Evening Seminar Commissioning to Transform Rehabilitation Ian Blakeman Director of Commissioning, NOMS and Colin Allars Director of Probation, NOMS 17 June, 2014

Director of Commissioning National Offender Management Service Ian Blakeman Director of Commissioning National Offender Management Service

NOMS and commissioning NOMS created with National Offender Manager, Wales and Regional Offender Managers (ROMs) as commissioners (HMPS separate) First private sector prison contracts already awarded (1990s) 2004 NOMS Agency created bringing together responsibility for prisons and probation with 10 Directors of Offender Management (DOMs) as lead commissioners 2008 Specifications, Costing and Benchmarking (SBC) Programme launched Creation of Probation Trusts 2009 DOM Strategic Commissioning Plans published Prison Competition Programme Launched NOMS Agency restructured with a functional commissioning model replacing the regional structure Payment by Results trialled at HMP Doncaster SBC Programme completed NOMS Commissioning Intentions first published 2011 2012 Prison Unit Cost Programme: benchmarking, reconfiguration, ancillary services competition Transforming Rehabilitation Programme launched

NOMS Commissioning Cycle NOMS defines offender services commissioning as – ‘The cycle of assessing the needs of courts, offenders, defendants, victims and communities then designing, securing and monitoring services to meet those needs, while making best use of total available resources’ Agree commissioning priorities Stage 1 PLAN Review of outcomes achieved to inform future priorities Secure delivery commitment through SLA/Contracts Stage 2 BUY Stage 4 REVIEW Monitor and assure once SLA/Contracts in place Stage 3 DO

Tools -Specification, Benchmarking, Costing programme The SBC Programme produced service specifications which set out mandatory minimum outcomes and outputs for each of these services, ensuring that they are legal, safe and decent NOMS service specifications support outcome based commissioning as they help define what needs to be provided, but not how they should be delivered or by whom. The commissioner is ultimately responsible for defining the mix and type of services they want to commission. Providers of services held to account for delivering outcomes and outputs for each service and Commissioners get the right services, at the right quality and the right cost. Specification: What are the outcomes and outputs of each service? Operating Models: What is the efficient and effective way to deliver each service? Costing: What should it cost to provide each service? Which services should we deliver? To which types of offenders? What is the minimum level of service? Is there flexibility to commission options above the minimum? Directory offers practical choices 2. NOMS decides

Tools – Evidence based commissioning

Tools - Segmentation Approach Segmentation shapes evidence-based choices about investment in different groups/segments of the population and choices about investment in services matched to their risks and needs It develops and synthesises the evidence on what works in delivering different outcomes for different offender groups For the NOMS Commissioning Rounds for 2013-4 and 2014-5, the segmentation approach has been embedded into the Commissioning process to help deliver better outcomes for offenders by improving the targeting of the right kinds of services to those offenders that NOMS chooses to prioritise for investment Segmentation supports NOMS in its commissioning processes, by enabling the delivery of efficient, quality services which are evidence-informed and by ensuring delivery is matched to population, purpose and NOMS outcomes

Tools - Commissioning Intentions: Ensure a safe, decent environment and rehabilitative culture Strengthen integration of service delivery between partners Ensure delivery is evidence informed, efficient and quality assured Ensure delivery is matched to population, purpose and NOMS outcomes Ensure that delivery of services is responsive to individual needs and characteristics to maximise outcomes http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/about/noms/commissioning-intentions-2014.pdf 8

The features of a rehabilitative prison – A hierarchy settle Address attitudes and thinking Address drug & alcohol problems Rehabilitative culture; Rehabilitative staff prisoner relationships Safety & Decency The features of a rehabilitative prison – A hierarchy Through co-commissioning we align our priorities and resources throughout the commissioning cycle both nationally, and locally, with a wide range of other funders to deliver over £1bn of offender services, including substance misuse treatment The future: Commissioning Through the Gate services A key focus for the Custodial Commissioning round for 2014-15 has been commissioning a rehabilitative culture 9

Rehabilitation outcomes can be enhanced through evidence based targeting: Shifting provision from acquisitive offenders increases the % point reduction in reoffending following Enhanced Thinking Skills against predicted rate from 8 to 14 percentage points 10

Community example: where to invest and in what Community example: where to invest and in what? Example segment – violent offenders The chart shows the risk of general reoffending against the risk of violent reoffending for all offenders managed in the community with a violent index offence for a CRC. We have given bidders access to the tools that we use in NOMS and the decisions that result. Whilst we share tools, such as segmentation with CRCs/bidders, bidders make their own choices on how to act on these resources. They may choose to invest in different segments of the population to NOMS and part of the benefit of this is that it drives innovation. This supports a key commissioning principles that it is not ‘how’ or ‘who’ but what is delivered. Then investment strategy based on what we know about…. What works with violent offenders?

Community services - managing change during the interim period Light touch, pragmatic commissioning approach to community services from 1st April 2014 Maintain service delivery from 13/14 where feasible and performance accountability at Divisional level Managing change and maintaining service delivery From 1st June Service Level Agreement with NPS and interim contract with CRCs Focus on preparation for CRC share sale and end state delivery model

Contract Management Effective management of risk & enhanced assurance of CRC delivery requires: Revised and robust processes. New arrangements to ensure that NOMS/MoJ receive adequate levels of assurance on outcomes. Intensive CM approach during transition period. Model consistent with Cross Government Review & MoJ Review of Contract Management DDs & their SCMs will use the interim period to develop positive relationships with the CRCs focusing on: delivering the requirements of the interim contract maintaining service delivery & stabilising the system embedding the new service operating model completing the required transition activity in preparation for share sale An agreed and consistent approach to interim contract management has been developed through a Contract Management Plan which has been used from 1 June 2014, and applied through the interim period by the SCM Teams to ensure consistent ICM practice across the CRCs

Future of NOMS Commissioning… Integrated commissioning approach across custody and community - building the integrated offender management model Through the Gate – enabling an integrated approach Focus on whole system commissioning - a focus on the needs and outcomes for users and beneficiaries of our services (e.g. courts, offenders, defendants, victims) National commissioning with local partnerships – CRCs will only achieve better re-offending outcomes working in partnership with other local partners who commission and provide services that offenders need Increased commercial skill-base Developing partnership working between commissioning / contract management and the NPS and CRCs More complex supply chain management and a more diverse provider base Continue to develop the evidence base to enable more effective commissioning decisions