Justice Social Work: national practice standards and outcomes

5. Managing Compliance and/or Escalating Risk

Practice standard 7: Decisions made and actions taken by the worker in relation to compliance with supervision are defensible, proportionate and clearly recorded.

5.1 Case Management Issues

Whilst some aspects of contact with JSW is voluntary in nature, the primary focus of JSW is to undertake duties as required by legislation. People therefore attend appointments because they are required to do so by a court or the parole board. It is the skill of the worker in developing the content of these meetings and building an effective working relationship, that ensures the time is used to address offending behaviour, manage risk, maintain engagement and encourage compliance.

Specific procedures for managing any non-compliance can be found in the relevant practice guidance as this can vary depending on the reason the person is involved with JSW.

Supervision and licence requirements can be lengthy and difficult to understand given the formal language used. Workers should be able to demonstrate that they have taken time, care and creativity to ensure expectations are fully explained and truly understood.

Successful completion of statutory supervision is the primary objective. However, it is equally important that it is clear from the outset, the potential implications and consequences should the person not adhere to any particular requirements of the order or licence to which they are subject.

Justice workers enable and encourage people to understand and address their behaviour, as well as identify and develop the skills they need to address the risk of re-offending.

Supporting compliance with supervision or licence requirements is intended to manage risk and protect potential victims and the wider community. Justice workers are skilled at identifying early warning signs of escalating risk or imminent offending and will implement strategies to mitigate this as a first response. Consideration will be given to the nature of the non-compliance coupled with the assessed risk to others which would be key in determining the nature of the response required.

Depending on the intensity of supervision and assessed risk, it may be appropriate to exercise a degree of discretion to build motivation and encourage compliance. The following taken from the Care Inspectorate’s record reading guidance clarifies this as:

“Such decisions are crucially important in ensuring the protection of the public as well as enabling the person to fulfil their obligations to the court. Such decisions must directly correlate to the level of supervision intensity and identified risk. In general, the higher the identified risk of causing harm, the less discretion should be used.”

If non-compliance persists or is considered to be unacceptable then formal action will be required.

5.2 Use of warnings

In situations where the person has caused serious harm, or is considered to present an imminent risk of causing seriously harmful behaviour, then further action in the form of a breach application to the court, or Scottish Ministers in the case of a licence, should be made without delay or recourse to issuing a series of warnings.

In situations where there are signs of disengagement but the worker considers there is no evidence of an immediate risk to others, then warnings should be used to encourage re-engagement. The worker should make every effort to contact the person or relevant others, either by phone or in-person depending on the management plan and contact frequency, to establish the current situation before a warning is issued.

Given the challenging personal circumstances that can be experienced by those in the justice system, professional judgement can be applied, for example to incidences of missed appointments. This has to be balanced with the statutory obligations required by the order or licence and the expectation that potential risks are managed effectively.

All discussion, decisions and actions relating to the issuing of warnings should be clearly recorded, along with the rationale to ensure decisions are transparent and defensible. This includes instances where professional judgement has been used to exercise discretion rather than issue a warning.

Workers should always advise their line manager prior to the issuing of a warning in order to note that there is escalating risk in the case.

5.3 When to apply for a breach

In terms of both statutory obligations and professional integrity, action is required if the person is persistently failing to attend appointments or undertake actions as required.

If the use of warnings and a re-engagement review have not achieved the desired outcome then a discussion should take place with a line manager to determine whether a breach application should be submitted.

Once the decision to submit a breach application has been taken this should be recorded and submitted within the timescale set out in the relevant practice guidance. The report should contain information about progress to date, all actions taken in response to non-compliance and include an outline of proposed actions to promote compliance should the order/licence be allowed to continue.

5.4 What should happen whilst a breach is pending

Unless the worker has had no contact with the person or has been unable to get in touch with them, efforts should be made to maintain contact whilst a decision on the breach application is pending.

The frequency or nature of this contact should be determined by professional judgement, assessed nature of risk and in discussion with a line manager. Consideration should also be given to the nature and purpose of this contact.

It presents an opportunity to enable reflection on the impact of poor decision making, taking responsibility for decisions, living within boundaries and solving problems, linking this to the issues which led to the breach application.

If relevant, the worker should prepare a brief update report to outline the person’s engagement and progress during this period. This will offer those making a decision on the breach application an insight into the current situation and can assist decisions on whether there is merit in continuing with community based supervision.

5.5 What happens after a breach application

Depending on the actions taken with regard to the breach application, there may be a gap in the person’s contact with JSW. If the order/licence is reinstated once the breach has been considered, it is a matter for local services to determine whether the same worker continues with the case management or whether it is more appropriate for a different worker to embark on the next phase of involvement.

Whether it is the same worker or not, the first appointment post-breach is an opportunity to reset expectations and consider whether there are lessons to be learned to support future engagement. Listening to why there was lack of engagement or certain behaviours occurred can be invaluable for both the worker and person involved to reflect and consider how to deal with difficulties differently should they arise again.

The management plan can then be adapted to reflect agreed actions that will contribute to reducing risks. Contact frequency and date of next review should be agreed based on the assessed likelihood and impact of reoffending, with the rationale for this noted in case notes.