Criminal Justice Committee Pre-Budget Scrutiny of the 2022/23 Budget

Social Work Scotland is the professional body for social work leaders, working closely with our partners to shape policy and practice, and improve the quality and experience of social services. We welcome this opportunity to feed into the Criminal Justice Committee’s scrutiny of the Scottish Government’s budget for 2022-23

The Criminal Justice Board (CJB) agreed to the distribution of an additional £50 million over 2021-22, both to establish additional court capacity and to contribute to the wider associated costs across the justice system, including community justice, prisons and legal aid. This is often referred to as the ‘COVID consequentials’. The immediate priority is recovery, but the money is also seen as a spur for renewal and transformation of the justice system.

Justice social work (JSW) were allocated £12.8 million (of the £50 million). This was distributed to the 32 local authorities through the same methodology as used for the distribution of the annual ring-fenced grant for delivery of JSW (often referred to as s27 funding). In addition, the Scottish Government budget for 2021-22 proposed an increase of around £2.5 million in relation to community justice services; this was also distributed to JSW using the formula and was ring-fenced to use specifically in commissioning Third Sector services to support and bolster recovery.

Social Work Scotland welcomed the additional allocation to assist with recovery; we continue to work closely with Scottish Government and partners in the justice sector, including Community Justice Scotland, to model the impact of courts reopening and movement through the substantial backlog of criminal cases from autumn 2021. It is likely that this will result in an increase of business/demand for JSW of over 30% above pre-covid levels until 2026. To put this in context, the number of community payback orders nationally pre-COVID was around 16,500 per year. A 30% increase would mean an extra 5,000 – 5,500 orders.

Whilst recognising that £12.8 million is a significant investment in JSW, we are concerned that the money is only for one year (when recovery will take a number of years) and that local authorities were only informed on 30 March of their respective allocation (leaving little time for planning). To build capacity for the anticipated increase in JSW business, most local authorities planned to recruit additional staff, a mix of qualified social workers and paraprofessionals. With no lead in time, and no ability to roll-forward under-spend from 2021/22 into 2022/23 due to Scottish Government rules, many local areas have been forced to recruit to short-term contracts; this makes recovery more precarious and limits our ability to deliver renewal and transformation.

The issue is, therefore, less the ‘total size of the budget’ and more the lack of time to plan, the short-term duration of the funding, and absence of guarantees of future funding to sustain recovery. Attracting qualified justice social workers can be difficult at the best of times (for a variety of reasons, including limited supply) and limiting us to offering short-term contracts (typically 12 months) has hindered recruitment; there is less incentive, particularly for social work qualified staff, to apply for these posts. Many local teams have instead expanded the hours of part-time staff and recruited ‘locum’ social workers; however, this is also a limited pool.

The reality is that at the half-way point of the financial cycle, with a recruitment process that typically takes 4 – 6 months to complete, it means that many local authorities are only just completing the appointment of additional staff. Indeed, if recruitment has been possible at all; some areas are reporting problems in attracting candidates. There is therefore a real risk that JSW will be unable to spend the totality of the covid consequentials this year. And even where areas have been able to successful recruit, many of the new social workers and other staff will not be experienced and trained in justice social work. A considerable additional investment (of time and money) is then required in training to complete various accredited risk and needs assessment tools, to use systems and to work with sex offenders and domestic abuse perpetrators

The blended working model of office/home will remain in place in many local authorities as it’s been proven to work (in respect of service delivery). There will be financial costs around IT equipment, chairs, desks etc. to develop and maintain this model, as staff will require this to work effectively at home on a permanent basis. All employers are considering the social and welfare costs for staff, in terms of loss of immediate access to peer support and the work/life balance of the new model. Many workers in JSW services have struggled with undertaking work with certain individuals whilst at home, reporting, for example, that interviewing a sex offender can feel like you have invited the person into your home. However, there are also benefits to employers and employees, and the environment, of a more flexible approach to work

Simply put, in respect to JSW, no. For JSW to adequately meet the anticipated demand a programme of long-term investment is needed, substantially increasing the annual grant allocation to local authorities. This would create a measure of stability for local authorities, supporting the retention of existing staff, facilitating recruitment of new staff (on longer term, more attractive contracts) and thereby enable local and national plans to recover, renew, and transform services. More secure funding would also enable JSW to strengthen the partnership with the Third Sector through local commissioning arrangements. The one-year covid consequentials funding, with no guarantee of this being extended into future years, does not provide that necessary certainty.

Please also refer to comments in the ‘Programme for Government’ section

Whilst continuing to deliver and maintain services throughout the pandemic, the initial lockdown in March 2020 and in late-December 2020 forced JSW to prioritise those individuals posing the most serious risk of harm, including those most vulnerable. Face-to-face contact continued where necessary, but much of the contact with individuals switched to telephone contact and, where possible, and increasingly so, with the use of some form of video-enabled technology, e.g. using various applications on Smart phones such as WhatsApp or Facetime.

This is likely to continue and develop. Virtual meetings will never replace the importance of direct contact with individuals, but whether it is in remoter rural areas or larger city authorities the benefits of conducting interviews and meetings online, where it is appropriate to do so, are unquestionable. Virtual meetings have worked extremely well, for example, MAPPA (the multi-agency public protection arrangements for sex and other dangerous and violent offenders), MARAC (the multi-agency risk assessment conferences working to keep victims of domestic abuse safe) and MATAC (the multi-agency task and coordination conferences working to manage the risk of perpetrators of domestic abuse).
Some local authorities report savings in terms of buildings being closed and plan for the rationalisation of their property portfolios in the longer term. There are also savings associated with reduced travel to prisons, which has the additional benefit of facilitating a ‘greener’ approach to JSW’s supporting people in prison and preparing for their release (referred to as Throughcare).
However, in the short-term savings have been offset by increased investment in IT infrastructure and equipping people to work at home (laptops, webcams, etc.). There has also been a concomitant increase in cost in some areas due to the need to adapt physical space to covid-related restrictions e.g. physical distancing and ventilation.

Moreover, there is a note of caution surrounding all these recent developments. Many staff have reported that the online world of work can be more intensive, with longer working hours and fewer breaks in between meetings. There is also less opportunity for personal connection, informal peer-support and relationship building. All of which can result in reduced motivation and feelings of burnout.

The two national lockdowns necessitated the cessation of the physical delivery of unpaid work. This directly contributed to the growing backlog of hours, necessitating the use of the Coronavirus (Scotland) Act 2020 to reduce the number of hours by 35% (with exclusions applying). However, local authorities greatly expanded the use of ‘other activity’ in response to being unable to deliver face-to-face unpaid work – this provides the opportunity, within certain prescribed limits, for an individual to undertake other rehabilitative activities which promote desistance (e.g. alcohol or drug education, interpersonal skills training, personal development or confidence building, literacy and numeracy tutoring, victim awareness, careers advice and employability training). These ‘other activities’ were often delivered in imaginative ways. Workbooks were issued to individuals, learning packs on alcohol education, and existing and new online modules were promoted and developed by the Third Sector and purchased by JSW from many organisations, including Sacro, Apex Scotland, The Wise Group and Street Cones. Many of these offered modules on a range of topics – mental health, employability – or worked with individuals directly to achieve positive outcomes on community payback orders through learning from lived experience and constructing a path to change through the arts.

Whilst ‘other activity’ will not replace physical unpaid work and the reparation and benefits to communities that this brings, COVID-19 provided the opportunity and impetus to expand the range and quality available. This will continue and it will be important to evaluate what does work and build an evidence base as to its effectiveness

Social Work Scotland support continuing local and national efforts to develop and invest in digital technology. Reliable, accessible and secure access within the prison estate to Scottish Prison Service staff and prisoners will, for example, significantly improve the connection between prison and community and planning for reintegration on release. And the success of reintergration correlates to the likelihood of recidivism. Digital has opened up new possibilities for JSW that we are eager to evaluate and, if effective, scale up.

However, there is a risk to seeing digital transformation as a panacea. The issue of digital poverty is legitimate – most local authorities accessed various funds to purchase devices for individuals, including data. That investment will need to continue for some time to come. And digital justice must never simply be used for the sake of convenience. For example, the custody court initiative to deliver virtual court capacity and associated processes remains a good idea, but it is crucial that we take the time to get this right. From a JSW perspective there remain several issues that would need be resolved to ensure the quality of service is not adversely affected e.g. access to individuals in the custody suite to conduct proper, full assessments (e.g. for bail supervision).

Social World Scotland strongly supports the statements within the Scottish Government’s Programme for Government (PfG) 2021/22 which note that “As a progressive and humane society, we should be working towards using prison only for those who pose a risk of serious harm” and that “This will be underpinned by investment in a substantial expansion of community justice services supporting diversion from prosecution, alternatives to remand and community sentencing, which evidence shows is more effective at reducing reoffending.” Such a process of investment and readjustment must start now.

The Scottish Government budget in 2020-21 allocated a core ring-fenced grant to JSW of £86.5 million. The level of this core grant has remained flat for several years, despite increased expectations on JSW and cost inflation. In any given year the core grant is topped up from other budget lines or funding for new initiatives; in 2020-21 it totalled £105,849,226. However, these additional ‘pots’ are closely prescribed, and may need to be spent and reported on in the financial year (with related issues for JSW recruitment, etc., as set out in answers above). It is crucial therefore that work starts as soon as possible on determining a more accurate assessment of the costs associated with community interventions across Scotland. The Scottish Government has already committed to doing so, in collaboration with key partner organisations such as Community Justice Scotland, with work due to take place over 2021 and 2022. This process should provide an informed assessment as to the true cost of providing justice social work services in Scotland, and of delivering on community justice services. Currently, this is not known with any degree of accuracy. For example, in 2015-16 the cost of supervising a community payback order was estimated by Scottish Government at £1,771, a figure which continues to be used as a baseline. This figure was calculated by dividing total recorded expenditure on CPOs across the 8 (now disestablished) Community Justice Authority’s by the volume of those disposals. This is the method of calculating all the unit costs for the various JSW services and does not reflect the complexity or true cost of those services. An evidence base is required as to the level of funding required to deliver services in the community.

The Scottish Government’s specific PfG ‘bail and release’ from prison proposals have potentially significant implications for JSW. The consultation paper will not be published until sometime in October, making any detailed comment here difficult. But SWS understands that the proposals may suggest reserving remand for those at risk of serious harm, therefore casting a spotlight on the risk assessment issue at the court stage i.e. who does it, what assessment tool is used, etc. There are possible implications for JSW, given our current role in assessing for supervised bail – many areas currently deploy non-social work qualified staff and changes may require qualified staff, increasing cost (notwithstanding possible recruitment challenges); and it may raise the prospect of a more formal statutory JSW role in the provision of bail supervision (currently there is none).

Similarly, there are likely to be some significant implications for JSW relating to the release for prison proposals. SWS understands these may include amending the Home Detention Curfew model (making it automatic for low-risk prisoners) and the whole issue of support for prisoners on release, particularly for short-term prisoners (e.g. strengthening the duties on public bodies, possibly through introducing minimum standards for voluntary throughcare ) and support for those remanded in custody. Social Work Scotland support the bold and transformational thinking that lie behind some of these proposals, but they would require sufficient funding to ensure they can be successfully delivered; both in respect to building the workforce base (numbers and skills) necessary to do the work, and support through the process of implementation (learning from those areas, in Scotland and beyond, who have experience and learning).