Considering the current review of probation services in England and Wales, this comment piece acknowledges the disappearance of supervision as a cornerstone of effective rehabilitation and the emergence of Rehabilitative Activity Requirements (RARs) replacing supervision. The authors raise concerns about the effectiveness of RARs and at this juncture argue the importance of retaining supervision within the responsibilities of National Probation Service case managers and safeguarding against it becoming an intervention that is delivered by external providers.
DomineyJ (2019) Probation supervision as a network of relationships: aiming to be thick not thin. Probation Journal66(3): 283–302.
2.
HM Inspectorate of Probation (HMIP) (2017) The Implementation and Delivery of Rehabilitation Activity Requirements. Manchester: HMIP.
3.
HM Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) (2019) The Proposed Future Model for Probation: A Draft Operating Blueprint. London: HMPPS.
4.
Ministry of Justice (MoJ) (2013) Transforming Rehabilitation: A Strategy for Reform. London: Ministry of Justice.
5.
Ministry of Justice (MoJ) (2019a) Strengthening Probation, Building Confidence. London: Ministry of Justice.
6.
Ministry of Justice (MoJ) (2019b) Offender Management Statistics Bulletin, England and Wales Quarterly: January to March 2019. London: Ministry of Justice.
7.
RexS (1999) Desistance from offending: experiences of probation. Howard Journal of Criminal Justice38(4): 366–383.
8.
RobinsonG (2005) What works in offender management?Howard Journal of Criminal Justice44(3): 307–318.
9.
RobinsonGMcNeillF (2017) Punishment in the community. In: LieblingAMcAraLMarunaS (eds) Oxford Handbook of Criminology, 6th ed, pp. 868–888. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
10.
RobinsonGPriedeCFarrallS, et al. (2014) Understanding ‘quality’ in probation practice: frontline perspectives in England & Wales. Criminology and Criminal Justice14(2): 123–142.
11.
ShaplandJBottomsAFarrallS, et al. (2012) The Quality of Probation Supervision: A Literature Review. Sheffield: Centre for Criminological Research, University of Sheffield.
12.
SmithAHeyesKFoxC, et al. (2018) The effectiveness of probation supervision towards reducing reoffending: a rapid evidence assessment. Probation Journal65(4): 407–428.
13.
UgwudikeP (2010) Compliance with community penalties: the importance of interactional dynamics. In: McNeillFRaynorPTrotterC (eds) Offender Supervision, pp. 325–343. Cullompton: Willan.
14.
VanstoneM (2004) Supervising Offenders in the Community. Aldershot: Ashgate.
