U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Probation Employment Schemes in Inner London and Surrey: An Evaluation

NCJ Number
179599
Author(s)
Chris Sarno; Michael Hough; Claire Nee; Victoria Herrington
Date Published
1999
Length
4 pages
Annotation
Two experimental probation programs designed to help offenders in England obtain employment were evaluated with respect to their impact on employability, the extent to which they achieved their goals, and features that contributed to their success or lack of success.
Abstract
The programs included ASSET in Inner London and Springboard in Surrey. They involved counseling, training, work placements, mentoring, and the provision of sheltered employment opportunities. The 3-year evaluation began in April 1997. Information was collected on referral, assessment, and guidance processes through interviews with offenders, probation officers, individuals in link organizations, and project staff and management; observation and discussion; analysis of attendance data; and analysis of program records. Probation officers and offenders were generally positive about the input of the caseworkers and saw a need for employment programs of this sort. Offenders valued the short-term benefits of immediate employment more highly than the long-term benefits flowing from vocational training programs. ASSET and Surrey Springboard found employment for 12 percent and 25 percent of their caseloads, respectively. The establishment of an Employer Liaison Officer and lower rates of unemployment in Surrey probably contributed to the difference. In addition, ASSET's experienced demonstrated the need for careful management of contracts with external training providers to ensure a high standard of delivery and value for money. Findings revealed some difficulties in recording outcome data, particularly regarding feedback on progress in education and training. Overall, both projects had problems associated with the first year of implementation, but indications were generally encouraging. Tables and figure