First International COSA Conference

Organisation and Legal IssuesMechtild Höing,

Chris Wilson, Ann Castrels, Rene Poort

20/1

1/2

014

Firs

t In

tern

atio

nal

CO

SA C

onfe

rence

Workshop Organisation and Legal issues

Ann Castrels COSA Antwerp; BelgiumChris Wilson, Circles UK, UKRene Poort, Dutch Probation; CoSa Netherlands

Intro: Mechtild Höing, Avans

1

Firs

t In

tern

atio

nal

CO

SA C

onfe

rence

20/1

1/2

014

Introduction

New Public Governance Paradigm

Public safety is shared responsibility: co-creation

Historical, legal, socio-cultural and organizational context

National and local conditions2

A model of the contextNational context

Local organizations

CoSA projects

Policy Penology, Sex offender legislation, Societal climate

Mission, philosophy, core values and goals

Proj. governance; political and proff. support; funding;Target group

Planning Infrastructure; Rules & regulations

Targets, Relationships,procedures, strategic management

project partners; level of co-operationProcedures; e.g.information exchange

Pro-duction

Service needs; capacity, expertise & resources

Service needs, prof. capacity & expertise; financial resourcesVolunteer resources

Contracted or independent provider?Resources (finances, expertise)Quality control

3

Circles 4EU

Final Conference COSA

Barcelona, November 2014

Belgium

20/1

1/2

014

CIR

CLE

S4EU

4

Political Context Belgium

Short animated film on situation in  Belgium ! 

20/1

1/2

014

CIR

CLE

S4EU

5

Start of  Cosa Belgium

Probation Services Belgium = starting point

Funded by Europe

Ministry of Justice (federal government) and Penitentionary Board = not interested

20/1

1/2

014

CIR

CLE

S4EU

6

So  

Started only in Antwerp

1 CC, 8 hours per week

7

CIR

CLE

S4EU

20/1

1/2

014

Consequences  

No national/federal funding

No general implementation policy

No sharing of knowledge/experience

No sharing of overhead costs

8

CIR

CLE

S4EU

20/1

1/2

014

Disadvantages

1.

Only local communication strategy

2.

No back‐up 

3.

Depends on local goodwill

4.

Long experimental phase 

9

CIR

CLE

S4EU

20/1

1/2

014

Funding

Initially : Europe

Then Province and City of Antwerp

Now : Flemish Community : Ministry of Social Affairs, Welfare and Health 

10

CIR

CLE

S4EU

20/1

1/2

014

Adaptation

No systematic risk assessment : cooperation with UFC 

Information : partners !   

Monitoring and evaluation : local ! 

11

CIR

CLE

S4EU

20/1

1/2

014

Cosa Belgium now (1)

Transfer of Cosa to Social Affairs

Since September 2014 : 2nd region (Brussels) and 2nd CC

Common Partner Meetings to give guidance and structure 

12

CIR

CLE

S4EU

20/1

1/2

014

Cosa Belgium now (2)

Mutual intervision and training

Exploring options with Government for more general implementation 

13

CIR

CLE

S4EU

20/1

1/2

014

Recommendations

Start with national implementation and structure; or at least more than 1 region

Create of a National Bureau or coordinator from the beginning

Funding = crucial ! 

14

CIR

CLE

S4EU

20/1

1/2

014

20/1

1/2

014

CIR

CLE

S4EU

15

This presentation has been produced with the financial support of the Daphne III Programme of the European Union. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of xxxxxxxx and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Commission

First International COSA ConferenceOrganisation and Legal Issues

Chris WilsonCircles UK Project Structure & Governance

20/1

1/2

014

Firs

t In

tern

atio

nal

CO

SA C

onfe

rence

Circles UK 6 Key Tasks

Circles UK funded by central government (MoJ)The 6 key tasks

•Ensure the development and delivery of Circles of Support and Accountability. •Ensure the quality and consistency of practices through training and assessment processes. •Coordinate a national perspective for the evaluation and research of Circles, •Promote an awareness and provide consistent, accurate information about Circles, •Maintaining the profile of Circles activity with strategic partners at national and regional level •Ensure the sustainability of local Circles project and to support their expansion into mainstream activity by adopting a coordinated and high level, approach to funding negotiations. 17

Firs

t In

tern

atio

nal

CO

SA C

onfe

rence

20/1

1/2

014

Context for Circles Criminal Justice and Civil

Government

Legislation & Policy

Process

Criminal Justice Civil

• Ministry of Justice Health• Courts / Judiciary Social Care• MAPPA Psychiatric Services• Police / Probation / Prison Faith Group• Police & Crime Commissioner Charitable Trust

18

Circles UK Project Structure & Governance

3 Probation Projects;• Cheshire• Leicester & Rutland• East of EnglandAll 3 Projects have a management / advisory board (unable to access charitable funding)

1 Probation Partnership• Greater Manchester probation & Greater Manchester Community ChaplaincyHas a management / advisory Board (can access charitable funding)

5 Large Criminal Justice / Child Protection Charities• Lucy Faithfull Foundation (West Midlands)• Barnardos (North East)• CJIW (North Wales)• CROPT (Cumbria and the North West)• Respond (London)Has a management / advisory Board (can access charitable funding)

4 Independent Circle Charities• Circles South East• Circles South West• YHCOSA• Safer Living FoundationHas a Board of trustees + advisory group

1 Consortium• Circles CymruHas a management / advisory Board (can access charitable funding)

19

The Relationship between Circles UK and its Member projects

Administration Professional Network• Operational templates Management Networks• Policies & Procedures Chairs Meeting• Volunteer Training Materials Strategic Managers Meeting

Funding Issues Coordinator Networks• Development 2 Training Events• Consortium 3 Coordinator Forums

Data Collection and Analysis National Conferences• Demographic 1 per year

• DRR Support & Advice• Case Histories Public Information line

Research Project information / support

• R & E Group Audit and Membership Renewal• Commissioning Full Review 1 x 3years Peer review

Facilitating Project Quality Assurance• Ethical Approval Interim review 1 x 18 month

National Coordinator Training European Partnership• New Coordinator training x 4 per year Circles 4EU 20

20/1

1/2

014

Firs

t In

tern

atio

nal

CO

SA C

onfe

rence

This presentation has been produced with the financial support of the Daphne III Programme of the European Union. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of Christopher M Wilson and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Commission

Thank you for your attention!

[chris.wilson@circles-uk.org.uk]

21

First International COSA ConferenceOrganisation and Legal Issues

Rene PoortCircles in the Netherlands

20/1

1/2

014

Firs

t In

tern

atio

nal

CO

SA C

onfe

rence

The Dutch COSA Project

Since 200950+ circles; 5 regional projects

Staff: 1 national project coordinator11 circle coordinators

All projects run by Dutch Probation Organization

23

Governance:CEO Dutch Probation

Organization

Head policy divisionCoSA officer

National Management Team

National Project coordinator

Project C/N2 cc

ProjectNW2cc

ProjectSW2cc

ProjectE

2cc

Project S

3cc

Avans, research and development

National project assembly

advice

hierarchy

SLA

Policy advisor Regional Unitmanagers

24

National contextStrengths:Sex offender legislation enables long term monitoringHigh level of political support & fundingHigh level of professional supportWorking within existing local networks (but not all of them)Privacy rules

Possible weaknesses:No community representation in the governance structureJust one funder (Ministry of Safety & Justice)No circles for offenders who are not supervised by probation COSA is a relative expensive interventionInclusion criteria sometimes too strictPrivacy rules

25

20/1

1/2

014

Firs

t In

tern

atio

nal

CO

SA C

onfe

rence

This presentation has been produced with the financial support of the Daphne III Programme of the European Union. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of xxxxxxxx and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Commission

Thank you for your attention!

[r. poort@reclassering.nl]