Recommendation 4

HMPPS is still not getting all the basics right when commissioning resettlement services. HMPPS works with Commissioned Rehabilitative Services (CRS) providers from the private and voluntary sectors who provide tailored support to offenders in areas such as accommodation, employment and wellbeing. HMPPS issued 110 contracts to CRS providers ready for ‘day one’ of the new unified probation service but a second wave of contracts for a wider range of services, such as finance, benefits and debt support, is still underway. HMPPS holds CRS providers to account against two administrative measures but does not systematically monitor all providers’ activities or offenders’ outcomes. Some providers have criticised the current CRS contracts for being “highly process driven” and focussing too much on inputs, such as whether a prison leaver has been offered an appointment, instead of good quality outcomes. HMPPS’s baseline audit of 28 highest value contracts identified poor performance by both the Probation Service and CRS providers. In 89% of contracts the Probation Service’s referrals to CRS providers did not meet standards in ‘some regards’ or ‘failed’ to meet standards, and in 68% of contracts providers did not sufficiently meet offenders’ rehabilitative needs. We are pleased that HMPPS tried to remove potential barriers to entry for small and voluntary sector organisations, but a 2021 survey of providers found the commissioning process was still “complex, cumbersome and bureaucratic”, with many small, specialist organisations finding it too hard to engage with HMPPS. Recommendation 4a: In its Treasury Minute response, HMPPS should set out how it will ensure good quality outcomes for prison leavers under its existing Commissioned Rehabilitative Services contracts. b) HMPPS should also set out in the Treasury Minute how it will apply the lessons learned from the procurement of these services to its future commissioning exercises. Resettlement support for prison leavers 7