LAUSR

felt pressure to focus on risk and lacked an understanding in the strength-based approach. There were inconsistencies in practice which derived from poor roll-out of national training. Training and support to empower practitioners is recommended. Managers should consider structured professional support and the benefits of the employment assistance programme. Divisions could benefit from utilising existing examples of good practice in providing training and information to staff. Disappointingly, much of the work in custody to assess, treat and manage sex offenders was poor. There was shockingly little training and staff felt unsupported. Liaison between prison and probation staff was often not strong, resulting in insufficient sentence plans. There was a lack of intervention, especially since the removal of the Sex Offender Treatment Programme in custody. This has resulted in untreated men leaving prison or delay and disruption to progress on sentences. Offender Management in Custody (OMic) may address some of these issues, but differentials between areas may only highlight this further. The report finds sufficient quality in OASys and use of RM2000. The Active Risk Management System (ARMS) was used in most cases, but the quality was poor. Many practitioners were not fully recognising the benefits of the assessment and not relating it to intervention and future risk assessments. ARMS needs to be included in the overall assessment and intervention for it to be effective. Accredited programmes were not used enough and the delivery of one-to-one intervention was ‘inconsistent at best and non-existent at worst’. Review processes nationally are inconsistent and purposeful home visits lacking in community cases, resulting in missed vital information. Appropriate MAPPA levels were used but the process was not working well in custody and information exchange between partners was not always present. The value of ARMS is not yet recognised, and by incorporating good practice to training programmes it is hoped that the benefits will be promoted. Overall, some good practice was noted in all probation regions. We now need to model these to replicate in all areas with a national training programme to increase the use of a strength-based approach and empower already skilled and committed staff.