Transcript Drug Interventions Programme (DIP)

UKDWF CONFERENCE
York
13-14 October 2009
Findings of the DIP Review
Peter Grime
Head of Operations, Drug Interventions
Programme, Home Office
The ground I intend to cover
• Impact of DIP on crime and re-offending.
• Findings from review of the DIP Delivery Model.
DIP impact
(a) Numbers referred to treatment via DIP (000s)
50
40
30
20
Milestones
A DIP phase 1
B Intensive drug treatment
in prisons
C DIP phase 2
D DRR replaces DTTO
E DIP phase 3
F IDTS launched
in prisons
G Tough Choices roll out
H 2008 Drug Strategy
B
10
C
0
Mar 02
Mar 03
Mar 04
D
E
Mar 05
F
G
Mar 06
H
Mar 07
Mar 08
12 months ending
Mar 09
DIP impact
(b) recorded drug-related acquisitive crime (000s)
Milestones
A DIP phase 1
B Intensive drug treatment
in prisons
C DIP phase 2
D DRR replaces DTTO
E DIP phase 3
F IDTS launched
in prisons
G Tough Choices roll out
H 2008 Drug Strategy
2,000
1,800
1,600
1,400
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1,200
1,000
Mar 02
Mar 03
Mar 04
Mar 05
Mar 06
Mar 07
Mar 08
12 months ending
Mar 09
DIP impact
(c) National Indicator 38
• assesses the rate of drug related offending, counting the
number of offences (proven by conviction at court) committed
by individuals identified as Class A drug users in the course of
their contact with the CJS
• 19 local authorities have included NI38 within their Local
Area Agreements
Not Just a local and national outcome target –
cohort analysis can be used for local problem
solving
DIP impact
(c) National Indicator 38 performance – one area example
• Cohort of 234
Just 18 individuals
account for the
difference between
actual and predicted
• Actual offences – 577
•Predicted offences – 426.3
25
20
15
10
5
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
DIP review findings: the good news
The Programme has already achieved a huge amount and we have a lot to
be proud about. The Review found:
 DIP has pioneered a ground-breaking offender-centred hub
 CJS sanctions to grip offenders and ensure they face tough
choices are comprehensive
 DIP has driven significant improvement in system capability
and services
 And it makes a difference: “ (DIP) saved my life”
DIP review findings: some of the challenges
•
The quality of case management is important to offenders
and needs to be given more emphasis in the delivery of DIP
•
The intensity of case management is variable between
areas
•
More emphasis is needed on developing life skills to help
prevent relapse into drug misuse and offending
• Greater clarity needed on Roles and responsibilities of
partners
DIP review findings: some (more) of the challenges
• Performance management not focused on reducing crime
and offending
• Allocation of DIP funding needs to be overhauled
• DIP’s purpose is clear to DIP leads, but understanding and
ownership is more variable beyond them.
• Government is providing effective leadership of DIP…
…but we all could do more to support local areas
case
for IOM
DIP review : whereThe
are we
now?
Taking forward the findings in six workstreams:
• DIP Delivery Model
• Funding and Value for Money
• Commissioning and Practice Guidance
• Performance Management
• National and Regional Leadership and Support
• Communications
- maximise positive outcomes for the community?
DIP Review – Delivery Model
Framework of the Model
• Identification
• who takes priority?
• identification by enforcement
• identification by pro-active engagement
• Assessment
• what are the needs?
• type – initial, follow-up, relevant or as a result of proactive engagement or self referral
• Case management
• how to achieve and deliver outcomes
DIP Review: Delivery Model
What’s difference:
• better identification in the custody suite
• emphasis on challenging offending behaviour
• more effective case management
• each client will have a CJIT case manager
• clear expectations of the client
• ensure client attends appointment and assertive
outreach for those who don’t
• clear pathways for clients who disengage despite
assertive outreach
DIP Review – Funding review and VFM
Developing a new funding model based on zero based
costs:
• fixed costs
• variable costs
• allowances
Purpose of this will be to remove the differences in costs
across the difference areas