Women offenders: after the Corston Report - United Kingdom ...
Women offenders: after the Corston Report - United Kingdom ...
Women offenders: after the Corston Report - United Kingdom ...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
86 <strong>Women</strong> <strong>offenders</strong>: <strong>after</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Corston</strong> <strong>Report</strong>specialist organisations, particularly those working with a minority group likewomen <strong>offenders</strong>, where <strong>the</strong>re has been reliance on qualitative data, to illustratesuccess. NOMS must work hard with partners to develop <strong>the</strong> evidence base forcommissioners, and explore how existing providers can gain access to data relatingto <strong>the</strong>ir service users, in order to analyse and measure outcomes. If <strong>the</strong> strength of<strong>the</strong> evidence base remains weak as <strong>the</strong> transfer to new providers approaches <strong>the</strong>n weconsider that alternative funding mechanisms must be found to support <strong>the</strong>secentres until better evidence of <strong>the</strong>ir capacity to reduce offending, or o<strong>the</strong>rwise, isavailable. (Paragraph 139)18. The Government’s proposals for Transforming Rehabilitation have clearly beendesigned to deal with male <strong>offenders</strong>. Funding arrangements for provision forwomen appear to be being shoehorned into <strong>the</strong> payment by results programme,resulting in <strong>the</strong> likelihood of a loss of funding for broader provision encompassingboth women <strong>offenders</strong> and those with particular vulnerabilities that put <strong>the</strong>m at riskof offending. In addition, <strong>the</strong> risk of sentencers using short prison sentences as agateway to support undermines <strong>the</strong> post-<strong>Corston</strong> direction of travel in reducing <strong>the</strong>use of custody for women, and does nothing to mitigate <strong>the</strong> detrimental impact ofshort sentences on women, <strong>the</strong>ir families and <strong>the</strong> likelihood of reducing reoffending.If <strong>the</strong> Transforming Rehabiltation reforms are to work, improvement ofinformation to sentencers about <strong>the</strong> alternatives to custody, which we haverepeatedly called for, must take place. In that context <strong>the</strong>re must be clarity aboutresponsibility for that effective liaison with sentencers to raise <strong>the</strong> awareness of <strong>the</strong>judiciary about <strong>the</strong> range of available interventions, which has hi<strong>the</strong>rto been vestedin probation trusts. (Paragraph 143)19. Reducing reoffending is a very important goal, but so is preventing first offences bydiverting women away from crime. We consider that <strong>the</strong>re is a compelling caseunder <strong>the</strong> Transforming Rehabilitation programme for commissioning services forwomen <strong>offenders</strong> separately and for applying o<strong>the</strong>r incentive mechanisms thatwould encourage not just <strong>the</strong> reduction of re-offending but also <strong>the</strong> diversion ofwomen from crime. A strategic inter-departmental approach should be taken toensuring <strong>the</strong> long-term sustainability of services for women with complex needs. In<strong>the</strong> short-term it may be necessary to retain some grant funding for specialistprovision for women, or to have a transitional phase whereby <strong>the</strong> funding forprojects is initially ring-fenced to allow women’s centres to gain credibility with newproviders. It will also be important to clarify how new providers will contribute toexisting local commissioning arrangements, for example, between probation trusts,police and crime commissioners and local authorities, or how statutory partnershiparrangements could evolve to accommodate non-statutory localproviders/commissioners. (Paragraph 149)The custodial estate20. It follows from <strong>the</strong> thrust of our argument in this <strong>Report</strong> that we consider that <strong>the</strong>scope of <strong>the</strong> Government’s custodial estate review is unduly limited in taking <strong>the</strong> sizeof <strong>the</strong> women’s prison population as a given, particularly as <strong>the</strong> implementation of<strong>the</strong> remand reforms under <strong>the</strong> Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders