Log in
Since 2001, Professor Grubin has led trials to test whether polygraph assessment could help case officers manage high-risk sex offenders released on licence in England and Wales. A three-year study of mandatory assessment which ended in 2012 demonstrated conclusively that polygraph testing helped case managers evaluate the risk posed by offenders and decide how best to protect the public from harm. A policy of mandatory polygraph assessment of all high-risk sex offenders on parole in England and Wales was approved by ministers in summer 2012, and procurement is underway for a national polygraph testing service for high-risk sex offenders.
Policy on offender management has been changed in several areas through statistical research on criminal careers. The research has:
a) crucially influenced an Information Tribunal appeal case on the retention of police records, where five Police Authorities were appealing against a decision of the Information Commissioners.
b) influenced the research methodology and policy of the Home Office towards the retention of DNA profiles for those arrested but not found guilty, and contributed to a new Act of Parliament.
c) through the development of a reconviction predictor tool for offenders (OGRS3), improved court pre-sentence reports, and provided a mechanism for new policy on payment by results.
A better understanding of electronic monitoring (EM) and improvements and innovation in policy and practice have resulted from research conducted by Professor Anthea Hucklesby. An important question facing criminal justice policy makers and practitioners is how to increase compliance with community-based sanctions to improve their effectiveness as well as the confidence of the courts and the public. The research addresses this agenda by highlighting factors which influence offenders' compliance with EM curfew orders and by recommending ways in which compliance might be increased. The research reinforced government confidence that EM should be used widely and shaped the future direction of EM policy in England and Wales. The research also brought about changes in the operation of EM within G4S, resulted in the setting up of pilot projects, provided for a safer staff working environment and informed the work of Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Probation.
Through better assessment of the risk of reoffending it has been possible to improve the treatment of sex offenders and protect the public. An algorithm developed at the University of Birmingham, has been used by the Probation Service to classify the entire prison population of over 8000 sex offenders attending treatment in England and Wales, enabling allocation to the best treatment available at the time. This approach to treatment led to a 40% reduction in recidivism in those who were treatment responders. More specifically, this work enabled length of treatment to be matched to high-risk offenders' level of pre-treatment risk/need, and resulted in a reduced rate of reconviction among high-risk offenders to the level of reconviction observed among lower risk/need offenders. The work has reduced the level of sexual victimisation in the UK, reduced the costs associated with such offending, and has influenced policy and services for the treatment of sex offenders in other countries in Europe. Such recidivism reduction also enables ex-offenders to lead more fulfilling offence free lives.
The research has influenced governments' policy and professional practice in the development of Restorative Justice (RJ) both nationally and internationally, through its evaluation of the effectiveness of RJ schemes in promoting rehabilitation of adult offenders while also considering the views of victims. Policy makers and practitioners have drawn on the research evidence specifically as regards the relative merits of two types of RJ intervention: `conferencing' involving a meeting of victim and offender with their supporters and with a neutral facilitator; and `indirect mediation' involving `shuttling' on the part of the mediator between victim and offender. The research has played a major part in the Ministry of Justice's commissioning of sentencing options in England and Wales, and has directly informed legislation implementing RJ (the Crime and Courts Act 2013).
In a project funded by the Ministry of Justice (MOJ), psychologists from the University of Kent investigated the effects of mandatory polygraph testing for UK sexual offenders released on licence. Their research demonstrated that this practice increased disclosure by sexual offenders. This led directly to a change in Government policy and delegated legislation under the Offender Management Act (2007). The resulting legislation will make it compulsory for sexual offenders in England and Wales to be polygraphed as part of their licence conditions from January 2014. The widely disseminated research findings also alerted professionals to the benefits of mandatory polygraph testing on sexual offenders, and generated significant public discussion.
Research commissioned by the Risk Management Authority (RMA) assessed criminal justice practice in Scotland relating to high risk offenders, and provided the rationale and founding principles for the RMA to create a Framework for Risk Assessment, Management and Evaluation (FRAME), published in July 2011. The key findings from the research were published in a report, which recommended the need for consistency in risk definitions and guidance across criminal justice agencies, for compatibility in information sharing and training, and for greater inter-agency cooperation and accountability. These recommendations have directly influenced Government policy and practice in assessing and managing offender risk, and continue to inform how sexual offenders are currently managed and how serious violent offenders might also be managed in the future.
In the mid-2000s the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) devised a new measure to compare area variations in reconviction rates across the Probation Service in England and Wales so that these differences could be taken into account when allocating resources. A number of Probation Trust Chief Executives have used Hedderman's research successfully to argue for revisions to the reconviction 'performance measure'. Her findings also influenced the Justice Select Committee's recommendation that the original measure should be replaced, as she showed that it led to unfair comparisons, was easy to manipulate, and failed to provide information which could be used by areas to improve their impact on reoffending. She has since worked directly with Kent, London and Hertfordshire Probation Trusts to address this last point.
Of the 200,000 offenders supervised in the community by Probation Area Trusts (PATs) in England and Wales, around half are reconvicted of another offence within two years. University of Sheffield research into why people stop offending (`desistance'), funded by the ESRC and the Leverhulme Trust, has provided evidence to senior staff in PATs, government departments, and the National Offender Management Service (NOMS) enabling the development of initiatives aimed at supporting service users in their efforts to desist. The research has increased awareness and understanding on the part of professionals of the factors associated with desistance. Through the medium of a film about how people desist, the research has helped both to reinvigorate probation services' professional practice and to develop training programmes with an emphasis on helping people to stop offending in place of the hitherto dominant focus on enforcement.
A research team at GCU, led by Professor Liz Gilchrist, exploring aspects of intimate partner violence (IPV) has had a significant impact on IPV practice. The research linked two traditionally conflicting approaches to IPV: the victim/survivor based research emphasising gender in IPV, and the forensic psychology approach focussing on characteristics and criminogenic need in offenders.This has significantly changed practice nationally and internationally, including leading to the development of parenting interventions for men convicted of IPV in Scotland; restructured interventions for victims and offenders in New Zealand and the assessment of dynamic factors for those accessing IPV programmes in Scotland.