Justice Social Work Services: national throughcare guidance
Operational guidance intended to support Justice Social Work Practitioners across Prison Based and Community Based settings. It outlines best practice approaches for delivering effective throughcare throughout Scotland and sets out key policies, procedures and frameworks to inform everyday practice.
Part of
11. Appendices
Throughcare Quality Assurance Tool Guidance
11.1 Quality assurance is one of the five practice standards outlined within FRAME. It is an important process through which the quality and consistency of JSW practice and processes at all of stages of the throughcare process can be assured.
11.2 Quality assurance helps to identify what is working well and what is making a difference in the lives of people who receive JSW services. It is also important in identifying where improvements or change is required. Standardised quality assurance tools, applied consistently across Scotland, also allow services to benchmark performance. This is important to support continuous improvement in throughcare practice. These are suggested guidelines and tools for local authorities to use to evaluate the work being carried out by both PBSW and CBSW in relation to throughcare services for people subject to statutory supervision.
11.3 Quality assurance consists of auditing case records; evaluating assessments; assessing whether timescales are met; judging whether reports are fit for purpose; evaluating the quality of case or risk management plans; assessing the effectiveness of multi-agency work; and undertaking self-evaluation to support continuous improvement.
11.4 This quality assurance tool available for throughcare aims to complement the existing tools used to evaluate TARL assessments as well as LS/CMI assessments. Managers should use these tools to assure themselves of the quality and consistency of work undertaken within their service.
11.5 The tools ask whether a task has been carried out as expected. This requires a Yes/No/Don’t Know response within the template. When a judgement is required a four-point scale is used to evaluate, the extent to which an expected task has been completed, and in some instances, how effective it has been.
a) Completely- Clear evidence that work has been carried out to a very high standard. The needs of the person in custody or in the community have been identified and are being met, while considering case management, risk assessment and public protection with an equally strong focus on positive reintegration. There is evidence of a positive working relationship with evidence of trauma informed practice. Multi-agency work is evidenced throughout, demonstrated by appropriate information sharing and collaborative working. Relevant risk assessment tools are used within correct timescales.
b) Mostly- There is evidence of positive work being carried out by the worker but there are some areas where there could be improvement when considering support and integration needs while keeping a focus on risk assessment, case management and public protection. Trauma-informed practice has been evident throughout. There is some evidence of multi-agency collaboration. Relevant risk assessment tools used within correct timescale.
c) Partially- The case has been managed and worked with to an acceptable standard, however, there are areas for improvements. Risk assessment, case management and public protection measures have been addressed but support for reintegration needs could be developed. There are signs of multi-agency work, but this could be further developed.
d) Not at all- There are clear areas for improvement in identified areas of the case. There are concerns about the level of risk assessment and case management strategies with weakness in consideration about persons support needs. There is little evidence of multi-agency working.
11.6 When assessments, reports for the purposes of progression and parole and release planning are being quality assured the auditor should consider the following factors. This is not an exhaustive list but recommendations of areas to consider within the work that is being carried out:
a) Evidence of collaborative work between PBSW, CBSW and partner agencies where appropriate.
b) Evidence of analysis of risk and need using appropriate risk assessment tools.
c) Evidence of analysis of offending behaviour both index offence and previous offending behaviours.
d) Analysis of needs and vulnerabilities.
e) What supports the person has in the community they’re returning to and how relationships have been maintained while the person is in custody.
f) Analysis of the case or risk management plan with clear indication if there are limitations in the plan for the person.
g) Consideration about previous trauma and the impact it has on the person.
h) What barriers are present for the person reintegrating into their community.
i) Have PBSW and CBSW provided assessments or reports to relevant decision makers within time scale required.
j) Have the person’s communication needs been considered.
Throughcare Quality Assurance Tool
(Use the guidance above when completing this tool)
| Name of auditor: | Date of Audit: | Case identifying number: |
| Date of sentence: | Length of sentence: | |
| Index offence: | Court: | |
| Type of case: SRO Extended sentence Long term sentence STSO Life OLR | ||
| Risk assessments used: LS/CMI RM2K SA07 SARA STARTAv Other (specify) | ||
|
MAPPA Y/N If Yes comment on level/category: |
||
| Is there an up-to-date risk assessment and Management Plan on file |
Yes/No N/A Comment: |
|
| Were risk assessment tools updated as per guidance? |
Yes/No Comment: |
|
| Has the Management Plan been updated when appropriate? |
Yes/ No Comment: |
|
| Is there a Progress Record on file? |
Yes/ No Comment: |
|
| Have reviews taken place in line with assessed intensity of contact? |
Yes/ No Comment: |
|
| Is there evidence that the service actively seeks and considers the person’s views at each stage? |
Yes/No Comment: |
|
| Evidence of regular home visits while subject to community supervision? |
Yes/ No Comment: |
|
| Evidence of compliance issues being dealt with appropriately? |
Yes/ No Comment: |
|
| To what extent is collaboration between PBSW, CBSW and/or partner agencies to address risk and need evident? |
Completely Mostly Partially Not at all |
Comment: |
| To what extent do applied risk assessment tools identify risk and need? |
Completely Mostly Partially Not at all |
Comment: |
| To what extent do completed assessments analyse offending behaviour in relation to index offence and previous behaviours? |
Completely Mostly Partially Not at all |
Comment: |
| To what extent is the analysis of public protection concerns clear? |
Completely Mostly Partially Not at all |
Comment: |
| To what extent have any vulnerabilities or communication support needs of the person been identified and addressed? |
Completely Mostly Partially Not at all |
Comment: |
| To what extent does the management plan identify the risks and needs? |
Completely Mostly Partially Not at all |
Comment: |
| To what extent has the person been assisted to gain an understanding of the wider impact of their offending behaviour, including on victim(s)? |
Completely Mostly Partially Not at all |
Comment: |
| To what extent are barriers to reintegration identified within assessments and reflected in the management plan? |
Completely Mostly Partially Not at all |
Comment: |
Feedback for worker:
Areas for further discussion:
Quick Guide to Minimum Practice that should be followed for throughcare
| Short Term Sex Offender (STSO) Licence/Parole/Non-Parole and Life Licences | Extended Sentence and Supervised Release Order | OLR | |
| First Appointment | SPS Serve the Order/Licence. First appointment on day of release. (If Did Not Attend (DNA) then home visit to release address within 1 working day). |
SPS serve the licence or order. First appointment on day of release. If DNA then home visit to release address within 24 hours. If NFA and no contact, submit breach. |
SPS Serve the licence. First appointment on day of release. If DNA then home visit to release address within 24 hours. If DNA and no contact, submit immediate breach. |
| First case manager appointment and serve Order | Licence served by releasing prison and reviewed at first appointment. | Review the licence/order conditions requirements and ensure that they are understood by person. Ensure any barriers to engagement/ compliance are considered and steps taken to support the person to begin prices of rehabilitation and reintegration |
Review the licence/order conditions requirements and ensure that they are understood by person. Ensure any barriers to engagement/compliance are considered and steps taken to support the person to begin prices of rehabilitation and reintegration. Ensure contact and interventions are in line with the RMP. |
| Completion of Case Management Plan |
Case management planning should have started during custodial period & have influenced release planning. LS/CMI should be fully reassessed within 20 working days of receipt of the risk assessment from the prison. If there is a delay in receiving the LS/CMI then there must be file information evidencing the requests for the LS/CMI to be exported. |
Case management planning should have started during custodial period & have influenced release planning. LS/CMI should be fully reassessed within 20 working days of receipt of the risk assessment from the prison. If there is a delay in receiving the LS/CMI then there must be file information evidencing the requests for the LS/CMI to be exported. |
Those subject to an OLR will require an RMP not a case management plan (please refer to Standards and Guidelines for Risk Management) LS/CMI should be fully reassessed within 20 working days of receipt of the risk assessment from the prison. If there is a delay in receiving the LS/CMI then there must be file information evidencing the requests for the LS/CMI to be exported. |
| Non-attendance/ Noncompliance |
Home visit within one working day. If absence not acceptable then written warning. Consideration of breach if DNA on 2nd occasion. Maximum of two warnings and then inform PBS of failures in the form of a breach application, considering whether service user can be safely managed in the community. Any change of circumstances, or formal action taken (eg warnings), to be recorded. |
Home visit within one working day. If unacceptable consider the circumstances and take relevant action to support engagement, including use of disciplinary action. If risk is not assessed as manageable in the community a breach application should be submitted to Parole (or Court if an SRO). Where a RMP is in place the actions taken must be in accordance with the RMP/Contingency plan. |
Actions must be in accordance with the RMP/contingency plan. If reason for non-attendance is unacceptable consider the circumstances and take relevant action to support engagement, including use of disciplinary action. If risk is not assessed as manageable in the community a breach application is to submitted to the PBS. |
| Breach proceedings |
Failure to comply which does not suggest increase in risk can be managed through internal warnings (as above). Further offence or other failure to comply which indicates increase in risk – escalate as proportionate. Within the breach consider whether recall / warning is required. If recalled, PBS will pass information to ministers to schedule consideration of immediate re-release within two weeks. |
If the decision to breach is made then the relevant paperwork is to be submitted in a timely and proportionate manner. The breach paperwork must clearly outline the reason for the breach, actions taken before or at the time and the recommendation including assessment of risk in relation to nature, pattern, likelihood and seriousness For extended sentence breach paperwork is to be submitted to: For SRO the breach paperwork is to be submitted to the sentencing Court. |
If the decision to breach is made then the relevant paperwork is to be submitted in a timely and proportionate manner. The breach paperwork must clearly outline the reason for the breach, actions taken before or at the time and the recommendation including assessment of risk in relation to nature, pattern, likelihood and seriousness Breach paperwork is to be submitted to: |
| Contact 1st Month | Minimum weekly | Minimum weekly | Minimum weekly |
| Contact 2nd and 3rd Month |
Level of supervision and intensity of contact must be determined by an assessment of the likelihood for further offending along with a consideration of the pattern, nature and seriousness of the offending to date. |
Level of supervision and intensity of contact must be determined by an assessment of the likelihood for further offending along with a consideration of the pattern, nature and seriousness of the offending to date. |
The level of contact must be in accordance with the risk management plan and determined by an assessment of the likelihood for further offending along with a consideration of the pattern, nature and seriousness of the offending to date |
| 4th Month onwards |
Minimum of once per month Changes in frequency of contact should be agreed at reviews of press, chaired by Line manager and in accordance with assessment of the likelihood for further offending along with a consideration of the pattern, nature and seriousness. Life Sentence- frequency of appointments can reduce to less than once pre month based upon risk/engagement in consultation with line manager/at reviews. After 10 years an application can be made to CommunityLicence@gov.scot For consideration of revoking the licence condition requiring supervision. |
Minimum of once per month Changes in frequency of contact should be agreed at reviews of press, chaired by Line manager and in accordance with assessment of the likelihood for further offending along with a consideration of the pattern, nature and seriousness |
Changes in frequency of contact should be agreed at reviews of press, chaired by Line manager and must be in accordance with assessment of the likelihood for further offending along with a consideration of the pattern, nature and seriousness. |
|
Home Visits In addition to these min standards, workers should consider the benefit of additional HV’s in some cases, inc. unannounced for purposes of risk management. |
A home visit must be completed between each review period. Planned and unscheduled home visits should be undertaken. A Home visit must be considered in the following circumstances: Increase/significant change to risk Change of address Home visits should be risk assessed in line with your agency’s policies and procedures. |
A home visit must be completed between each review period. Planned and unscheduled home visits should be undertaken. A Home visit must be considered in the following circumstances: Increase/significant change to risk Change of address Home visits should be risk assessed in line with your agency’s policies and procedures. |
A home visit must be completed between each review period. Planned and unscheduled home visits should be undertaken. A Home visit must be considered in the following circumstances: Increase/significant change to risk Change of address Home visits should be risk assessed in line with your agency’s policies and procedures. |
| Reviews |
Initial Review: Within 12 weeks of date of release The frequency of subsequent reviews will be in accordance with level of intensity (after 3 months, 6 months or annually). It is good practice to hold a final review as part of the endings process. LS/CMI progress record updated with relevant information regarding progress prior to each review. |
Initial Review: Within 12 weeks of date of release The frequency of subsequent reviews will be in accordance with level of intensity (after 3 months, 6 months or annually). It is good practice to hold a final review as part of the endings process. LS/CMI progress record updated with relevant information regarding progress prior to each review |
Initial Review: Within 12 weeks of date of release The frequency of subsequent reviews will be in accordance with level of intensity (after 3 months, 6 months or annually). It is good practice to hold a final review as part of the endings process. LS/CMI progress record updated with relevant information regarding progress prior to each review |
| Exit Questionnaire | At Final Review stage | At Final Review stage (N/A for OLR) | At Final Review stage |
| Completion Reports and file closure | N/A | N/SRO only: Completion report to Court within 10 working days of Order Expiry | OLR does not end. |
Contact
Email: throughcare@gov.scot