Evidence shows that ISSP ‘doesn’t work’ says study

An initiative designed to keep young offenders out of prison is failing, a study conducted by researchers at the University of Portsmouth has concluded.
The Intensive Supervision and Surveillance Programme (ISSP) is a multi-million pound initiative which allows offenders aged ten to17 to stay living at home after committing a series of crimes that, if they were adults, could result in a 14-year prison sentence.
But according to the study, the programme has not been properly enforced and fails to bring structure to young offenders’ lives or correct their anti-social behaviour. More than 90 per cent of the youngsters taking part in the ISSP had committed further crimes after their period of supervision and surveillance had ended. Many said they would have preferred to be sent to jail because that would have removed them from their immediate circle of criminal friends and given them a chance to learn a trade.
One of them told the researchers: “ISSP is not a big part of my life. You just tell the workers what they want to hear and then carry on as normal.”
Tom Ellis, Nick Pamment and Chris Lewis are part of the university’s Institute of Criminal Justice Studies and conducted the study. They concluded that ISSP had failed to have a positive effect on offenders’ attitudes or provide age-appropriate supervision to offenders.
Mr Ellis said: “It is clear, from whatever perspective you look at it, using any triangulation of methods, ISSP doesn’t work. It is time to stop flogging a dead horse.
“Neither youth custody nor ISSP is effective for high-risk offenders. Most of these young offenders seem to be asking to be put in jail but what they are really asking for is to be removed from their environment, taught job-related skills and given supervision in the form of structured mentoring.
“The whole regime of dealing with young offenders needs a radical and urgent overhaul which focuses on what works or is likely to work rather than on political expediency and sounding tough.”
The study has been criticised as the sample size involved only 28 young offenders and 27 staff members. The Ministry of Justice has said the findings are “not representative of the national picture”.
A spokesman for the Youth Justice Board (YJB) said the research produced by Portsmouth University are “anecdotal rather than national research”.
The YJB quoted independent research undertaken by Oxford University that showed ISSP presented “a significant reduction in frequency and seriousness of offending and is cheaper than custody2.
“ISSP tackles the most persistent offender who may have mental health problems and learning difficulties. This is an exceptionally difficult group of offenders who present a major challenge to ISSP teams.
“The scheme gives young people an opportunity to rehabilitate, to return to education and training and to receive support for mental health and substance misuse problems. Oxford University findings showed 19 per cent at school and 92 per cent in education or training by the end of ISSP period,” the YJB spokesman added.
But Mr Ellis argued that while the numbers in the study were not large by national standards, they represented a large proportion of staff and offenders on the two ISSP areas studied and is no smaller than the study the Government used to justify the launch of the ISSP in 2001.
“In other words, the Government launched ISSP based on the results of a single study with an equally small number of people and has since spent more than £50 million on the programme,” he said.
The researchers found, as did many previous studies, that tough blanket conditions and applying more stringent breach rules made problems worse and resulted in higher numbers being jailed.
The study also critiques all previous evidence on intensive supervisions, arguing that there has never been any convincing evidence that ISSP was ever likely to be a success.
Mr Ellis said: “The evidence is overwhelmingly against intensive supervision. With low completion rates, high re-convict