Professional Documents
Culture Documents
This process is adapted from the European Excellence Model and requires a self –assessment to be undertaken by area
staff, covering ECP systems, processes, outcomes. It represents a move on from the Sign off and Post-Implementation
Review, the principal purpose of which was to ascertain that the components of ECP were in place. The focus of this
exercise is on the quality of delivery and the benefits which are being realised.
• The first stage will require a group of ECP staff in each area to ensure that the evidence in relation to the
criteria is available and accessible and to complete the self-assessment form on the basis of this. It will not be
necessary for areas to physically collect the evidence, simply to cite its availability and be prepared to
produce it for verification if required during the second stage of the process. This exercise will result in a
provisional quality score. There is no intention at present that the score will affect the counting of
completions.
• The second stage will involve a Regional Validation Team to validate the score which areas reached through
self-assessment. This stage will not begin until all area self-assessments have been completed. There will be
input from the Quality Systems Manager and ECP team at NPD, as well as the Inspectorate, in arranging and
conducting these meetings which will be attended by the Regional What Works Manager and a range of local
staff. The validation event will produce a final, agreed Quality Score.
Timetable:
• Five one day briefing events will be held for area staff. These will provide further detail on the assessment
and validation processes. Nominees should ideally be the people who will be involved in organising the self-
assessment exercise in areas or those who are well positioned to cascade this input.
Areas can nominate between two and five people to attend these and should submit names and, where
possible, two choices of date, to Liam.Carolan@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk by June 18 2004. Information on
timings and venues will then be circulated to attendees
• Area Self-Assessment meetings should be scheduled to take place between October and December 2004
and the date, time and venue should be submitted to Liam.Carolan@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk by June 30 2004
• Regional Validation Meetings will take place between January and March 2005
Quality Scores will be reported to NPD and an annual report and summary of the process will be made available to the
panel at the first scheduled meeting after the completion of the exercise.
The self assessment framework is an opportunity for the area to look at the way it runs ECP.
The tools/documents provided by the Quality Management Team (QMT) for the purpose of quality assessment are as follows:
The first stage requires areas to ensure that the evidence in relation to the above components of the assessment is available and accessible. At this stage it is not
necessary to physically collect it. As with EEM, the scores will first of all be established by the areas on the basis of the available evidence. There is no
requirement to send any of the evidence to the QMT. The QMT does not require any advance information but will expect the area to complete the self
assessment form. However, the area should note at this stage where the evidence is located, as this will be of use for the verification process. The scores resulting
from the self assessment will constitute the Provisional Quality Score (PQS).
The information contained in the “Evidence required” section of the “ECP Self Assessment Guidance Form” represents good practice and mandatory elements
relevant to ECP. When undertaking self assessment if you believe your area has innovative practice which affects the score please include full details of the specific
practice. This should include processes and outcomes in sufficient detail for the Quality Management Team (QMT) validation panel to make a judgement about the
validity of the information. The QMT validation panel will consider the practice identified and the allotted score based upon the evidence provided, to ensure “best
practice” is disseminated widely and scoring integrity is maintained.
The second stage involves validation of the scores set by areas. In order to be able to complete the validation the area will be required to nominate representatives
to form a regional verification team which will be facilitated by the Quality Systems Manager. Prior to the validation event areas will be informed which evidence
needs to be available on the day for validation. A final score will then be available to the area.
Guidelines on Collating Evidence
The Quality Assessment process is, in line with Probation Service Policy, evidence based. Quality Assessment is more about finding evidence to show whether or
not an area has met a specific pre determined criteria. The ECP Self Assessment Guidance Form is structures around Performance Standards and makes specific
what the evidence is required and how it should be scored in terms of quality rating.
The self assessment approach has been designed within the framework of the EFQM. Consequently the following principles apply:
Evidence should be identifiable rather than anecdotal i.e. the evidence can be shown whenever it is requested.
There should be an appropriate scope for evidence in terms of :
o The extent to which a full range of evidence, relevant to the criteria, are presented (scope)
o The extent to which the relevance of the evidence presented is understood (relevance)
o The extent to which the evidence covers all relevant areas of the area set up e.g. throughout Schemes (segmentation)
The evidence can demonstrate what it claims to demonstrate in terms of the criteria set.
Types of Evidence
Possible sources of evidence are suggested in the document in relation to each of the criteria. These are not prescriptive and areas are free to use other means
where they can effectively evidence a criterion. Whilst evidence should be drawn from a range of sources, quality is more important than quantity. Some pieces of
evidence can appropriately be used in relation to several criteria and should be cross-referenced on the form.
Evidence should be current and the usual interpretation of this is that it should have been produced within the last twelve months. An exception to this would be
items such as a long term strategy document which had continued relevance. In such cases the most recent version should be used.
Sources of evidence in ECP units will include policy and practice documentation; scheme documentation as set out in the core manual; letters, e-mails and meeting
notes; beneficiary surveys and feedback; staff portfolios; offender GSL portfolios; details of accredited awards; workgroup rotas; training plans; promotional
material; press coverage; data reports.
Scoring
As a guiding principle Mandatory Elements require a higher degree of evidence to achieve a Score 2 than Important Elements. However, where National Standards
targets apply this is reflected in the scoring regardless of the level of importance placed on the criterion. Likewise where it is imperative to maintain scheme integrity
this approach has been adopted.
Committed Leadership & Supportive Management
A 1 Committed Leadership (Mandatory)
The senior management of the area should be openly and explicitly committed to the proper running of the scheme through policy and public statements.
5. There is a sufficient amount of material available to • First Aid Course registers and Certificates.
complete the work.
• A sample from the register of staff skills and
6. First Aid facilities are available and appropriate to qualifications, matched with work plans.
the nature of the project.
7. In the supervising and/or tutoring of offenders staff
have the required level of competence to deliver the
tasks as defined in the work plan.
B 3 Provision of information about the scheme (Important)
There should be a set of leaflets for offenders, sentencers and staff clearly describing the scheme and its requirements.
Score 1
In 50%-74% of cases scheme specific copies of leaflets
are available to staff, sentencers and offenders and they
contain the required elements.
Score 0
In less than 50% of cases scheme specific copies of
leaflets are available to staff, sentencers and offenders.
B 4 Managing attendance (Mandatory)
Offender attendance and absence are managed to achieve the required National Performance Management target for offender completions. Attendance is managed to achieve
coherent delivery with full impact for all undertaking the scheme.
Score 0
In less than 50% of cases the required elements have
been achieved.
B 6 Timeliness (Important)
All offenders commence the scheme within the specified period.
For CPROs, the timing may be different on occasions to permit other work to be completed, e.g. a programme of drug detoxification, completion of accredited programme.
Details are given in the scheme’s guidance on integrated case management and this sequencing must be followed.
Score 0
Less than 65% cases the size of the group does not
exceed six offenders to one supervisor.
B 8 Staff Selection (Mandatory)
A staff selection procedure meeting the requirements of the scheme’s manual is in place and only staff meeting the defined criteria are selected to deliver it.
Score 1
In 50%- 74% of cases the required elements have been
achieved.
Score 0
In less than 50% of cases the required elements have
been achieved.
B 10 Training arrangements for new staff (Mandatory)
Training courses are available for all roles involved in delivering the scheme. The training delivered conforms to the ECP training manual. All staff are required to undertake this
training before delivering the scheme.
F 2 Taxpayers receive excellent value for money from the ECP Scheme (Mandatory)
ECP provides is value for money and provides benefits to the taxpayer.
Score 0
Fewer 60% of orders are completed.
Score 0
No evidence.
F 5 Staff ownership of the scheme (Mandatory)
There is full ownership of the scheme by managers, supervisors and other relevant staff, e.g. court personnel and Case Managers. ECP staff have high level of morale/job
satisfaction from their role in ECP scheme.
Diversity
The Quality Assessment of ECP will pursue matters of Diversity within the National Probation Service’ policy on diversity as set out in
“Heart of the Dance – A Diversity Strategy for the National Probation Service for England and Wales 2002-2006”. The process should
therefore reflect the requirements of the National Probation Service Charter. “The National Probation Service pledges itself to equal service for all our
members, the offenders, victims of crime and our communities”. (Heart of the Dance 2003: page 5) It will also relate to the five specific points of the
National Probation Service Charter and thereby ensure the four principles for Diversity (Heart of the Dance 2003: page 6) are achieved.
Furthermore, the policy of diversity should be viewed within the framework of “responsivity”.
Responsivity
“The responsivity principle states that interventions should be delivered in ways which match the offenders’ learning style and engage their active participation” (HMIP
Evidence Based Practice A Guide to Effective Practice 1998: page 14 paragraph 1.27).
The root of the responsivity principle lies in the belief that every offender regardless of race, religion, gender, sexuality, age etc, should be
enabled to fulfil their potential to lead law abiding lifestyles to the maximum.
The wording in “The Performance Standards Manual for the Delivery of ECP” usually takes the form of addressing “race equality and
diversity issues”. This clearly stresses the importance of race but is also talking about all issues of discrimination. Quality Assessment should
therefore avoid hierarchies of discrimination. This means that Anti- Discriminatory Practice addresses racism, sexism, homophobia, disability
and ageism. It should also include any other form of discrimination where an individual is prevented from benefiting from a scheme or faces
obstacles to their attendance and participation. Anti- discriminatory practice therefore will address issues such as basic skills problems and
learning difficulties, mental health, rurality and so on.
Quality Assessment will look at how scheme staff, (including Case Managers and other involved staff) develop offenders’ responsivity by:
Community Re-integration
“Community reintegration is the most critical process for achieving long-term change. It should be an essential element of any supervision plan. The outputs of any
scheme should include motivation, preparation and skills enhancement to achieve successful participation in community life.” (HMIP Evidence Based Practice A
Guide to Effective Practice 1998: page 64 paragraph 5.2)
Exceptional Circumstances
“There is an unforeseen or unavoidable event, which is outside the Scheme Manager/Supervisor’s control and which any reasonable person would conclude would render
it impractical to continue with the scheduled session.” Based upon the principle contained in Probation Circular 92/2001 (Appendix 7).