.

However, there are a number of steps which might help minimise disengagement:

Section 5.1 above identifies factors which facilitate engagement in the early stages. Share

good practice around these issues and ensure they happen in as many cases as

possible. One mentor suggested an online forum in which mentors and prison champions

could ask questions and share learning.

Continue to publicise the Shine brand, maintain its coherence and raise awareness of

the service among women who offend and referrers.


Where necessary, increase contact between mentors and mentees pre-release.

Prison champions indicated that some mentors made more contact than others pre-

release. They speculated that physical distance and caseloads were part of the problem

for some. However, they also reported that some mentors were poor at providing updates

to prison champions on who they had seen (there is a form for this) so they could not be

sure about who had been seen/when and what the extent of the problem was. This is

something worth exploring in more detail and, if necessary, adjusting caseloads to enable

mentors to make more prison visits.

Continue to liaise locally with prisons and with the SPS Head of Partnerships to develop

more effective ways to make contact in time with prisoners on remand and prisoners

released on Home Detention Curfew (HDC).

Consider providing and publicising a central Shine telephone number and mobile

number. This would provide an easier way, post-release, for prisoners on remand or on

HDC to make contact and pass a message/new contact details on to their

mentor/prospective mentor. Similarly, it would provide an easier way for mentees who lose

or to re-establish contact. Many

mentees are more comfortable texting than phoning (particu

someone) so providing a mobile number as well as a landline would encourage contact.


5.4 Key findings on engagement

There were a number of factors which were thought to encourage women to

agree to take part in the Shine service, and helped with the initial

engagement at the first few meetings:

Word of mouth recommendations and awareness of the Shine service

Personalising the introduction of the service

Good relationships between community referrers and mentors

Having already met the mentor

Engagement with the mentor pre-release.

Mentors and referrers felt that the main reason for women failing to engage

or disengaging was simply not wanting to change (enough) or not be ready

to change. There is therefore a limit to what Shine, or any other service can

do, and there will always be a significant minority who fail to engage - at

least the first time - or who drop out.

However, there are a number of steps which might help minimise

disengagement:

Sharing good practice on the factors which facilitate engagement

Continuing to publicise the Shine brand, maintain its coherence and

raise awareness of the service among women who offend and

referrers

Where necessary, increase contact between mentors and mentees

pre-release

Continue to liaise locally with prisons and with the SPS Head of

Partnerships to develop more effective ways to make contact in time

with prisoners on remand and prisoners released on Home Detention

Curfew

Providing and publicising a central Shine telephone number and

mobile number.

[Report Title]: [Report subtitle 50

[Job number] | [version] | [confidentiality status]

For more information

Ipsos MORI Scotland

4 Wemyss Place

Edinburgh

EH3 6DH

t: +44 (0)131 220 5699

f: +44 (0)131 220 6449

www.ipsos-mori.com

www.twitter.com/IpsosMORIScot

About Ipsos MORI Scotland Ipsos MORI Scotland provides research focused on the distinct needs of policymakers and businesses in

Scotland. We offer the full range of qualitative and quantitative research methodologies and have a detailed

understanding of specific sectors in Scotland, their policy challenges and their research needs. The variety of

research we conduct gives us a unique insight into many aspects of life in Scotland.

Lorraine Murray

Deputy Managing Director, Scotland

Ipsos MORI Scotland

[email protected]

Firstname Lastname

Job Title

Ipsos <Specialism>

[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

normal dot (rev02 january 2009) · help them do that. the ultimate aim is to help reintegrate women...

Documents