Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Probation in Wales operates along a ‘jagged edge’ of criminal and social justice. Agencies which support rehabilitation, including health, education, and housing, are devolved to the Welsh Government (WG), adding complexity to probation development and practice. Several reviews have suggested devolving probation to WG to address this and improve probation outcomes. This commentary examines the case for devolution of probation in Wales, including: (1) the Welsh context in which probation operates, (2) differences in probation work in Wales, (3) opportunities to ‘work locally’ within the current devolution settlement and (4) the prospect that devolution could afford – a more progressive socially just probation.

Keywords

devolution wales integrated offender management localism social justice

Introduction

Probation in England and Wales has been operating under constantly shifting organisational structures in recent times. This has been particularly felt in Wales where in 2010, four probation trusts (Dyfed and Powys, Gwent, North Wales and South Wales) merged into Wales Probation Trust. This newly created but strongly performing organisation was split into the Wales Community Rehabilitation Company and National Probation Service in 2014 (Wales Probation Trust, 2014) before reunifying into HM Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) in 2020, in advance of colleagues in England. Whilst the ‘necessary, but painful process’ was widely experienced, with probation reforms being debated across England and Wales (Millings et al., 2023, p.344), it remains important for such debates within criminal justice ‘to be grounded within the context from which they emerge’ (Newman and Dehaghani, 2022, p.78). Therefore, the Welsh criminal and social justice landscape needs to be considered in exploring probation reform. Indeed, whilst the inspectorate continues to highlight persistent challenges for the civil service–based probation service in terms of performance, recruitment and lack of staff experience (HMIP, 2025), there are arguments to suggest that issues for probation (and people on probation) in Wales go far beyond such organisational matters to significant constitutional and structural differences which affect rehabilitative outcomes.

Unlike England, a reunified probation service in Wales, operates along with what has been described as a ‘jagged edge’ of justice (Welsh Government, 2019). Key agencies which can support rehabilitation and desistance, including health, education, and housing, are devolved to the Welsh Government (WG), whilst criminal justice policy is reserved to the UK Government. This adds additional complexity to policy and organisational development, commissioning and probation practice (Deering et al., 2025) and has contributed to poor criminal justice outcomes for the people of Wales (WG, 2019). Devolved agencies in Wales face significant challenges in terms of funding services for a population with high rates of poverty, deprivation and ill health. People in Wales experience longer NHS waiting lists than in England (although different performance measurements make comparisons challenging) (ONS, 2024).

Unemployment and economic inactivity are higher in Wales than England (WG, 2025a). When people are employed in Wales, they are still poor, with the average earnings of people across 21 of 22 local authorities being less than the UK median wage (Bevan Foundation, 2025). Therefore, people on probation in Wales, who have even lower rates of employment and increased housing and health needs than the Welsh population, may face additional struggles compared to people on probation in England (Rabaiotti, 2024a). Furthermore, as well as experiencing the legacies of probation reforms, austerity and budget cuts have disproportionally impacted access to justice in Wales, including court closures and inadequate legal aid (Newman and Dehaghani, 2022). Notably, Wales is said to have the highest imprisonment rate in Western Europe and probation officers in Wales are more likely to recall people on probation back to custody than in England (Jones and Wyn Jones, 2022). When considering these contextual headlines together, the importance of Welsh criminal justice being studied as a distinct entity cannot be understated (Jones and Wyn Jones, 2022).

Efforts to work across the ‘jagged edge’ have been challenging; Jones and Wyn Jones (2022, p.116) highlight that when it comes to criminal justice, ‘Welsh Government is ultimately a policy taker rather than a policy maker’. For example, drug-related deaths are consistently higher in Wales than England (Public Health Wales, 2024). However, the development of a distinct and progressive Welsh drug policy has been limited by UK Government drug misuse legislation (Brewster and Jones, 2019). Whilst the Welsh Affairs committee has recently launched an enquiry asking, ‘are prisons and probation working in Wales?’ (UK Parliament, 2025), it has been suggested that the way to address the various challenges within probation may lie in the devolution of probation to WG. Indeed, several reviews, the Thomas Commission (which took a wholescale look at the justice system in Wales) (WG, 2019), the Brown Commission (UK Labour, 2022), and the Independent Commission on the Future of Wales (Independent Commission on future of Wales, 2024), support devolution of probation in Wales as part of a broader move towards criminal justice devolution. This has been supported by Welsh Government ‘Delivering for Justice’ policy ambitions for a whole system approach to crime and criminal justice, promoting social justice and diversion to reduce levels of demand on the system (WG, 2022; WG, 2024). This has gained endorsement from probation's trade union, Napo (2023), as well as the Wales Probation Development Group (WPDG), a group of academics and practitioners convened under the Welsh Centre for Crime and Social Justice (Borja et al., 2023). Napo and WPDG argue for significant reform by seeking an independent probation free from control of Westminster, civil service and prisons (Napo 2023; Borja et al., 2023; Raynor, 2024). Whereas abolitionists do not think such reforms go far enough to address the systemic inequalities and harms experienced in Wales including racial bias and criminalisation of the poor (Gant et al., 2024).

How a devolved probation service in Wales will look is unclear, with various options provided by the Welsh Centre for Public Policy (WCCP) (Price et al., 2024, WCPP, 2025). These include 1) a ‘memorandum of understanding’ which has been compared to Greater Manchester's model which includes co-design of services, a devolved budget and localised co-commissioning (see GMCA/MoJ, 2019); 2) the transfer of executive responsibility, providing Welsh Ministers administrative oversight of probation without any lawmaking powers; or 3) full legislative and executive responsibility giving the Senedd (Welsh parliament) power to create a Welsh probation service (Price et al., 2024). This third option offers ‘maximum flexibility, allowing the setup of a probation service with as close to a blank slate as possible’ (Price et al., 2024, p. 36). This could involve redesigning probation in a way that fits with WG's social justice ideals, and values and principles proposed by the WPDG (Borja et al., 2023; Price et al., 2024) and could support efforts to greater professionalise the service (Deering et al., 2025). Despite there being commitments from the UK Labour government to explore devolving youth justice and probation, and a continued commitment to pursuing devolution by WG (2024) irrespective of the slow progress being made, there is no current indication that full-scale devolution is imminent. The issue did make it into the General Election Labour manifesto but without a clear commitment to action, it is reasonable to question how far it can be a priority for the UK government. Indeed, the minister for prisons and probation emphasised to Senedd members that he needs to focus on stability within the criminal justice system before considering devolution (Equality and Social Justice Committee, 2025). In the annual McWilliams probation lecture, he recognised local practice is important, but when asked about increasing local control, he asserted that a central approach to developing technology will be critical to probation reform (Timpson, 2025). This position highlights the tensions between centralised and local policy development and commissioning. Meanwhile, WCCP (2025) is now exploring the application of the Greater Manchester Model to Wales in more detail, and it is presumed that without the UK government support, any devolution will begin with a small ‘d’.

Therefore, perhaps the slow journey to devolution could start with a better understanding of where probation sits in the current landscape of Wales, and the opportunities within existing powers to improve local delivery and buy-in from devolved agencies. Indeed, this aligns with calls for probation to ‘work locally’ (Raynor, 2024) and opportunities to explore more local control for probation (HMIP, 2023). This article will examine the case for devolution of probation in Wales and is divided into four short parts – (1) the Welsh context in which probation operates, (2) some differences in probation work in Wales, (3) opportunities to work locally within the current devolution settlement and (4) the prospect that devolution could afford – a more progressive probation.

Reducing reoffending in the Welsh social justice context

Wales’ constitution is a global anomaly due to it being the only common law country in the world to have a legislature and executive, but not a judiciary (Jones and Wyn Jones, 2022). Criminal justice in Wales is a reserved UK Government policy area but social factors that influence offending – including education, health (including drug treatment) and housing (Social Exclusion Unit, 2002) – come under Welsh devolved policy. Navigating these ‘jagged edges’ is further complicated by crime policies being typically punitive at UK Government level, whilst WG takes a more progressive approach emphasising social justice, prevention, human rights and race equality (WG, 2017; WG, 2022; WG, 2024). This approach can be seen in policy examples implemented to tackle gendered harms and modern slavery, and multi-agency ambitions for an anti-racist Wales (Deering et al., 2025). This builds on Welsh social policy traditions of ‘progressive universalism’, an emphasis on ‘citizenship’ and ‘participation’ and a government that cares about ‘equality of outcome, rather than merely equality of opportunity’ (Drakeford, 2010, discussed in Evans et al., 2022, p.639). One key example of this policy is demonstrated within the Wellbeing of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 which sets out five ways of working for Welsh public bodies (long-term, integration, involvement, collaboration and prevention). Known as the ‘sustainable development principle’, this represents WG ambitions for a ‘one Welsh public service’ approach which devolving probation (and other justice agencies) would support (Deering et al., 2025).

Within Welsh criminal justice, innovations within youth offending have benefited from Wales’ different policy context; the Youth Justice Board Cymru was established in recognition of these differences, and practitioners have developed partnership strategies enabling them to take a progressive Welsh approach (Drakeford, 2010; Evans et al., 2024). Welsh policies and strategy developed in the early 2000s such as ‘every child matters’ and ‘extending entitlement’ emphasise greater opportunities for young people, with Wales becoming early adopters of the ‘child first, offender second’ approach and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (Drakeford, 2010; Evans et al., 2022). Wales has continued to build on a ‘child first’ rights-based approach, with a greater emphasis on public health and trauma-informed practice, leading to reductions in first-time entrants into the criminal justice system through prevention and diversion strategies (Evans et al., 2024). This has been enhanced by Welsh social policies based on universalism (such as free prescriptions) and supporting young people (16+) in education and training through Education Maintenance Allowances and the Youth Guarantee (Evans et al., 2024). It is not to suggest that England has not been progressive (or all local areas of Wales have been equally effective) but it has been argued that a Welsh way of working, known as ‘dragonisation’, provided a framework by which local practitioners could work differently (Evans et al., 2022).

In Wales (and England), Community Safety Partnerships (CSPs) developed from the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, also form an important component of criminal justice with their local focus on crime prevention and reduction (Rabaiotti and Harrison, 2023). In 2010, probation was added as a responsible authority, alongside police, local authorities, fire and rescue and health. Furthermore, CSPs were given the responsibility of reducing reoffending and building on work with prolific and priority offenders (Home Office/MoJ, 2009). However, it is argued that probation's activity within Welsh CSPs appears limited, where police and local authorities are known to take the lead (Rabaiotti and Harrison, 2023). It has long been argued that probation (in England, as well as Wales) could provide a greater role in preventing offending, including through sharing data around population needs (Home Office/MoJ, 2009; Smith and Vanstone, 2002, Rabaiotti and Harrison, 2023). Despite this, CSP responsibilities have increased in recent years, including conducting domestic homicide reviews and a duty to prevent serious violence, areas in which probation plays a crucial role. Each new responsibility has needed to be adapted for a Welsh context, including integrating this work into other partnerships developed from Welsh policy (Rabaiotti and Harrison, 2023). A whole-scale review of community safety highlighted challenges around governance and accountability in Wales due to the complex overlapping partnerships between devolved and non-devolved agencies (WG, 2017). The Thomas Commission (WG, 2019) supported this conclusion, highlighting that the All-Wales Criminal Justice Board, now known as ‘Criminal Justice in Wales’, has no executive authority and that ‘there are few legislative levers which enable devolved bodies to be held to account for reducing reoffending and improving rehabilitation outcomes’ (p.143).

Differences in probation in Wales

Whilst the core work of a probation officer is the same as England, the context in which probation in Wales is delivered is different and reflected in various arrangements. However, the literature on this is limited, reflecting Jones and Wyn Jones’ (2022) concerns that the Welsh criminal justice system is neglected as an area of distinct focus. For probation, the literature is even more scarce, with many academic papers addressing England and Wales but having little explanation of the Welsh context or implications for delivery in Wales. Recent exceptions to this include an examination of the Wales Offender Personality Disorder Pathway (O’Meara et al., 2019; Gilder et al., 2025); the development of Integrated Offender Management (IOM) Cymru (Maguire et al., 2024); the health needs of people on probation (Rabaiotti, 2024a; Williams et al., 2024); the use of digital technologies by those with offending histories (Morgan et al., 2025); and the introduction of the probation professional framework (Deering et al., 2025).

Earlier commentators have highlighted challenges in delivering a bilingual Welsh probation service; Adlam and Lynn (1998) described limited commitments to the Welsh language within probation training and delivery of group work, and moreover, historical and structural issues relating to the oppression of the Welsh language has impacted identity and experiences of both Welsh speaking probation officers and people on probation. For Madoc-Jones and Buchanan (2003), this can impact on the therapeutic relationship, whilst Adlam and Lynn suggest people do not insist on a Welsh language pre-sentence report as they ‘do not want to make a fuss’ (1998, p.75). The Welsh language commissioner (2025) has highlighted concerns that the Welsh language has been omitted from prison strategy, and they are currently working with His Majesty's Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) to develop a new Welsh language scheme. Recent inspections suggest youth justice services are responsive to providing Welsh language services, but probation's performance is less clear (see HMIP, 2024).

Probation leaders in Wales have shown they are amenable to making policy initiatives work (or at least, giving it their best efforts). During the Transforming Rehabilitation (TR) policy development, Wales was identified as an early adopter of a potential Payment by Results pilot, and when TR failed, Wales was early to reunify with a recognition that its differences needed to be considered (Barton, 2019). HMPPS in Wales continues to show prompt implementation of national policy; short-term sentence teams were in place in advance of other regions, potentially due to the integrated structure of prisons and probation in Wales (HMIP, 2022). Wales piloted the alcohol tagging pilots which perhaps indicates the desire to shape and influence projects to make them work for Wales (MoJ, 2022). Indeed, HMPPS in Wales has taken a broader approach to health and justice coordinators (Rabaiotti 2024a; Rabaiotti, 2024b). Probation is also known to commission and co-commission a range of rehabilitative services in Wales, with the latter primarily in relation to substance misuse arrangements (Rabaiotti, 2024a). However, few services are provided by local providers due to centrally controlled commissioning (Borja et al., 2023; Rabaiotti, 2024a).

Integrated offender management Cymru

One example of Welsh development of probation policy and practice is Integrated Offender Management (branded as ‘IOM Cymru’), introduced to give consistency across Wales probation and Wales’ four police forces. IOM was developed in 2009 in Wales and England, building on the persistent and priority offender scheme which used a partnership approach to tackle volume crime (Maguire et al., 2024). In this author's experience of working across Dyfed Powys within the Wales Community Rehabilitation Company, IOM continued to work positively despite organisational challenges resulting from TR, with IOM police officers adding capacity to small rural teams. Inspectors described the scheme as ‘effective’, ‘well-managed’ with ‘highly motivated staff’ (HMIC, 2016, p.3), and these ‘good working relationships’ have continued (HMIC, 2022, p.25).

Maguire et al. (2024) argue that the traditional IOM schemes became ‘complicated’ by the introduction of the ‘Framework to Support Positive Change for those at Risk of Offending in Wales 2018–2023’ (All-Wales Criminal Justice Board, 2017). This developed IOM into a broader strategic approach beyond high risk of reoffending (and ‘WISDOM’, a Welsh scheme targeting ‘high risk of harm’), providing a partnership focus on women, armed services veterans, family of people on probation, young people and care leavers, as well as ethnically diverse people. There are examples on the scheme website of the range of activity undertaken (IOM Cymru, 2025). Maguire et al. (2024, p.11) highlight that ‘while producing some innovative and effective work, this also fostered a sense in some areas that IOM was losing its focus’. Indeed, IOM Cymru arguably has been used as a framework to manage across the ‘jagged edge’ and has differed from England in two key areas which were seen as beneficial to the development of the scheme (Maguire et al., 2024). This includes 1) a dedicated Programme Manager working across Wales to support with regional governance and 2) an active IOM Cymru Board, jointly chaired by police and probation, with senior representation from devolved and non-devolved bodies, the voluntary sector and academia. As a result, Maguire et al. (2024) stated that Wales was ‘ahead of the game’ in highlighting issues and solutions in advance of the thematic inspection (HMIP, 2020, p.12). This resulted in ‘the IOM refresh’ being implemented in Wales in 2021 before England.

Welsh government involvement in probation work

During TR, it was proposed that ‘the public sector probation service will have a distinct identity for Wales, facilitating links and relationships with the WG’ (MoJ, 2013, p.25). However, despite MoJ (2018) acknowledging Wales is different and has distinct needs in relation to the services available for people on probation, and notwithstanding the activity under IOM Cymru, there appeared little else to ameliorate the implementation of TR on the wider probation cohort. Moreover, there does not appear to be the same efforts by WG to support probation in the way that it has supported policing both strategically and operationally (see, for instance, WG, 2022). This may be due to the strong influence of police and crime commissioners in Wales, plus the development of a policing partnership board which supports and helps coordinated joint working in a Welsh context including addressing strategic challenges. Notably, whilst numbers of police officers were cut during austerity measures, WG have funded increasing numbers of police community support officers to increase community safety and engagement (at a cost of £15 million in the 2024–25 budget; WG, 2024).

Initiatives under WG devolved functions that provide support for those in prison and leaving prison include a ‘rapid rehousing’ scheme and health protection initiatives, as well as access for people on probation to the employability ReAct + programme (WG, 2024). An evaluation of the homeless interventions described some positive examples of outcomes for prison leavers but recommended more prevention work was needed, as well as better measurement of the impact of interventions (Blood et al., 2024). Development work with probation has primarily established out of the aforementioned ‘framework to support positive change’ and subsequently led to two ‘criminal justice reform’ partnership programmes including the ‘Women's Justice Blueprint’ and ‘Youth Justice Blueprint’ which focus on criminal justice diversion and alternative support (WG, 2022; WG, 2024 ). However, the Thomas Commission (WG, 2019) previously questioned the blueprints’ sufficiency as solutions to the challenges of justice in Wales as it is ‘not clear who will be held to account for results’ (p.465). WG ( 2025b) have seen the blueprints as generally successful yet recognising the limitations within the current devolution settlement.

Working locally within the current devolution settlement

The former chief probation inspector suggested that probation should be a locally delivered service and the answer to improving probation (and community sentence) outcomes could lie with local governance and control (HMIP, 2023). In his paper on ‘Reviving Probation’, Raynor (2024, p.3) also emphasises the importance of working locally:

The services which people under supervision need, both statutory and voluntary, are more effectively accessed through local contact, particularly when supported by personal relationships….different localities need different approaches and probation staff on the ground need the freedom to develop local strategies.

Indeed, the aforementioned ‘rapid rehousing’ policy suggests local partnerships should help shape individual transition plans (WG, 2024). Whilst developments in inclusion health approaches for people on probation have included local health needs assessments and responsive pilots by Public Health Wales in conjunction with local health boards and probation delivery units (Rabaiotti, 2024a, Rabaiotti, 2024b).

A Welsh social policy approach sees a good government working together to solve common problems (Drakeford, 2010). The Greater Manchester probation model is one approach being considered as a first step to local control but given the complexity in Wales, it is unlikely to be easily applied. Price et al. (2024, p.4) suggest that this approach ‘offers the opportunity for co-commissioning services. Although this provides limited scope for overcoming workforce or delivery challenges, it does facilitate responsiveness to local needs and offers some flexibility to increase the service’. However, the ability to be local will be challenging given the complex criminal justice partnership landscape (WG, 2017). Price et al. (2024) consider that probation work could be aligned to regional structures such as Regional Partnership Boards established as part of the Social Services and Well-being (Wales) Act 2014 to assess well-being, health and care needs. Or Public Service Boards, under the Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, many of which have combined local authority level arrangements similar to CSPs. The difficulty with working at local authority level according to Price et al. is the ‘wide variation in local authority capacity in Wales means that local governance may be uneven and, in some areas, insufficient for effective practice’ (2024, p.20). This reflects earlier findings in a review of community safety (WG, 2017).

However, there is much to learn from youth justice to improve locally delivered justice (Evans et al., 2024). Perhaps this learning can be used to renew the relationship of probation within CSPs, rather than creating new local structures. For example, a professional skills gap has been identified in community safety, and steps are being taken by the Wales Safer Communities Network to improve support for Continuous Professional Development (CPD) (Rabaiotti and Harrison, 2023). Given the need to provide CPD opportunities to support the implementation of the Probation Professional Framework (HMPPS, 2024), there is a possibility here to join up the professionalism agenda between probation and community safety and increase effective practice (Deering et al., 2025).

Moreover, there are glimmers of hope, including the ‘grand avenues’ scheme in Cardiff; a collaborative project between local charities and public services, that is ‘asset-based, user-centred and rooted in local communities’ enabling contact with probation and other accessible support in a community hub (Telescope, 2025). Like the Newham youth to adult hub, ‘a local hub in a national service’ (Phillips et al., 2024, p.36), it shows the benefits of: co-location of services in accessible locations; a space that is conducive to establishing open and trusting relationships; local commissioned services to meet local needs; and a workforce that reflects the local community. Locally run community spaces like ‘warm hubs’ supported by WG have been shown to foster social connections and feelings of safety (Rabaiotti, 2024c). However, the implementation of local initiatives can be affected by the ‘jagged edge’, such as the delays to a Welsh residential women's centre and the withdrawal of a ‘problem solving court’ initiative (WG, 2024; WG, 2025b). This reminds us that without full devolution, WG remains limited in its policy making powers when it comes to justice (Jones and Wyn Jones, 2022).

Work towards a progressive probation

According to Raynor (2024, p.4), ‘it is now widely believed that probation services require more local governance outside the Civil Service, and the WG's desire to see control of probation devolved to Wales is driven by similar concerns, with the support of the staff unions’. Work undertaken by the WPDG concluded that Wales needs an independent probation service centred on the relationship between the worker and the probationer, which takes a rights-based approach, using evidenced-based interventions, local resources and strong partnerships (Borja et al., 2023). The group consider that, aligned with approaches to young people and women, diversion of individuals from custody is central, recognising the important role of community in rehabilitation, victim safety and public protection. The WPDG supports a devolved probation service that better serves the people of Wales, echoing 2019's Thomas Commission and to which WG remains committed (WG, 2025b). The WPDG's proposals around values, partnership and practice have been reflected within the work of the WCCP who continues to review options for different probation models in Wales (Price et al., 2024; WCPP 2025). Recognising that more uncertainty over the future of probation is far from ideal, WPDG considers that there needs to be further change in probation in Wales beyond the blueprints to fundamentally address the disparities in Welsh criminal justice outcomes (Borja et al., 2023).

Evans et al. (2022, p.649) have argued that the ‘endurance’ of the so-called ‘dragonisation’ or Welsh ways of working within youth justice ‘owes much to the belief that an alternative system in Wales could be possible’. Alternative approaches to probation such as ‘Grand Avenues’ are possible, however, Phillips et al. (2024) reflecting on the Newham hub which involves ‘“young adult first” practice and the trauma-informed and strengths-based approaches’ (p.2), notes ‘challenges inherent in creating and maintaining a Hub with a particular ethos that can be constrained by other parts of the system’ (p.37). Therefore, whilst greater opportunities for co-commissioning under a Greater Manchester style model could be positive, Wales would still be constrained by UK government's centralised policymaking, which has been performatively ‘tough on crime’ (Jones and Wyn Jones, 2022). Whilst there has been some recent progress to disaggregate Welsh justice data from England (Equality and Justice Committee, 2025), UK crime policy often lacks an evidence base and consideration of the Welsh context (Jones and Wyn Jones, 2022). Only through full-scale change by devolution could a progressive rights-based Welsh probation service based on values of social justice be realised. The devolution of criminal justice policy has generated discussion from not only practice-minded people, such as Napo and the WPDG, but also abolitionists. Abolitionists see the opportunity to go further to address systematic discrimination, replacing the criminal justice system with community-based ‘emancipatory solutions’ (Gant et al., 2024). Whilst such a radical alternative is unlikely, it is accepted that probation is just one path on the devolution journey to a better Welsh criminal justice that serves its communities. For example, despite a divergence in Welsh policing since devolution (Jones et al., 2022), there is an acknowledged ‘opportunity to reimagine [it's] vision, culture, and ethos’ (Foulkes and Ackland, 2024, p.31).

Furthermore, it is accepted that the call for change in probation, and for probation to work locally, goes beyond Wales. Indeed, Priestley and Vanstone (2019, p.335) have also argued for an independent community-based probation ‘re-constituted as a moral enterprise’ drawing on skilled practitioners and evidence-based approaches to reduce reoffending. Millings and Carr (2025), reporting on the significant ‘rehabilitating probation’ research study, concluded that service users are looking for a probation that is person-centred, rehabilitation focused, draws from lived-experience, and is community-based. In addition, the Independent Sentencing Review has significance across both England and Wales (MoJ, 2025). The review has highlighted opportunities to reduce bureaucracy in probation allowing practitioners to be empowered to use more professional judgement and draw from third sector support in the community (MoJ, 2025). However, recommendations within the sentencing review, such as rolling out Intensive Supervision Courts, will still rely on devolved services in Wales, with the pilot report highlighting the importance of accommodation provision (CFE Research and Revolving Doors, 2024). Therefore, MoJ reforms will continue to rely on WG devolved agencies to support reducing reoffending and the jagged edge will persist.

Concluding thoughts

This paper does not present an exhaustive account of probation work in Wales, the potential differences and future opportunities, but it does outline a position, that to the author's knowledge, has not been captured elsewhere. There is a sense of frustration amongst many in Wales that devolution of justice is slow to be realised, despite successive reviews stating this is sorely needed. The Senedd is due to increase its members at the next election which it argues can strengthen democracy in Wales. However, ‘a progressive politics without the justice function is seriously deficient’ (Rawlings, 2022, p.725). As Jones and Wyn Jones (2022) have stated, devolution is unlikely to be a panacea to the problems of the Welsh criminal justice system, or its social and economic context. Therefore, a cut and paste of the current probation service is unlikely to lead to better outcomes, and probation reform needs to be part of wider criminal and social justice reform. The journey to devolution is slow, so whilst arguments continue to be made for a transfer of powers, there remains an opportunity to work locally to improve rehabilitative outcomes, building on evidenced-based practice, including within youth justice and community hub development. Whilst a Greater-Manchester style arrangement between WG, HMPPS and MoJ will need to be adapted for the Welsh context, the prospect of increasing local control and commissioning to meet the needs of people on probation in Wales is welcome. Moreover, it takes a step closer to show what could be possible in a progressive Welsh probation service.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank the reviewers at the Probation Journal and colleagues Professor Peter Raynor and Dr Michael Harrison who have provided helpful feedback on earlier versions of this paper.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The author is a member of the Wales Probation Development Group, part of the Welsh Centre for Crime and Social Justice, an academic collaboration of Welsh universities.

Funding

The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Ella Rabaiotti

References

Adlam

Lynn

(1998) The Welsh language, oppression and probation practice. Probation Journal 45(2): 73–77.

All-Wales Criminal Justice Board . (2017) Framework to Support Positive Change for those at Risk of Offending in Wales 2018-2023. https://www.iomcymru.org.uk/Framework-to-support-positive-change-for-those-at-risk-of-offending-in-Wales-20182023/.

Barton

(2019) ‘Strengthening probation, building confidence’: the task of re-designing probation. Probation Journal 66(1): 131–137.

Bevan Foundation. (2025) State of Wales briefing: Jobs in Wales, now and future. https://www.bevanfoundation.org/subscribers-area/state-of-wales-briefing-jobs-wales/?mc_cid=54b5ffc103&mc_eid=a17fd59403.

Blood

Alden

Dulson

, et al. (2024) Evaluation of Homeless Interventions: Final Report. Welsh Government, GSR report number 29/2024 https://www.gov.wales/evaluation-phase-2-homelessness-approach-final-report.

Borja

Deering

Feilzer

, et al. (2023) Towards a devolved Probation Service in Wales: A collection of papers by the Probation Development Group. Welsh Centre for Crime and Social Justice. https://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa65622.

Brewster

Jones

(2019) Distinctly divergent or hanging onto English coat-tails? Drug policy in post-devolution Wales. Criminology & Criminal Justice 19(3): 364–381.

CFE Research and Revolving Doors . (2024) Process evaluation of Intensive Supervision Courts pilot: Interim report. Ministry of Justice. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6785311af029f40e50881712/process-evaluation-intensive-supervision-courts-pilot-interim-report.pdf.

Deering

Feilzer

Rabaiotti

(2025) Professional registration of probation practitioners in a devolved Welsh probation service. Probation Journal 72(2): 186–201.

10.

Drakeford

(2010) Devolution and youth justice in Wales. Criminology & Criminal Justice 10(2): 137–154.

11.

Equality and Justice Committee . (2025, July 14) The criminal justice system in Wales: Ministerial scrutiny session. Senedd (Welsh Parliament)

12.

Evans

Jones

Musgrove

(2022) Dragonisation’ revisited: a progressive criminal justice policy in Wales? Criminology & Criminal Justice 22(4): 636–653.

13.

Evans

Thomas

Williamson

(2024) The Future of Youth Justice in Wales An academic reflection. Welsh Centre for Crime and Social Justice. https://wccsj.ac.uk/images/j3wccsj_all_content/documents/publications/2024/The%20Future%20of%20Youth%20Justice%20in%20Wales%20Final.pdf.

14.

Foulkes

Ackland

(2024) Preparing for the devolution of policing in Wales. Welsh Government. https://www.gov.wales/sites/default/files/pdf-versions/2024/3/1/1710769915/preparing-for-the-devolution-of-policing.pdf.

15.

Gant

Hanks

Mogford

, et al. (2024) Resisting the carceral temptations of devolution. Abolitionist Futures. https://abolitionistfutures.com/latest-news/resisting-the-carceral-temptations-of-devolution.

16.

Gilder

Räsänen

Davies

(2025) Exploring the experiences of South Wales Probation staff that access the Offender Personality Disorder Pathway. Probation Journal. https://doi.org/10.1177/02645505251321426.

17.

Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA) and Ministry of Justice (MoJ) . (2019) Greater Manchester justice devolution 2019-2021: Memorandum of Understanding between the Greater Manchester Combined Authority and the Ministry of Justice mou-moj-gmca-justice-devolution.pdf.

18.

Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Probation (HMIP) . (2020) A Joint Thematic Inspection of Integrated Offender Management. https://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/cjji/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/02/A-joint-thematic-inspection-of-Integrated-Offender-Management-2.pdf.

19.

Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Probation (HMIP) . (2022) A joint thematic inspection of Offender Management in Custody – pre-release. https://hmiprobation.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/document/a-joint-thematic-inspection-of-offender-management-in-custody-pre-release/ .

20.

His Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) . (2024) Probation Professional Register Policy Framework. Ministry of Justice. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/66fa78c0a31f45a9c765ee6e/2024_09_30_Prof_Reg-Probation_Professional_Register_policy_framework.pdf.

21.

(HMIP)

(2023) Annual report 2022/2023 . https://hmiprobation.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/document/annual-report-2022-2023/.

22.

HM Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) . (2016) Police effectiveness 2015 – An Inspection of Dyfed-Powys Police. https://assets-hmicfrs.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/uploads/police-effectiveness-2015-dyfed-powys.pdf.

23.

HM Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) . (2022) PEEL 2021/22 – An inspection of Dyfed-Powys Police. https://hmicfrs.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/publications/peel-assessment-2021-22-dyfed-powys/.

24.

HM Inspectorate of Probation (HMIP) . (2024) Welsh Language Scheme – Annual Monitoring Report for 2023/2024. https://hmiprobation.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/corporate-document/welsh-language-scheme-annual-monitoring-report-for-2023-2024/.

25.

HM Inspectorate of Probation (HMIP) . (2025) Annual report 2024: inspection of probation services. https://hmiprobation.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/document/annual-report-2024/ .

26.

Home Office/Ministry of Justice (MoJ) . (2009) National support framework Reducing reoffending, Cutting crime, changing lives. https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ukgwa/20100408122332mp_/http://www.crimereduction.homeoffice.gov.uk/community-safetly-guidance.pdf.

27.

Independent Commission on future of Wales . (2024) Final Report: January 2024. https://www.gov.wales/independent-commission-on-the-constitutional-future-of-wales-final-report.

28.

IOM Cymru . (2025) Our Work https://www.iomcymru.org.uk/Our-Work/.

29.

Jones

Harrison

Jones

(2022) Policing and devolution in the UK: The ‘special’ case of Wales. Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice 17: paac063. https://doi.org/10.1093/police/paac063.

30.

Jones

Wyn

(2022) The Welsh Criminal Justice System: On the Jagged Edge . Cardiff: University of Wales Press.

31.

Madoc-Jones

Buchanan

(2003) Welsh Language, identity and probation practice: the context for change. Probation Journal 50(3): 225–238.

32.

Maguire

Jackson

Williams

, et al. (2024) IOM in Wales after the refresh: Practitioner views of Integrated offender Management. Welsh Centre for Crime and Social Justice. https://wccsj.ac.uk/en/publications/publications-2024.

33.

Millings

Burke

Annison

, et al. (2023) A necessary but painful journey: experiences of unification in a probation service region. Probation Journal 70(4): 331–349.

34.

Millings

Carr

(2025, June 27) Rehabilitating Probation: Rebuilding culture, identity and legitimacy in a reformed public service. Presentation to the Probation Institute.

35.

Ministry of Justice (MoJ) . (2013) Transforming Rehabilitation: A Strategy for Reform. https://consult.justice.gov.uk/digital-communications/transforming-rehabilitation/results/transforming-rehabilitation-response.pdf.

36.

Ministry of Justice (MoJ) . (2018) Strengthening probation, building confidence. https://consult.justice.gov.uk/hm-prisons-and-probation/strengthening-probation-building-confidence/supporting_documents/strengtheningprobationbuildingconfidence.pdf.

37.

Ministry of Justice (MoJ) . (2022, April 4) Alcohol tags helping thousands of offenders stay sober. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/alcohol-tags-helping-thousands-of-offenders-stay-sober.

38.

Ministry of Justice (MoJ) . (2025) Independent Sentencing Review: Final report. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/independent-sentencing-review-final-report.

39.

Morgan

Walker

Taxman

(2025) Understanding the access to and use of digital technology by people in the criminal legal system: empirical findings from Wales. Health & Justice 13(1): 1–15. Article 16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40352-025-00326-8.

40.

Napo . (2023) Probation in Wales can show a better way. Napo magazine. https://napomagazine.org.uk/probation-in-wales-can-show-a-better-way/.

41.

Newman

Dehaghani

(2022) Experiences of Criminal Justice: Perspectives from Wales on a System in Crisis. Bristol: Bristol University Press.

42.

Office for National Statistics (ONS) . (2024) NHS planned care waiting times across the UK: June 2024. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/healthcaresystem/articles/nhsplannedcarewaitingtimesacrosstheuk/2024-06-18.

43.

O’Meara

Morgan

Godden

, et al. (2019) A model of a specialist transitional support and liaison service within the offender personality disorder pathway in Wales: learning from a regional pilot service. Probation Journal 66(3): 348–355.

44.

Phillips

Ward

Albertson

, et al. (2024) Process Evaluation of the Newham Y2A Hub: Evaluating the implementation of a specialist youth to adulthood transitions service in probation. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/66d830f5dbffedc7eb44d1c0/y2a-hub-process-evaluation.pdf .

45.

Price

Notman

Tilley

(2024) Building a Welsh probation service - Part 1: Models and pathways. Wales: Centre for Public Policy. https://wcpp.org.uk/publication/building-a-welsh-probation-service/ .

46.

Priestly

Vanstone

(2019) Restoring probation: a declaration of independence. Probation Journal 66(3): 335–347.

47.

Public Health Wales (Health Protection Division) . (2024) Harm Reduction Database Wales: Drug Related Mortality Annual Report 2024 (data to end of 2023). Public Health Wales. https://phw.nhs.wales/publications/publications1/harm-reduction-database-wales-drug-related-mortality1/.

48.

Rabaiotti

(2024a) People on probation as an inclusion health group: Exploring needs, barriers and service provision in Wales. Probation Journal 71(4): 364–386. https://doi.org/10.1177/02645505241247291.

49.

Rabaiotti

(2024b) Inclusion health approaches for people on probation in Wales. Probation Quarterly (31): 53–68. Probation Institute. https://www.probation-institute.org/news/inclusion-health-approaches-for-people-on-probation-in-wales.

50.

Rabaiotti

(2024c) Safe and welcoming “warm hubs”: building social connections and inclusion in Welsh communities. Journal of Community Safety and Well-Being 9(1): 46–51.

51.

Rabaiotti

Harrison

(2023) Is partnership working? Complexities and barriers in the development of community safety practice in Wales. Crime Prev Community Saf 25: 318–337.

52.

Rawlings

(2022) Wales and the United Kingdom: a territorial constitutional policy drive. Territory, Politics, Governance 10(5): 714–732.

53.

Raynor

(2024) Reviving Probation: Ten Evidence Driven Strategies. London: Probation Institute. https://www.probation-institute.org/news/reviving-probation-ten-evidence-driven-strategies .

54.

Smith

Vanstone

(2002) Probation and social justice. British Journal of Social Work 32: 815–830.

55.

Social Exclusion Unit . (2002) Reducing re-offending by ex-prisoners. Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. https://www.bristol.ac.uk/poverty/downloads/keyofficialdocuments/Reducing%20Reoffending.pdf.

56.

Telescope . (2025) Case Study: Grand Avenues: Re-imagining how probation services can work with local communities. https://www.wearetelescope.org/grand-avenues.

57.

Timpson

(2025, July 11) Probation's Crucial Role in an Evolving Criminal Justice System: The 27th Annual McWilliams Probation Lecture with Lord Timpson OBE. University of Cambridge’s Institute of Criminology. https://www.crim.cam.ac.uk/events/27th-annual-mcwilliams-probation-lecture-lord-timpson-obe.

58.

UK Labour . (2022) A New Britain: Renewing our Democracy and Rebuilding our Economy Report of the Commission on the UK’s Future. https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Commission-on-the-UKs-Future.pdf.

59.

UK Parliament . (2025) Are prisons and probation working in Wales? MPs launch inquiry. https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/162/welsh-affairs-committee/news/205112/are-prisons-and-probation-working-in-wales-mps-launch-inquiry/.

60.

Wales Probation Trust . (2014) Wales Probation Trust Report and Accounts For the period 1 April to 31 October 2014. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a80df70ed915d74e6230ef4/Wales_Probation_Trust_Report_and_Accounts_2014.pdf#:∼:text=These%20accounts%20cover%20the%20final%20seven%20month%20period,contract%20with%20the%20Secretary%20of%20State%20for%20Justice.

61.

Welsh Centre for Public Policy (WCPP) . (2025) Delivering probation services for Wales. https://wcpp.org.uk/project/delivering-probation-services-for-wales/.

62.

Welsh Government . (2017) Working Together for Safer Communities Review. https://www.gov.wales/sites/default/files/publications/2019-03/working-together-for-safer-communities.pdf.

63.

Welsh Government . (2019) Justice in Wales for the people of Wales: The Commission for Justice in Wales Report. https://www.gov.wales/commission-justice-wales-report.

64.

Welsh Government . (2022) Delivering Justice for Wales. https://www.gov.wales/delivering-justice-for-wales.

65.

Welsh Government . (2024) Delivering Justice for Wales: 2024 progress report. https://www.gov.wales/sites/default/files/pdf-versions/2024/2/4/1708593949/delivering-justice-for-wales-2024-progress-report.pdf.

66.

Welsh Government . (2025a) Labour Market Overview: January 2025 (headline results). https://www.gov.wales/labour-market-overview-january-2025-headline-results-html.

67.

Welsh Government . (2025b) Oral Statement: Women’s and Youth Justice Blueprints. https://www.gov.wales/oral-statement-womens-and-youth-justice-blueprints.

68.

Welsh Language Commissioner . (2025) Written evidence submitted by the Welsh Language Commissioner to the UK parliamentary Welsh Affairs Committee. https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/141453/html/.

69.

Williams

Gray

Perrett

(2024) Identifying the public health needs of a UK probation cohort: a cross-sectional analysis. Journal of Public Health (Oxford, England) 46(1): 12–19.

‘Work locally’: The slow journey to devolving probation in Wales

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Reducing reoffending in the Welsh social justice context

Differences in probation in Wales

Integrated offender management Cymru

Welsh government involvement in probation work

Working locally within the current devolution settlement

Work towards a progressive probation

Concluding thoughts

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

Declaration of conflicting interests

Funding

ORCID iD

References