Use of customer insight in revire of offender management services in Lewisham


Published on

Published in: Business, News & Politics
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • .
  • Finish with this slide if you compare it to earlier slide much simpler and more cohoerent
  • Use of customer insight in revire of offender management services in Lewisham

    1. 1. Use of Customer Insight inReview of Offender management services in Lewisham Frank Curran Consultant
    2. 2. Total PlaceReducing re-offending chosen as one of four Total Place strands in 2009Aim: To identify opportunities for improving the effectiveness of existing service delivery models and subsequently to reduce re-offending rates and the harm caused by offenders.Scope: Review the range of community based rehabilitative services and resettlement packages offered in Lewisham, to offenders especially adults leaving prison
    3. 3. Aim of Customer InsightWho is the ‘customer’?Aim to answer:•What is the client journey from arrest to rehabilitation?•What is the offenders own experience of the services andinterventions they receive(d)•What are the drivers of criminal behaviour?Scope:•8 offender ethnographies•Offender journey mapping•5 service provider ethnographies/ shadowing•Case file review
    4. 4. Example of ethnography output
    5. 5. “She spoke of her frustration He remembers ‘waking up and about leaving prison clean and thinking “it’s another day, what‘full of good intentions’ and being shall I do today?”’. He was used to placed in a hostel next to drug the routine of prison and found itdealers and users. She knew hat weird not to be told what to do. because she was in the sort of environment she’d relapse” “ If you can’t find services, you find your drug dealer”
    6. 6. Pros and consWhat worked well Possible difficulties• Doesn’t over simplify • Not statistically sound• Detailed case studies and quotations •Will it have credibility? •How will it inform service• Offender led change?• Honestly of those involved •Recruiting• Not involving the ‘usual suspects’ •Mapping offender journey more• Case studies very compelling difficult than we expected Would do differently: • Service provider ethnographies• Retrospective journey mapping with repeat offenders – very complex journeys
    7. 7. Resettlement & Rehabilitative Services Post-Release
    8. 8. Findings from customer insight work• Limited co-ordination of rehabilitative services – Complexity of offender pathway – Multiple assessment points & key workers – Ad-hoc information sharing arrangements• Transition from prison to community not smooth – Release dates not communicated to community based providers – Friday releases – Offenders released from prisons outside of London – Lack of basic provision in place upon release• Rehabilitative Services & Interventions – Designed as a one way rigid process – Limited range of service offers – Employment related training not linked to employment opportunities – No assessment of effectiveness
    9. 9. Lewisham’s response (1)Commissioned a service to “disrupt “ the systemand work with offenders to reduce reoffending:2.Service paid partly on success in reducing offendingamongst participants3.Provider given great flexibility in service design4.Service focuses on people released from prison andothers motivated to change behaviour5.Service acts as lead professional
    10. 10. Lewisham’s response (2)•Improve operational co-ordination amongst agenciesleading to better joint approach to offenders•Improved information sharing leading to reducedassessments•Two police officers working on the project•Discussions with NOMS re prison releases•Discussions with Work Programme primes re linking withlocal CJ services•Dashboard of performance measures reviewed everymonth at joint board meeting
    11. 11. Reducing offending system Proposed model model
    12. 12. Questions & Comments?For further information contact Frank Curran 07515 875381