THE ROLE OF NGOs IN PRISONER RESETTLEMENT:

PROVISION AND ENGAGEMENT

Rosie Meek University of Southampton, United KingdomAlice Mills University of Auckland, New Zealand

Dina Gojkovic Third Sector Research Centre

ESC ANNUAL CONFERENCE, VILNIUS: 22nd SEPTEMBER 2011

Overview ‘Third sector’Aim 1: Explore the extent of third sector involvement

in the resettlement of offenders.– Secondary analysis of existing datasets from the

Charity Commission and the National Survey of Third Sector Organisations

Aim 2: To explore awareness of, and engagement with, third sector organisations from the perspectives of those currently service prison sentences.

– Survey carried out in eight English prisons

Strengths of TSOs

Academic debate

• Volunteers viewed as amateurs and with suspicion (Bryans et al. 2002; Neuberger 2009)

• Relationship varies. Prison governors and probation area directors use their discretion in allocating budgets (NPC, 2009)

• Expertise of public sector lost - divested of social welfare role (Gelsthorpe and Sharpe 2009)

• Appropriateness of TSOs managing penal institutions (Garside 2009; Neilson 2009)? Involved in punishment = at odds with charity ethos (Benson and Hedge 2009)

Reducing Re-offending National Action Plan (Home Office, 2004)

Reducing re-offending ‘pathways’:1. Accommodation2. Education, employment and training3. Health4. Drugs and alcohol5. Finance, debt and benefit6. Children and families7. Attitudes, thinking and behaviour

Methodological challenges

Measurement largely depends on:

1. Which parts of the sector are measured2. Whether organisations consider offenders to

be one of their main client groups3. Whether we include only the organisations

whose primary area of work is the criminal justice system

Secondary analysis: Charity Commission

• CC is a non-ministerial governmental body charged with the regulation of charities. Charities are required to register with the CC and to submit their annual accounts

• Approximately 166,000 active charities, and another 111,000 which were inactive or newly registered

• No obligation to report to the CC for organisations below the reporting threshold (which in 2007 was raised from £1,000 to £5,000)

• Disadvantage: Excludes TSOs such as social enterprises, community groups, non-charitable housing associations, cooperatives and mutuals, and faith groups

• Disadvantage: Offenders are not specified as one of the client groups available for selection.

• Keyword search

National Survey of Third Sector Organisations

• Commissioned by OTS, aimed to provide a measurement of contributions made by local authorities to meeting National Indicator 7: creating an environment for a thriving third sector

• Encompasses charities, social enterprises, community groups, clubs and societies, non-profit organisations, voluntary organisations, housing associations, trusts, cooperative and mutuals, and faith groups

• 129,000 charities + 40,000 companies limited by guarantee, Industrial and Provident Societies and Community Interest Companies

• Questionnaires received from 40,692 charities, 5,622 non-charitable companies limited by guarantee, 271 community interest companies, 2,354 industrial and provident societies

• Beneficiary groups, main client groups and main areas of work

Findings

• CC: keywords identified 769 charities• NSTSO:

– 18,380 identified offenders, ex-offenders and their families as one of their client groups

– 1,744 as main client group– 4,916 identified criminal justice as one of their

areas of work

Variation in findings from the two datasets

• Interpretation of criminal justice and what it means to work within it

• Demonstrates the inter-penetration of the criminal justice system and community work, where working with offenders and their families goes beyond the immediate boundaries of the criminal justice system

Engagement with and awareness of TSOs: prisoner self reports

Population Type of prison (two privately run)

Response rate n (% population)

Female Closed 85 (18)Male Open, training 50 (10)Male Open, local 90 (9)Male Juvenile 19 (4)Female Open, training 16 (11)Male Closed 66 (12)Male young adults Closed 46 (10)Male Closed local 308 (25)

Survey respondents

• N = 680, age 15-78 years (mean age 32)• 85% male• 3% juvenile, 7% young adult• 59% repeat prisoners• 60% White British, 12% Black British, 7%

Asian, 6% mixed race, 6% White other• 19% on remand

Prisoner awareness of and engagement with TSOs

• TSOs operating in each prison • n = 15-31, total of 116 different organisations• Have you heard of x?• Have you worked with x? (If not, why not?)• Low overall engagement levels with TSOs:

– Heard of, on average, just four organisations– Engaged with an average of one

0102030405060708090

100

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

% o

f re

spo

nd

ents

Prison ID

engaged with

heard of

neither

• Estimating the prevalence of TSOs in CJ is complex and challenging: – Registered Charities who consider work with offenders as one of their

key aims and worth highlighting in their aims and objectives (769) – Those with offenders as their main beneficiary group (1,743)– Those that identified offenders as one of their beneficiary groups but

not necessarily the main one (18,380)– Those that identified criminal justice as their area of work (4,916)

• Levels of awareness of resettlement-focused TSOs in prisons remains low:– Average number of TSOs per prison was approximately 20– Respondents were aware of an average of only four TSOs– Respondents engaged with an average of no more than one TSO

• A number of TSOs had no or very few users among our respondents, despite the prisons reporting a working relationship with them– Importance of VCS coordinators (Prison Service Order 4190, 2002)