HM Prison Doncaster, at the request of the Ministry Of Justice (MoJ) is trialling a version of Payment by Results. It’s an innovative and ambitious scheme where the private operator, Serco, will have to reduce reoffending rates to get its full contracted income. If they want to earn more they must reduce reoffending by more than 5%. John Biggin is the Director who is driving this forward. This is the first of a series of articles on how he is achieving it. If it works then it has implications for society that will reach well beyond the gates.

CR When we last spoke you said that payment by results was the future for prisons. Why do you think that? Why not just warehouse the difficult ones and put the rest on tough probation?
JB The talk in the press recently is all about locking people up for longer so they cannot commit further crimes. That just stores the problems up for longer as the inmates will one day be out on the street again. So if you fail to tackle their problems whist they are in prison the problem has to be sorted on the outside, it does not just go away. Tougher probation in lieu of prison for some crimes is something the public is not ready to accept because of the perceived risk to public safety in proving its effectiveness. The reason I believe that payment by results is the future for prisons is because it releases me and my staff from the restrictions that were placed on how we deliver interventions. The programme is now enshrined in our operating contract for the prison and so it supersedes all other centrally driven initiatives and programmes. The new flexibility means we can now concentrate our efforts and resources on the areas we think will have most effect for our inmates. Rather than meet the individual centrally set KPI’s for tackling reoffending, we must achieve a set reduction or we lose income. Basically, we are allowed to put our money where our mouth is. How we do it is left up to us.

CR So how will you go about it?
JB We are free to adapt our interventions depending on the prisoner’s particular circumstances and need. From a reoffending point it may be more important to ensure they don’t lose their job, family attachments or accommodation. Retaining these can be vital, especially on a very short sentence. For others, drug courses may be more important, or education. Our ‘Alliance Offender Management’ model, where we will work in partnership with Catch 22 and Turning Point, will allow a very individualised Case Management approach where we will be able to access the significant ‘through the gate’ capability of these voluntary sector organisations to deliver mentoring, interventions and accommodation services to discharged prisoners. Because we are free to allocate additional resources on a case-by-case basis we can adapt as we see fit, not having to follow centrally imposed solutions.

CR How are you selecting the pilot groups for the trial?
JB We have created ‘cohort’ groups comprising a year’s worth of inmates. All individuals who are discharged from the prison in an exact 12 month period from the day the trial starts are in the first cohort. This ensures there is no cherry picking that could skew the results and this has been agreed with the MoJ.

CR Why did Doncaster get the trial? I ask because you are dealing with arguably the toughest group of inmates when it comes to reoffending. Young males with short sentences. Isn’t that asking to fail? Or is it a target rich environment that is just waiting for success?
JB When we considering how Serco was going to bid for renewing the contract, a report called ‘Locked up potential’ by Ian Duncan Smith was published. It talked about different approaches to tackling reoffending and called for a step change in addressing the problems. The report was a catalyst to bring together many of the ideas we had already instigated at HMP Doncaster. We already were focusing on many areas the report highlighted such as: maintaining family contact; the resettlement wing; restorative justice for internal discipline; and so on. Therefore, bringing in the payment by results model was a natural progression for Doncaster. We already had much of what was needed in place that would enable us to successfully run the pilot.

CR How long is the trial and will the results and methods be distributed beyond Serco? After all should you find a way of achieving the desired results then the techniques are probably commercially valuable.
JB The trial is for four years, it starts on the 1st of October 2011. We are delivering the programme on behalf of the MoJ, so all the data and techniques will be shared with everyone they wish to let know. We are also having Sheffield Hallam University examine the interventions we are providing and how they affect the individual inmate. This will help to provide the evidence on which the programme’s future development will be based. There is no exclusivity to the information. A lot of it is already in the public domain and what is on trial here it’s putting the flesh on the bones and making it happen.

CR When you look at the make up of your first years cohort you must be able to determine those that are more likely to reoffend, those that probably won’t and the ones who will need support. So if can you ‘risk profile’ the inmates how do you use the information?
JB We can do this and we hope to use a piece of software called Quest developed by an American company called Syscom. It takes into account everything we know about an inmate and it is designed to create an individual risk profile and help us to identify where to target resources. We will be running this in parallel with OASys.

CR How will success or failure of PbR be measured?
JB From 1st October 2011 anyone who is released from HMP Doncaster will be in the first year’s cohort. Should they reoffend, and that is defined as receiving a Court disposal which covers just about anything, then that is a reconviction and so goes down as a failure. Success is reducing the current reconviction rate by 5%. So if my present reconviction rate is, for example, 50% then on 30 September 2012 it must be 45% or we lose 5% of our operating fee. So we will know at the end of the second year if the first year was a success.

CR The results, are you expected to reduce reoffending by 5% year-on-year so it reduces by 20% over 4 years or is it 5% over the whole trial period? And why 5%? What is the significance of that figure?
JB Its 5% over the whole trial period; 5% was selected by the MoJ because it’s considered to be statistically significant. There are always grey areas around reoffending rates and so this figure was decided upon partly because if we achieve it then we have shown a genuine improvement. However I would be very surprised if, once the pilot is proved a success, that the bar isn’t raised.

CR When we last spoke there was not a system for registering whether your inmates reoffended unless they were sent back here. This was due partly to misidentification, or records not being up to date etc. So how will the system be able to tell if someone has reoffended?
JB It will be from the Police National Computer and the MoJ records. If they say we have a reoffender then that is final.

CR How will you decide where to allocate additional resources? Its not a one size fits all solution. Some inmates will never reoffend, some will if the circumstances present themselves.
JB There are several techniques however one of the more interesting ones is the Offender Group Reconviction score (OGRS). This system has the ability to differentiate between inmates who are high, medium and low liability to reoffend. It bases its results on a whole set of information about an inmate and using its results we will be able to target resources more accurately based on an inmates need. For instance, we already know that the vast majority of inmates, if they are going to, will reoffend in the first month. Therefore we already know that it’s imperative that we concentrate resources to deliver support and guidance in that first month. After that we identify other key areas on a case-by-case basis so that the required resources an individual needs are in place to keep them on the straight and narrow.

CR What’s at stake here for Serco if you achieve, and if you fail, to make the 5% reduction?
JB Serco will receive the full annual contract price if we achieve the 5% reduction. If we fail by any margin then we lose 5% of the annual contract value. There are no grey areas or sliding scale. There is also a bonus incentive if we achieve a greater than 5% fall in the reconviction rate, up to a maximum of a 10%. So I can make a decision and choose to invest extra money in tackling reoffending if I think it can help me beat my targets and therefore earn the investment, and more, back. However there is not a safety net. If I spend additional funds and we do not achieve our targets then we are out of pocket in a big way.

CR Won’t there be a temptation to channel resources towards those in the sample or ‘cohort’ so as to achieve your bonus? So having to under invest in those outside it to their detriment?
JB This is a genuine concern about the system; however the payment by results model we are using is based upon the premise of more work with those who are in the risk category. Those who are in the first cohort will get extra funding and resources targeted at their individual needs. However, those not in the first cohort will still get everything we presently offer all our inmates at the prison.

CR Are staff going to be rewarded or penalised if the prison succeeds or fails?
JB This is still under review. We wish to set up all the systems and support structures and ensure they are in place before such decisions are taken. It would be wrong to place undue stresses in the new system before it’s fully settled in and working.

CR Here is the £25 million question. What are you doing to make it succeed?
JB Much of what needs to be in place we have already done. In a nutshell it’s about creating the right prison environment and looking after family relationships. By getting and keeping the right regimes in place we have created the correct internal structures. The really exciting bit comes now when we can follow our work supporting inmates when they have gone through the gate. We will have case managers coordinating the volunteers as they support the newly released settle in to life on the outside. I also am creating jobs on the outside and we are coordinating with our Alliance Partners, Catch 22 and Turning Point, as they have the experience and current initiatives to tackle offender management in the community. It’s my belief that by working together we can achieve the results that are needed, both by us, and by the community. That’s the crux of it.

CR What other types of additional support are you proposing?
JB An example is the 24 hour mentoring scheme. Up to now any support has been on a 9-5, Monday to Friday basis, but inmates tell us that it’s not when they need support, it’s when the pub shuts or when they have had a problem with their landlord. So we will be providing inmates with access to a 24 hour mentor and a recycled mobile phone which has had their mentor’s telephone number pre-programmed into the speed dial.

CR If it’s possible to identify a particular short sentence inmates requirements and design offender behaviour programmes and external support for them then this begs the question. Why had this not been done before?
JB In the past people serving less than one year have gone through the gate and been left to fend for themselves. It’s been the perceived wisdom that it takes longer than a year for offender behaviour programmes to work so targeting scant resources on this section of the population was not seen as cost-effective. Although, offenders considered to be a high risk rightly receive a lot of support. However, the vast majority of crimes committed are those which result in sentences of less than 12 months These offenders are the people we have here at Doncaster so these are the ones we must work with. The Government hasn’t the money to invest in any more resources for this group and the higher risk categories are not receiving any less. So these extra resources haven’t been there to target, up until now. Incidentally I think that if we can make a difference with this group then 5% is a modest target.

CR Have you developed this in conjunction with the Police or Probation service at all?
JB We are at the point of briefing the Doncaster Boards so they are informed about our plans and we can get their feedback. The Police will be interested because reoffending is endemic in youth crime and the Probation service will have a keen interest because young offenders can go on to become more serious adult criminals. However, Probation isn’t traditionally targeted at our inmate population because of the short nature of their sentences. We expect all the criminal justice agencies to ‘buy in’ to this as reducing reoffending is in the interests of each one of them. I have my revenue at risk; the the success of the scheme is to all society’s benefit.

CR I can see how the incentive within the payment by results system would work in a privately run prison. There is a real carrot and stick. A private investor could lose a lot of money, or make a lot. But I could not see this working in the state run sector. A governor could not have the downside of a 10% loss of revenue. So if this works, what are the implications for the state run prison sector?
JB It would be an interesting to see if it could be transferred into the state sector. However, under the current method of operation, I am not sure how it could work. The choices would require a lot of thinking ‘outside the box’ to make it applicable. For example, while a bonus could be offered, I am not sure what the counterbalance would be for not achieving targets. What must be remembered is that it isn’t just a matter of loss or profit to a private company. While success means the company’s shareholders see a better return, this is only part of the benefits equation. Success more importantly means that there is less reoffending; less victims of crime and that is the whole purpose of the programme. Plus, aside from the overriding human aspect there is also the cost savings for the tax payer. It costs thousands to catch and prosecute a criminal, if we achieve a 5% reduction in reoffending think of how much that will save. Far more than the bonus we could secure if we exceed our targets. The benefit to the people of South Yorkshire is huge.

CR Have you still to achieve KPI’s in other areas or have you been freed in all areas to do as you see fit? And when does the pilot project commence?
JB No, I still have to run a safe and secure prison. There are KPI’s I have to achieve in all other areas. Security is one of them. I’ve only been given licence to think outside the box where it comes to matters concerning tackling reoffending.

Thank you for talking to the Review.