This article, based on a review of the literature both from Britain and North America and findings from the Approved Premises pathfinder, will explore the key issues in establishing a model regime for Approved Premises. It will suggest that face-to-face work with residents is an essential component for Approved Premises, and that there is a danger of this vital work being pushed into a secondary function by the need for surveillance and monitoring. The article will argue that working in a rehabilitative manner with residents assists in their risk management.
Burnett, R. (2005) ‘More Than Accommodation, Less Than Prison: Raising the Profile of Approved Premises’ , Vista10 (1): 2-8 .
2.
Burnett, R. & G. Eaton (2004) Factors Associated with Effective Practice in Approved Premises: A Literature Review. Home Office onLine report 65/04. London: Home Office .
3.
Canadian Training Institute (2002) Towards an Evaluation of Community Based Residential Facilities in Canada: A Review of the Literature. Ottawa: St Leonards Society and Correctional Services .
4.
Casey, S. , A. Day & K. Howells (2005) ‘The Application of the Transtheoretical Model to Offender Populations: Some Critical Issues’ , Legal and Criminological Psychology10 (2): 157-171 .
5.
Cherry, S. (2004a) Living Here; Moving On (LiHMO): A Group Work Programme for Offenders in Hostels. Birmingham: MPTC .
6.
Cherry, S. (2004b) Pro-social Modelling: Reinforcement Strategies for Managers. Birmingham. MPTC/NPD .
7.
Cherry, S. (2005) Transforming Behaviour: Pro-social Modelling in Practice. Cullompton: Willan .
8.
Dowden, C. , R. Serin & K. Blanchette (2001) The Application of the Community Intervention Scale to Women Offenders: Preliminary Findings. Ottawa: Correctional Services Canada .
9.
Fenwick, S. (2005) ‘Achieving Change in Whitemoor Segregation Unit’ , Prison Service JournalMarch: 9-11 .
10.
Foster, S. (2004) Approved Premises: Results of a Snapshot Survey, 2003, RDS findings 230. London: Home Office .
11.
Fuller, C. & MPTC (2004) Systematic Motivational Work in Approved Premises. London: National Probation Directorate .
12.
Fuller, C. & P. Taylor (2003) Toolkit of Motivational Skills. London: National Probation Directorate .
13.
Hollin, C. R. & E. J. Palmer (2005) Criminogenic Factors amongst Women Offenders. London: HM Prison Service .
14.
Home Office/HM Inspectorate of Probation (1999) Thematic Inspection of Approved Hostels. London: Home Office .
15.
Home Office/HM Inspectorate of Probation (2005) An Essential Element of Effective Practice: An Inspection of the National Probation Service Work on Offender Accommodation. London: Home Office .
16.
Home Office/HM Inspectorate of Probation (2006) Independent Review of a Serious Further Offence Case Damien Hanson and Elliot White. London: Home Office .
17.
Home Office/HM Inspectorate of Prisons Report (2004) Parallel Worlds: A Thematic Review of Race Relations in Prisons. London: Home Office .
18.
Latessa, E. J. & C. T. Lowenkamp (2002) Evaluation of Ohio’s Community Based Correctional Facilites and Halfway Houses Programs. Final Report. Cincinnati: University of Cincinnati .
19.
Lewis, J. & K. Davies (2004) Literacy and Numeracy Staff Handbook for use in Approved Premises. Ellesmere: Be Consultancy .
20.
Loney, K. , A. Peaden , J. Wallace & K. Stephens (2000) Pro-social Modelling: Report on Implementation in Hostels. London: National Probation Service .
21.
Lowencamp, C. T. & E. J. Latessa (2005) ‘Increasing the Effectiveness of Correctional Programming Through the Risk Principle: Identifying Offenders for Residential Placement’ , Criminology and Public Policy4 (2): 263-290 .
22.
Lowencamp, C. T. , E. J. Latessa & A. M. Holsinger (2006) ‘The Risk Principle in Action: What Have we Learned from 13,676 Offenders and 97 Correctional Programmes’ , Crime and Delinquency52 (1): 77-93 .
23.
National Probation Directorate (2004) Submission to the Correctional Services Accreditation Panel on the Approved Premises Pathfinder. London: National Probation Directorate .
24.
National Probation Directorate (2005a) Approved Premises and Offender Housing Strategy for Higher Risk Offenders, Probation Circular 37/2005. London: National Probation Directorate
25.
National Probation Directorate (2005b) Role of Purpose of Approved Premises. London: National Probation Directorate .
26.
National Probation Directorate (2006a) Changes to Admissions Policy for Approved Premises, Probation Circular 26/2006. London: National Probation Directorate .
27.
National Probation Directorate (2006b) Implementation of Approved Premises Performance Standards, Probation Circular 19/2006. London: National Probation Directorate .
Porporino, F. , M. Van Dieten & E. Fabiano (2003) A Women’s Programme for Acquisitive Female Offenders: Theory and Application Manual. Ottawa: T3 Associates
30.
Randel, G. & S. Brown (2002) Helping Rough Sleepers off the Street. London: Office for Deputy Prime Minister .
31.
Research Development Statistics (2005) Criminal Justice Act 2003: Statistical Briefing Note No. 3. London: Home Office .
32.
St Leonards Society of Canada (2005) From Inside Out; an International Halfway House Colloquium, Executive Summary. Ottawa: St Leonards Society of Canada .
33.
Sinclair, I. (1971) Hostels for Probationers: A Study of the Aims, Working and Variations in Effectiveness of Male Probation Hostels with Special Reference to the Influence of Environment on Delinquency, Home Office Research Studies No. 6. London: HMSO .
34.
Trotter, C. (1999) Working with Involuntary Clients. London: Sage .
35.
Trotter, C. (2004) Helping Abused Children and their Families: Towards an Evidenced Based Treatment Model. London: Sage
36.
Tuklo Orenda Associates (1999) Making a Difference. Bridgewater: South West Probation Training Consortium .
37.
Wincup, E. (2002) Residential Work with Offenders: Reflective Accounts of Practice. Aldershot: Ashgate .
