Friday 4 April 2014

Omnishambles Update 43

The slow-motion train-crash that TR is rumbles on and we know potential bidders both big and small are dropping like flies. We know this because Ian Lawrence told us in his pre-strike email to all members:-

"The number of bidders has fallen from 50 to 26 and is dropping almost daily.  In some areas there is only one serious bidder which is not even approaching the legal definition of a competition."

and the Clinks website tells us that the MoJ's desperate search for Tier 2 and 3 bidders has been extended indefinitely:-
The MoJ has recently confirmed that the 31st March registration deadline for potential Tier 2 and 3 providers has now been removed and registrations will continue indefinitely. If you are considering subcontracting under the TR programme you are strongly advised to register to ensure that any subcontracting arrangements you enter into use the Industry Standard Partnering Agreement (ISPA); contact MAS@justice.gsi.gov.uk to request a registration form. Organisations that are registered will receive an email from the MoJ by the end of this week, if you have previously registered and do not receive this email you are advised to query this by contacting MAS@justice.gsi.gov.uk.
I understand that one of the problems has been getting hold of some cash as this blog from January on the Social Enterprise Live website explains:-


In autumn last year, partnerships interested in bidding to be Tier 1 providers had to complete a Pre Qualification Questionnaire (PQQ) to get through to the next round of bidding.
In order to get through the PQQ, partnerships needed to be able to demonstrate that they would be able to raise the working capital needed to deliver the contract in the event that they won it: “Potential Bidders must demonstrate access to funding equivalent to 50% of the indicative annual contract value of any one lot they wish to bid for.
Evidence of this access to finance could include: “funding in principle letters, provided by a lender”.
Keen to avoid doubt, the MoJ made clear that: “For the avoidance of doubt, bidders who cannot demonstrate available funding of at least £5.85m (equal to 50% of the indicative annual contract value for the smallest lot within the competition (Norfolk and Suffolk) will be awarded a ‘fail’ and not be invited to proceed to the next stage for any lot or to refresh their lot preferences.
Given that the contracts themselves are still to be determined the question being put to social investors was effectively ‘in the event that this social enterprise consortium was in a position to (a) win a contract and (b) convince you that the as yet undetermined numbers stacked up, would you in theory be in a position to provide them with a significant proportion of the working capital they need to deliver the contract?’
On that basis, Mike Harvey, chief executive of Northern Inclusion Consortium (NIC), a new company formed by 5 social organisations based in the North with strong track record in supporting people with complex needs, decided to ask some of the UK’s leading social investment intermediaries whether they could provide a letter offering ‘funding in principle’.
The answer was “no”. Or, as Harvey explains: “even where the answer was a tentative ‘possibly yes’, that was caveated with ‘but not at this point in time’ – i.e. when it was actually needed for the PQQ, and this was after the market had supposedly been warmed up months in advance by the MoJ, so is perhaps again indicative about the social investment market’s ability (or inability) to respond at the pace required by most procurement exercises.”
Undeterred, Harvey then approached a range of other social investors from the BSC list and beyond. The responses from included (expressed in Harvey’s words):
reasonably positive but ultimately came back to say they didn’t have a fund available to provide cover, could potentially have a fund in the new year, but it would be capped
no funds until spring 2014
told us to approach our own banks first, and at best could get to £2m in investment but not in the timeframe
understood our issues but were capped at a max investment of £350k
said they could invest up to £1m, then said they couldn’t do a covering letter in the necessary timeframe
A dickie bird tells me that civil servants are privately horrified by some the organisations bidding, such as a large cleaning company in Wales that's in pole position. It seems the Welsh Office is not impressed by the prospect, but that's the reality of this TR omnishambles

I don't know why, but I wasn't aware of this until I saw it buried in Mactailgunner's latest weather report over on the Napo forum pages:-

Enhanced VR Scheme

There are some very fed-up senior managers around the country - Chief Execs, Heads of HR etc. NOMS have dictated that this scheme cannot be accessed until after June (for reasons that they aren't being entirely honest about). It was promised, like now - indeed some Trusts started to invite expressions of interest. These invites have had to be withdrawn. Grievances are bubbling and it is probably only a matter of time before someone takes the matter to an ET - unfair or constructive dismissal - jobs disappear = redundancy situation. This will particularly affect senior staff in Trusts merging to form one CRC 

Finally, I saw this on twitter and am mightily impressed by it. A simple infographic that helps explain it all:-


Embedded image permalink

It would seem that the decision to shaft probation goes right back to the very beginning of the coalition alliance. The Tories wanted to privatise the whole thing, but the Lib Dems were not happy. The Tories were sensibly wary of getting too involved in trying to supervise all the under 12 month people, so a deal was struck. Only part of the Service was to be privatised, in return for buying off the Lib Dems with mandatory supervision of all the under 12 month people.

It was decided right from the beginning and it's the Lib Dems who should never be allowed to forget that it was they who so ignorantly and comprehensively laid the foundations for the present bloody mess we find ourselves in. No wonder we never got anywhere trying to lobby that weasel bunch.

17 comments:

  1. I recall a previous posting which suggested managers might be able to vote for VR but then defer it for up to two years, hence cream a couple more years' crc or nps salary until they walk with pockets overflowing. MacTailgunner's piece seems to cast doubt on that view - perhaps managers are also being shafted now that TR is "on track", so perhaps there might be disgruntled managers prepared to speak out at last?

    Have you been shafted? Has TR affected you? Then contact On Probation - the blog designed to air your views and ease your pain.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "Have you been shafted? Has TR affected you? Then contact On Probation - the blog designed to air your views and ease your pain." ROFL - our new strapline....

    ReplyDelete
  3. I heard from someone working for a potential external bid team that they are concerned about the deals struck by the unions in terms of no redundancies and maintaining T&C's for a set period (obviously, as we all knew, part of their business model was to cut staff). Also, concerns about a dissatisfied work force (highlighted by this weeks strike), and the potential union involvement at a later date if job changes etc take place.

    I doubt the main players will have these concerns, they'll just ride roughshod over people. But a lack of competition may leave scope for the unions to make waves; the likelihood is the proposed CRC services will be scaled back when they realise they don't have to offer so much (and thereby reduce their profit) to win a bid for the contracts.

    So, my personal view is that it is worth staying in NAPO and being active in reporting back the mess the Trusts are in, continuing with industrial action and not just resigning ourselves to a perceived inevitability that we can't influence anything. I will also be active in reporting any shoddy and dangerous practice if/when the sale goes ahead.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I have no doubt that Graylings plans took a massive hit when Serco and G4S were identified as very crooked companies. They would have taken mist of the TR contracts as prime providers.
    With the withdrawal of many interested parties and bidders becoming so few, I'm left wondering if this move by serco recently may have any significance to'wards TR?

    Rupert Soames is joining Serco as its chief executive a month earlier than expected as the security giant looks to quickly rebuild its reputation in the electronic tagging scandal's wake.Serco said in a brief statement that Soames, who is the grandson of British wartime prime minister Winston Churchill, will now take the helm on May 1 rather than in June. He joins from his role as boss of energy firm Aggreko.The business is under criminal investigation by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) after it emerged that the Ministry of Justice had been overcharged on Serco's contract to carry out the electronic tagging of criminals.In some cases it was alleged that taxpayers were billed for tagging work that was never carried out. Serco's rival G4S, another outsourcing firm, is also caught up in the scandal.When the SFO investigation was announced, Serco's then chief executive Christopher Hyman quit.Serco was subject to a ban on government contracts until early 2014 as a result of the tagging furore.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Fantastic - brother of Nicholas, the larger than life Uber-Tory MP. Huwwah!!

      Delete
  5. https://twitter.com/AndrewzCooper/status/444449127154601984 hope this link works Jim as I and possibly others cannot enlarge the image embedded in your script.I have adked Andrew to add probation to the list of affected organisations w/out success to date.Maybe you'll have more luck!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes a good point and I meant to include the link.

      Thanks

      Delete
  6. I think part of the fight should be about NAPO going on the offensive in exploring and exposing the effectiveness of some of those companies that are bidding for the contracts. How much money has been thrown at organisations such as DISC (part of the NIC mentioned above) over the years and what have been their outcomes in bringing about a change in people's lives? I have much greater faith in the mutual adhering to the values that we as staff have as well as having a greater understanding of offenders than consortiums that are more concerned with profit and their existence than lives of our offenders and victims.

    ReplyDelete
  7. well the TR omnishambles resulted in me assigned to NPS. Whilst out on strike on Tuesday, a high risk violent offender was released. The first I knew about it was on the Wednesday when a faxed Licence was thrust in my hand at 4,30pm. Had he attended? Who saw him? No idea what was going on!!!!!
    Told by admin that he had not attended and was about to start recall when accidentally bumped into someone on the stairs who had seen him as he had indeed attended!
    Previous OM also on strike and had not been informed of exact day of release.
    Chaos reigns...........lack of communication..............no managers (always in meetings)..........even when there, don't know any more than us............trying to get to grips with whole new caseload..............who's inside.....who's out.........if they are out, have they got an appointment.........who's risky and to whom.......MAPPA arrangements, MARAC, Child Protection issues, Domestic Violence risks, Mental Health issues, Personality Disordered offenders, the inadequacy and sheer inaccessibility and unworkability .of NDelius not to mention bloody Oasys........taking calls from other involved agencies, but often embarrassingly and (to my mind) unprofessionally having no/sketchy knowledge of the case! The list goes on! (An SFO waiting to happen, and you know who will be blamed....me).
    So, that was my week when reality struck home and the pervading fear enveloped me.
    This has just made me more determined to fight TR with all my might and resources. I will support the Union fight to the end............Grayling cannot be allowed to do this.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I am so glad I do not need to be a probation officer right now - the chaos anticipated is happening - NOW - actually - a potential issue with a possibly dangerous person - on DAY ONE - April the 1st - what was that about gradual introduction - resettlement prisons - all met at the gate - pre release prison visits - obviously if such service is planned for folk sentenced to less that 12 months - it would be crass to have a lesser service for folks who have been out of circulation for longer - wouldn't it - or am I just an out of touch has been - the sort of practitioner whose experience is no longer relevant?

    That there was no actual recall, reported suggests that on this occasion, a skilled and alert practitioner, got to grips with situation and sorted out what could have been disastrous if she or he had been giving evidence in court, on leave or on a prison visit at 4.30pm and there had been no one as a back up - to have the fax "thrust" in their hands.

    We used to find it difficult in small offices, having a duty officer available for unexpected callers in the morning, so how will it work out when in EVERY probation area - double the number of duty staff will be required and that is just in co located offices, what about when there are relocations and the NPS place is in the next town or... etc.,etc.?

    Omnishambles is an understatement - STOP IT IMMEDIATELY - lets design some pilots - do it different ways in different areas - compare experiences in - say 12 months then do a report to Parliament and let them decide the best design, on the basis of experience!

    I hope Anon at 18.49 sends an email with details as encouraged by Napo -

    http://www.napo2.org.uk/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=594

    even if Anon at 18.49 is not a member, and also as I have seen advised, can't recall exactly where = complete an accident/incident form and submit it to the CEO

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Fortunately, (although I'm not entirely sure for whom), recall was not proceeded with as he had been given an appointment (by the person who failed to inform me) to attend today, which thankfully he did. However, it was only by accident that I found out any of this information. The whole episode is scary and shows how easy things can go wrong.
      Further to this, we have been sent by email today, TR practice instructions, and Chief Officer directions...............BY EMAIL! As if we have time to read it amid this omnishambles. If this is how it is going to be they may as well bring out a "Teach yourself Probation manual"...might make a few quid with the privateers too!

      Delete
    2. A fax!!! Who still uses faxes?

      Delete
  9. We also keep getting information daily via e-mail. To be honest for the first time in my 10 year probation career my e-mail in-box is overflowing. Prior to TR I would immediately respond to, delete, or appropriately file away the majority of e-mails leaving only key important ones in my in-box. Now all I can do is glance at the ones that look important and ignore the rest. I just have too much to do. None of my work was covered by the strike. Colleagues are off sick. I'm playing catch-up with my own work and covering everyone else's.

    Managers must realise that by sending us e-mails saying 'Important! Read! Act immediately!' rather than talking to us or providing us with proper training on the subject that they are simply going to be ignored or put in the 'to do when I get time' pile. Especially as we are getting numerous e-mails like this from various managers each day.

    To be honest though, I know that the managers do know this but maybe don't know what else to do. It is all too much, too quick, it doesn't work, it's understaffed and under funded. It's plain ridiculous.

    ReplyDelete
  10. So, so, so tired. Just completely exhausted. Spent the day trying to transfer a very high risk client too a new area he has been bailed to 250 miles away. At 2.30pm got a call from Crown Court who wanted to release a High Risk one directly from Court, managed to get them to adjourn for sentencing on Monday when we've got the AP bed properly in place, appointments with the DIP and Community Personality Disorder Team. Had to quickly ring Social Services and the DVU police to update them, work out with the prison how to get the PD1 and add additional licence conditions. Meanwhile I was duty and got all the normal Friday afternoon random calls. Everytime I put the phone down, it rang again. My legs are bruised from walking into all the bastard packing crates in the office. I was supposed to pack my own today. Not a chance. I'm going to have to go in tomorrow to do two three OASys terminations, separate my files and pack the crates because I'm off for a week. When I come back to work on 14 April, I will have been relocated. That's now 6 miles further from home. A 44 mile round commute each day. I want to cry but I know if I did I wouldn't stop. I'm opening the second bottle of wine. This is how TR is affecting me.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Commiserations - I wish you strength for tomorrow and then a time of recuperation and reflection

    ReplyDelete
  12. I hear & see your pain & anguish.....but don't go in tomorrow. If asked not one of your managers will say they required you or expected you to go in on a Saturday - you appear to have a good reason for not doing the OASyS terminations so don't go in on your own time.......enjoy the rest of the wine...........Bobbyjoe

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 21:50 - this is your time, you are on leave. Don't do any more for nothing (no one will thank you presumably). Take care.

      Delete