Nordic and Scottish Civil Society Organisations Working with Offenders and the Effects of Service Delivery: Is Pursuing Mission Impossible Whilst Bidding for Contracts?

Abstract

It has been suggested that civil society organisations (CSOs) in the penal sector may be losing their autonomy, whilst delivering services to the public sector. This interview‐based study explores this question in the context of Nordic and Scottish CSOs. The findings reveal that for these CSOs that already are dependent on co‐operation with the criminal justice system, service‐delivery contracts have generated additional difficulties in remaining truthful to their missions. However, those CSOs that had embedded their core activities in volunteering instead of paid professionals were able to hold on to their original missions to a greater extent, regardless of service delivery. The article suggests that CSOs that still wish to remain loyal to their original purposes should reinforce volunteer‐based working methods within their organisations.

From the Outside In: Narratives of Creative Arts Practitioners Working in the Criminal Justice System

“…This ethos reflects the roots of British civil society organisations which ‘are located in charity distributed by the elite and middle classes to the poor (Taylor 2004; Kendall and Knapp )’ (Helminen , p.75). This kind of patronage assumes an affinity between the practitioner and mainstream society and a desire to reproduce its values; the charitable patron is an insider bestowing alms upon the socially marginalised and needy.…”

Evaluating voluntary sector involvement in mass incarceration: The case of Samaritan prisoner volunteers

“…Whilst they do respond to policy consultations, there are very limited means through which they seek to influence policies or decisions pertaining to the scale and conditions of imprisonment (but see Samaritans 2017Samaritans , 2019. The problem is structural: even grant-funded voluntary organisations self-censor in order to maintain their access to prisons and their beneficiary group (Helminen 2016). As such, although understandably, voluntary organisations like the Samaritans thus perpetuate the long-standing scenario where prison both creates the problems and defines the possible solutions (Zamble and Porporino 1988: 99).…”

Exploring Autonomy in the Finnish and New Zealand Penal Voluntary Sectors: The Relevance of Marketisation and Criminal Justice Policy Environments in Two Penal Voluntary Sector Organisations

“…Furthermore, in this environment many New Zealand service‐delivery VCOs have felt unable to engage in public advocacy for fear of losing funding (Mills ; Tennant ), suggesting the existence of a ‘democratic deficit’ (Grey and Sedgwick , p.57). Arguably, such concerns have long been salient for VCOs’ work in criminal justice, which requires the support and co‐operation of one of the most authoritarian arms of government (Mills ; Tennant ), and VCOs may engage in self‐censorship to ensure continued access to service users, regardless of their funding arrangements (Helminen ; Tomczak , p.117).…”