The penal voluntary sector in England and Wales: Beyond neoliberalism?

Abstract

In response to policy developments aiming to increase the involvement of penal voluntary

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

“…Indeed, as noted, the voice and service roles have traditionally been integrated in the Nordic countries. Thus, although the two Scottish CSOs appeared, in the light of these findings, more dependent on public funding, the penal voluntary sector in the UK may have more diversity, as Tomczak () has illustrated. However, the responsibility for influencing work should not be thrust solely upon campaigning organisations, as it can be assumed that CSOs which participate in service delivery themselves lend special weight to their opinions before the government.…”

“…For example, in one of the few studies in which stakeholders from the CSOs were interviewed, half of the interviewees stated that government contracts muted their critical voice, whilst half of them had not noted such an effect (Mills, Meek and Gojkovic ). Furthermore, Tomczak () has highlighted the heterogeneity of the CSOs working in the area of criminal justice, arguing that CSOs are able to find alternative funding sources instead of becoming ‘junior partners’ of the government. Hence, these observations suggest that the effects of service‐delivery contracts may not be as harmful for the civil society sector as previously imagined.…”

Striving for a “good” family visit: the facilitative role of a prison visitors’ centre

“…In England and Wales, third sector providers managing visitors' centres have not been exempt from wider 'efficiency and effectiveness' examinations in the criminal justice system (NOMS, 2014). Through delivering family services on behalf of statutory organisations, third sector organisations could potentially be in jeopardy of distorting their primary goals and remit (Tomczak, 2014).…”

The revolving door of reform

“…A similar reduction took place following the Offender Management Act 2007, which established a process for Probation Areas to apply to become a Probation Trust; in all, 35 were eventually constituted (Burke and Collett, 2010). Most recently, Transforming Rehabilitation saw probation trusts disbanded and a 'new' National Probation Service established, alongside 21 Community Rehabilitation Companies combining private companies and third-sector organizations in a hybrid model of public service delivery (Tomczak, 2013). While this arrangement offers potential access to a greater number of staff, they are of varying skill, experience and qualification (Annison et al, 2014).…”

“…The coalition government claimed it was opening up community justice to the voluntary sector, though in reality the penal voluntary sector was already well established in the UK (Tomczak, 2013). The value of introducing contestability into criminal justice practices, to create a 'market' of providers, has been challenged as a distraction from developing greater understanding of the way interventions are delivered (Rowe and Soppitt, 2014).…”