Beyond ‘Polibation’ and towards ‘Prisi-Polibation’? Joint Agency Offender Management in the Context of the Street Crime Initiative

Abstract

This paper reflects on the trajectory in England and Wales towards greater criminal justice multi- and inter-agency cooperation with the objective of reducing crime. In particular we focus on the potential for the emergence of new forms of offender supervision that combine the close monitoring of specified groups of offenders with supportive resettlement programmes. We examine whether a new criminal justice practitioner is developing within this context, offering an ‘end-to-end’ service that blends and merges the operating practices of the participating agencies. We draw on Nash's concept of ‘polibation’, extend this to ‘prisi-polibation’, and consider these in relation to data derived from our evaluation of an inter-agency project that involved the joint agency (police/ probation/ prisons) management of street crime offenders in the English West Midlands. We suggest that although the cases for polibation and prisi-polibation are not proven, these conceptual models should not yet be dismissed and we conclude by speculating on their place in the future development of joint agency offender management.

Keywords

offender management probation prison interagency cooperation

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Boone

(2005). Community justice in a safety culture: Probation service and community justice in the Netherlands. In Winstone

Pakes

(Eds.), Community Justice: Issues for Probation and Criminal Justice (pp. 283–300). Cullompton: Willan.

Bowling

Ross

(2006). SOCA: The Serious and Organised Crime Agency. Criminal Justice Matters, 63, 8–9.

Byrne

J.M.

Hummer

(2004). Examining the role of the police in reentry partnership initiatives. Federal Probation, 68(2), 1–10. Retrieved 1 July 2006, from: http://www.uscourts.gov/fedprob/September_2004/initiatives.html.

Davidson

(1976). Planning and coordination of social services in ***multi-organisational contexts. Social Services Review, 50, 117–137.

Fletcher

(2005). The police service: From enforcement to management. In Winstone

Pakes

(Eds.), Community Justice: Issues for Probation and Criminal Justice (pp. 52–71). Cullompton: Willan.

Gough

(2005). Tough on probation: Probation practice under the National Offender Management Service. In Winstone

Pakes

(Eds.), Community Justice: Issues for Probation and Criminal Justice (pp. 91–105). Cullompton: Willan.

Hallsworth

(2005). Street Crime. Cullompton: Willan.

Harfield

(2006). Soca: A paradigm shift in British policing. The British Journal of Criminology, 46(4), 743–761.

Home Office. (2005). National Offender Management Service — Corporate Plan 2005–06 to 2007–08. London: Home Office.

10.

Home Office. (2006a). A Five Year Strategy for Protecting the Public and Reducing Re-offending (Cm 6717). London: The Stationery Office.

11.

Home Office. (2006b). National Offender Management Service — Business Plan 2006–7. London: Home Office.

12.

Kemshall

Maguire

(2001). Public protection, partnership and risk penality: The multi-agency risk management of sexual and violent offenders. Punishment and Society, 3(2), 237–264.

13.

Maguire

Kemshall

Noaks

Wincup

(2001). Risk Management of Sexual and Violent Offenders: The Work of the Public Protection Panels (Police Research Series Paper 139). London: Home Office RDS.

14.

Mawby

R.C.

Crawley

Wright

(2005). Project Chrysalis: Final Evaluation Report. Unpublished report to GOWM. Keele: Keele University.

15.

Mawby

R.C.

Worrall

(2004). ‘Polibation' revisited: Policing, probation and prolific offender projects. International Journal of Police Science and Management, 6(2), 63–73.

16.

Morgan

(1991). Safer Communities: The Local Delivery of Crime Prevention through the Partnership Approach (Report of the Home Office Standing Conference on Crime Prevention). London: Home Office.

17.

Nash

(1999). Enter the ‘polibation officer’. International Journal of Police Science and Management, 1(4), 360–368.

18.

Nash

(2000). Deconstructing the probation service — The Trojan Horse of public protection. International Journal of the Sociology of Law, 28, 201–213.

19.

Nash

(2004). A reply to Mawby and Worrall. International Journal of Police Science and Management, 6(2), 74–76.

20.

Nash

(2005). The probation service, public protection and dangerous offenders. In Winstone

Pakes

(Eds.), Community Justice: Issues for Probation and Criminal Justice (pp. 16–32). Cullompton: Willan.

21.

PA Consultancy Group & MORI. (2005). Action Research Study of the Implementation of the National Offender Management Model in the North West Pathfinder (Home Office Online Report 32/05). London: Home Office.

22.

Petersilia

(Ed.). (1998). Community Corrections: Probation, Parole and Intermediate Sanctions. New York: Oxford University Press.

23.

Project Chrysalis. (2005). Information. Birmingham: National Probation Service (West Midlands).

24.

Raynor

Maguire

(2006). End-to-end or end in tears? Prospects for the effectiveness of the National Offender Management Model. In Hough

Allen

Padel

(Eds.), Reshaping Probation and Prisons: The New Offender Management Framework (pp. 21–34). Bristol: Policy Press.

25.

Street Crime Action Team. (2002a). Street Crime Initiative: Figures to the End of September. London: Home Office.

26.

Street Crime Action Team. (2002b). Delivering the Street Crime Initiative: Partnership in Operation. London: Home Office.

27.

Thomas

(1986). The Police and Social Workers. Aldershot: Gower.

28.

Walton

(2006). Protecting the public: The police/probation partnership. Criminal Justice Matters, 63, 20–21.