The Home Office's emphasis on a new risk-based agenda for the Probation Service has been the hallmark of both legislation and a large number of policy documents. Yet very little is currently known about how probation officers view these changes. Here, Anthony Colombo and Mike Neary use their initial research findings to gain a clearer understanding of the practical concerns probation officers have about combined risk/needs measures, and assess the implications for future progress in the assessment and management of offender risk.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Feeley, M., and Simons, J. (1992) 'The New Penology: Notes on the Emerging Strategy of Corrections and its Implications', in Criminology30(4), pp.452-474.
2.
Fletcher, H. (1995) 'New Reconviction Scale', in NAPO News72, p.l.
3.
Harris, R. (1994) 'Continuity and Change: Probation and Politics in Contemporary Britain', in International Journal of Offending Therapy and Comparative Criminology31(1), pp.30-40.
4.
Home Office (1995) National Standards for the Supervision of Offenders in the Community. London : Home Office.
5.
Kemshall, H. (1995) 'Offender Risk and Probation Practice', in Kemshall, H. and Pritchard, J. (Eds.) Good Practice in Risk Assessment and Risk Management. London: Jessica Kingsley.
6.
Probation Circular No. 63 (1996) Guidance for the Probation Service on the Offender Group Reconviction Scale (OGRS. London: Home Office.
7.
Probation Circular No. 35 (1998) Effective Practice Initiative: A National Implementation Plan for the Effective Supervision of Offenders. London: Home Office.
