Evaluation of the On Side II project
Evaluation of the Nacro On Side II Project at HMYOI Portland
Susannah Eagle and Alex Gammampila
Submitted to Nacro (April 2005) by:
Susannah Eagle
Policy and Practice Research Group (PPRG)
Middlesex University
Queensway
Enfield
EN3 4SA
020 8411 5354 / 07812 008235
Acknowledgements
The evaluation team would like to thank the On Side II project staff (past and present) – Roy Koerner, John Bayley and Carrol Roskell-White for their enthusiasm and support for the evaluation, for completing both evaluation databases so thoroughly and for arranging interviews. Thanks also to Sue Ansell for her help.
The On Side II project participants who were willing to be interviewed both in HMYOI Portland and on release were open and honest and shared their personal experiences and views with the evaluation team; their involvement in the research is greatly appreciated.
The evaluation would have been more difficult were it not for the support and assistance provided by Lynn Punter and Jackie Worral from Nacro.
Thanks also to the On Side II steering group members, who provided a forum for interesting discussion throughout the evaluation. Their support for and interest in the project and the evaluation have made this an exciting and challenging piece of work.
Finally, thanks to Elaine Arnull (Head of PPRG) who managed the evaluation team and provided advice and support throughout.
Susannah Eagle and Alex Gammampila
April 2005
Contents
Executive Summary 4
Glossary 9
Introduction 10
Review of current literature 12
HMYOI Portland 21
The On Side I project 23
The On Side II project 24
Evaluation Methods 27
Part I 33
Profile of the Project Participants 33
Accommodation 41
Family 52
Education, Training and Employment 60
Drugs and Alcohol 67
Mental and Physical Health 74
Peer Group 80
Impact of the On Side II project on the young people 83
Reconviction Study 93
Part II 99
Process and Implementation Issues 99
Part III 110
Summary of Findings and Recommendations 110
References 113
Appendix 1 – Case Studies 116
Case Study A 116
Case Study B 120
Case Study C 123
Executive Summary
Prison population figures for 2004 indicated that more than 8000 young people aged 18-21 were residing in prisons in England and Wales. Research evidence suggests that this group of prisoners is amongst the most vulnerable, often having experienced troubled and disrupted lives. Approximately 76 percent of young people aged 18-21 who are released from prison are reconvicted within two years.
In response to growing concern about high reconviction rates for those leaving prison, the development of effective resettlement strategies has become a key aim for policy makers. Research suggests that those strategies need to tackle both long standing life issues prevalent amongst those who offend, including family issues, mental health problems and substance use issues and factors known to hinder successful resettlement, such as suitable accommodation and employment on release.
Nacro launched the On Side I project at HMYOI Portland in 1999. Until 2002, the project worked with the most vulnerable 15-17 year olds at the institution to address their resettlement needs and to provide on going support to them post-release. The project evaluation reported in 2003.
The On Side II project was launched in 2002. The project aimed to continue the work with the most vulnerable 18-21 year olds being held at HMYOI Portland. It underwent a three year evaluation, the findings of which have pertinence for policy makers and practitioners working to resettle prisoners of all ages, and particularly those working with the 18-21 year old age group.
The Research
The evaluation was based on the On Side II project’s work with 85 participants and involved the analysis of a range of data sources:
· Analysis of detailed participant information: Two specially designed project databases collected information on the entire research sample (n=85). The databases were completed by project staff over the three years of project activity. The information included their age, ethnicity, offending histories and information relating to ‘risk factors’ such as the young person’s drug and alcohol use, family background, accommodation status and experience of education, training and employment. The data covered both childhood/young adult experiences and more recent experiences in custody and on release.
· Qualitative interviews with project participants: Face to face, semi-structured interviews were carried out with 13 participants prior to their release from HMYOI Portland; five of these participants were interviewed for a second time approximately six months after release.
· Qualitative interviews with project staff, prison staff and representatives from external agencies: Three members of project staff, the prison Governor and two members of prison staff and three individuals representing a local probation service and two residential projects housing ex-offenders in the South West were interviewed during the course of the evaluation.
· Offender Index data: Home Office Offender Index (OI) data was provided for 76 participants in the research sample. This data was analysed to provide reconviction data.
The Participants
· The On Side II project participants were aged between 17 and 21 on acceptance onto the project and all were hoping to be resettled in the South West of England. In terms of ethnicity 98 percent of the participants were white with the remaining two percent classified as Black.
· On average, On Side II participants received their first police caution/reprimand aged 15, their first community sentence aged 16 and their first custodial sentence aged 17. However, 44 percent of the sample had no previous experience of custody prior to their current custodial episode. 29 percent had received one or two previous custodial sentences.
· On average, each participant had been convicted of ten offences; 12 percent of the sample had no previous convictions.
· 38 percent of the research sample had received their most recent custodial sentence for burglary or attempted burglary offences; 18 percent for violent offences and 17 percent for robbery or attempted robbery offences.
Vulnerability
The aim of the On Side II project was to offer an intervention to those young people deemed ‘most vulnerable’ within HMYOI Portland. The evaluation found that the project met this aim given that:
· 95 percent of the research sample had accommodation problems;
· 88 percent had substance use issues;
· 86 percent had employment issues;
· 74 percent had education or training issues;
· 84 percent had family related problems;
· 84 percent had problems associated with their peer group;
· 53 percent had issues related to victimisation from violence or abuse;
· 46 percent had mental health issues.
And:
· 91 percent of the research sample was considered to have five or more of these identified risk factors present in their life.
The evaluation found that the On Side II sample were substantially more vulnerable, according to these risk factors, than the younger On Side I cohort had been. The levels of vulnerability amongst the On Side II sample support research literature that indicates that male prisoners aged 18-21 are amongst the most vulnerable.
Impact of the On Side II Project
The impact of the On Side II project could be measured in a number of ways:-
Young people’s views:
· All the young people interviewed reported that they enjoyed positive relationships with their project worker;
· 12 of the interviewees were able to identify examples of how they had been helped or supported by their On Side II project worker;
· Four interviewees said they felt more self-confident since participating on the project;
· Eight of the interviewees thought that receiving the sort of help they had been offered by their On Side II worker earlier in their lives would have made a difference to them. Three considered that it might have reduced the chance of them becoming involved in offending and two thought that they would have benefited from the emotional support.
· 11 of the 13 young people interviewed thought that participating on the On Side II project had impacted on their likelihood of reoffending.
Advocacy:
Analysis of the project database revealed that On Side II project staff had facilitated change and improvement across a number of issues. The evaluation found that one of the most important roles fulfilled by On Side II staff was that of advocate. In some cases this involved complex negotiation on behalf of the young person, in others form filling, making telephone calls or writing letters on their behalf. The evaluation highlighted various instances where the young person would have been without accommodation, mental health support or access to grants or benefits were it not for the advocacy of the On Side II project worker. In some cases it was also suggested that the On Side II worker was the only responsible adult the young person was in contact with.
Mentoring:
The mentoring aspect of the On Side II project, both within HMYOI Portland and in the community post-release was praised by prison staff, external agency representatives and the young people themselves. It is this aspect of the project that sets it apart from many other forms of help and support available to the young people in prison. On going support after release from custody was identified as being of key importance in reducing reoffending and facilitating resettlement.
Practical improvements:
The On Side II project also brought about practical improvements for the young people, including:
· Finding accommodation for 89 percent of participants on release;
· Helping to secure education for 22 percent of participants;
· Arranging employment or training for 16 percent of participants;
· Offering substance use related support or advice to 73 percent of participants;
· Arranging Release on Temporary Licence in order for participants to attend accommodation interviews or appointments with careers services, mental health services, employers or training providers.
Difficulties:
The evaluation highlighted, however, that On Side II project staff faced a number of difficulties (both within HMYOI Portland and in the community) in trying to bring about positive change for the young people. During the course of the evaluation the institution was recognised as having limited mental health provision for inmates – particularly those with moderate rather than severe needs – and severely reduced education and training provision.
Outside the prison, the project faced challenges posed by the shortage of suitable accommodation for young ex-prisoners in the South West; the lack of education, training and employment options for young people, the limited mental health provision available and poor inter-agency links in the area.
Implementation issues:
The project evaluation also considered the implementation of the On Side II project, its working practices and relationships with prison staff and external agencies and raised several points for consideration:
· The On Side II project would benefit from an improved communication strategy, particularly directed at HMYOI Portland’s Resettlement team. The evaluation found evidence of misconception and a lack of understanding between the two teams.
· The On Side II project would also benefit from a more efficient marketing/publicity strategy that publicised the work of the project both within the institution and more widely in the local area.
· Clearer support and supervision mechanisms should be put in place to ensure that On Side II project staff do not feel emotionally and geographically isolated.
Reconviction
Home Office Offender Index (OI) data presented one way to assess the success of the On Side II project in meeting its aims. OI data was available for 62 percent of the sample.
Analysis of OI data suggested that On Side II project participants were reconvicted at around the same rate as other 18-21 year olds leaving prison and thus that the project had not had an impact on reconviction rates. However, various factors including the small number of participants for whom full two year reconviction data was available suggest the results should be treated with caution.
A comparison of the seriousness of participants’ offences immediately prior to engagement with the On Side II project and those they were reconvicted for after release from HMYOI Portland suggested, however, that there had been a statistically significant reduction in seriousness.
Conclusions
The evaluation report concluded that the On Side II project met its aim to work with the most vulnerable young adults held at HMYOI Portland. Project workers provided consistent, continuous, flexible, tailored support and advice to participants. The evaluation concluded that, in some cases, participants on the project would have received limited (if any) support had it not been for the On Side II project. The value of this support was recognised by project participants, prison staff and external agencies working with the young people on release.
The evaluation recognised that the level of support required by this very vulnerable and needy group of young men meant that it was unlikely the On Side II project would be able to immediately demonstrate a positive impact in terms of reducing reoffending, however, the value of providing targeted support to this group was evidenced and only a longer term study could build a clearer picture of the impact the On Side II project had on the young men it worked with.
Glossary
ASBO - Anti Social Behaviour Order
CARATs - Counselling, Assessment, Referral, Advice and Throughcare Service
ETE - Education, training and employment
HDC - Home Detention Curfew
HMCIP - Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Prisons
LIDS - Local Inmate Database System
NFA - No fixed abode
ODPM - Office of the Deputy Prime Minister
OI - The Offender Index
PAT - Policy Action Team
PPRG - Policy and Practice Research Group, Middlesex University
ROTL - Release on temporary licence
SEN - Special educational need
SEU - Social Exclusion Unit
Introduction
The only raw material that every nation on earth shares is its people, and woe betide any that does not do everything it can to identify, nurture and develop their talents.
(Sir David Ramsbotham, then HM Chief Inspector of Prisons, 1997)
Prison population figures released by the Home Office in 2004 indicated that more than 8000 ‘young adult’ prisoners (those aged between 18 and 21) were currently residing in prisons in England and Wales. As a group, they have received less attention and focus than juveniles involved in offending or held in custodial establishments. However, research indicates that they are at least as, if not more, vulnerable. They are also subject to as wide a range of problems as their younger counterparts.