Recent publications

• Aebi, M., Delgrande, N. and Marguet, Y. (2011) Annual Penal Statistics, SPACE II 2009, Survey on Non-Custodial Sanctions and Measures in the Council of Europe Member Countries,  PC-CP (2011) 4, Council of Europe.

• Brayford, J., Cowe, F. and Deering J.  (eds) (2010) What Else Works? Creative work with offenders, Cullompton, Willan.

• Canton R (2011) Probation, Working with Offenders. Abingdon, Routledge.

• Durrance, P., Dixon, L. and Singh Bhui, H. (2010) ‘Creative working with minority ethnic offenders’, in Brayford, J., Cowe, F. and Deering J.  (eds)  What Else Works? Creative work with offenders, Cullompton, Willan, 138-154.

• Genders, E. and Player, E. (2010)   ‘Therapy in Prison: Revisiting Grendon 20 Years On’,  The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 49: 431–450.

• Haigh, R. (2010)‘Grendon's Contribution to Therapeutic Communities and Personality Disorder’, The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice 

• Laws, R. and Ward, T.  (2010) Desistance from Sex Offending: Alternatives to Throwing Away the Keys, London, Routledge.

• Ledger, J. (2010) ‘Rehabilitation Revolution: Will Probation Pay the Price?’ Probation Journal  57:4 415-22.

• Hansbury, S (ed) (2011) Evaluation of the Intensive Alternatives to Custody pilots, Research Summary 3/11, Ministry of Justice.

• Mair, G. and Burke, L. (2011) Redemption Rehabilitation and Risk Management, London, Routledge.

• Moore, L., Phillips, A. and Kostadintcheva, K. (2010) Community Payback and local criminal justice engagement initiatives, public perceptions and awareness, Research Summary 3/10, Ministry of Justice, London.

• National Audit Office (2008) National Probation Service, The Supervision of Community Orders in England and Wales, London, The Stationery Office.

• Nugent, B. and Loucks, N. (2011) ‘The Arts and Prisoners: Experiences of Creative Rehabilitation’, The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 50: 356–370.

• Parkes, R. and Bilby, C. (2010) ‘The Courage to Create: The Role of Artistic and Spiritual Activities in Prisons’, The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 49: 97–110.

• Peck, M. (2011) Patterns of reconviction among offenders eligible for Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements, Ministry of Justice Research Series 6/11, London,  Ministry of Justice.

• Roberts, J. (2010) ‘Women offenders: more troubled than troublesome?’ in Brayford, J., Cowe, F. and Deering J. (eds) What Else Works? Creative work with offenders, Cullompton, Willan,  91-116.

• Robinson, G.  (2008) ‘Late-modern rehabilitation:  The evolution of a penal strategy, Punishment and Society, 10(4) 429-46.

• Trebilcock, J. (2010) The reality of short term prison sentences: early findings from research with the Prison Governors’ Association, London, Howard League.

• Trebilcock, J. (2011) No Winners – the reality of short term prison sentences, London, Howard League.

Cases

• Secretary of State for Justice v James (formerly Walker and another)  [2009] UKHL 11. 

International comparisons

• Killias, M., Gillieron, G., Kissling, I. and Villettaz P. (2010) ‘Community Service Versus Electronic Monitoring--What Works Better?:  Results of a Randomized Trial’ Br J Criminol 2010 50: 1155-1170. [The abstract for this article, by members of the Institute of Criminology, University of Zurich, Switzerland gives the following information:
  The present study is based on a controlled experiment in Switzerland with 240 subjects randomly assigned either to community service or to electronic monitoring. Measures of outcome include reconvictions, self-reported delinquency and several measures of social integration such as marriage, income and debts. The findings, based on subjects who successfully completed their sanction, suggest, with marginal significance (p < 0.10), that those assigned to electronic monitoring reoffended less than those assigned to community service, that they were more often married and lived under more favourable financial circumstances. ]

• Vanstone, M. (2008) The International Origins and Initial Development of Probation’ British Journal of Criminology vol 48(6) pp 735-755. [The abstract for this article says that it ‘examines why probation emerged as an alternative to punishment throughout the world in a relatively short period of time at the end of the nineteenth and beginning of the twentieth century’.]

• van Kalmthout, A. and Durnescu, I. (eds) (2008 Edition) Probation in Europe
  [This collection surveys 32 European countries in terms of historical development, current legislation, and organisational structures and provides a range of statistical data.]

Community sentences

• Ashworth, A. and Player, E. (2005) 'The Criminal Justice Act 2003: The Sentencing Provisions' Modern Law Review Vol 68(5) 822-838.

• Bottoms, A. (2008) 'The Community Dimension of Community Penalties' Howard Journal Vol 47(2) pp 146-169

• Bottoms, A., Rex, S. and Robinson, G. (2004) Alternatives to Prison, Options for an Insecure Society.

• Bullock, K. (2011) ‘The Construction and Interpretation of Risk Management Technologies in Contemporary Probation Practice’  Br J Criminology vol 51: 120-135

• FitzGibbon, D. (2007) 'Risk analysis and the new practitioner' Punishment and Society Vol 9(1) 87-97. [In this article FitzGibbon refers to other commentators who have warned that the proper implementation of the risk assessment techniques now required of the Probation Service necessitates adequate resources and traditional casework skills. He then argues that, 'If either or both of these conditions fail to apply, then the likely consequences will be over-prediction of risk and dangerousness' (FitzGibbon 2007: 95) so reinforcing social exclusion and also contributing further to the workload pressures on NOMS.]

• Harrison, K. (2006) 'Community Punishment or Community Rehabilitation: Which is the highest in the sentencing tariff?' The Howard Journal Vol 45(2) 141-158.

• HM Inspectorate of Probation, HM Inspectorate of Courts Administration, HM Inspectorate of Constabulary (2007) A Summary of Findings on the Enforcement of Community Penalties from three Joint Area Inspections, Thematic Inspections Report (London: Home Office).

• Home Office (2006) Rebalancing the Criminal Justice System in favour of the law abiding majority, Home Office: London.

• Home Office (2010) Drug Misusing Offenders: Results from the 2009 cohort for England and Wales
  http://rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/stats-release.html

• Lewis, S., Raynor, P., Smith, D. and Wardack, A. (eds) (2005) Race and Probation Alternatives to Prison. Cullompton, Willan Publishing.

• Mair, G. and Mills, H. (2009) Three years on: The Community Order and Suspended Sentence Order - the views and experiences of probation officers and offenders. London: The Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, Kings College.

• Mair, G., Cross, N. & Taylor, S. (2007) The use and impact of the Community Order and the Suspended Sentence Order. London, Centre for Criminal Justice Studies.

• Mair, G., Cross, N. and Taylor, S. (2008) The Community Order and the Suspended Sentence Order: the views and attitudes of sentencers. London, Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, King's College London.
  [This report provides an analysis of the views of sentencers, reporting that they are generally positive about these new orders, but are concerned about the volume of legislation and changes to sentencing practice in recent years. The full report can be found at www.crimeandjustice.org.uk/sentencersviews.html.]

• National Offender Management Service (2006) Working with Probation to Protect the Public and Reduce Re-offending, Home Office: London.

• Robinson, G. (2008) 'Late-modern rehabilitation: The evolution of a penal strategy' , Punishment and Society Vol 10(4) pp 429-46.

• Stanley, S. and Patel, S. (2008) The Use of the Community Order and Suspended Sentence Order for Women, Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, Kings College, London.
  [This report was launched after a seminar to discuss the findings attended by magistrates, senior civil servants and practitioners, see:
  www.crimeandjustice.org.uk/communitysentencesforwomen.html]

• Worrall, A. and Hoy, C. (2005) Punishment in the Community, 2nd edition, Cullompton, Willan Publishing.

Non-compliance: theory, research and sanctions

• Bottoms, A.E. (2001) 'Compliance and community penalties' in A. Bottoms, L. Gelsthorpe and S. Rex, Community Penalties: change or challenges, 87-116

• Hucklesby, A. (2008) 'Vehicles of Desistance? The impact of electronically monitored curfew orders', Criminology and Criminal Justice Vol 8(1) 51-71.

• McKeever, G. (2004) 'Social Security as a Criminal Sanction' Journal of Social and Welfare Law Vol 26(1) 1-16.

• Nash, M. and Williams, A. (2008) The Anatomy of Serious Further Offending, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

• Nellis, M. (2006) 'Surveillance, Rehabilitation, and Electronic Monitoring: Getting the issues clear', Criminology and Public Policy Vol 5(1) 103-108.

See also:

• Home Office (2005) Juvenile Reconviction: results from the 2003 cohort, Home Office, Online Report 08/05.
  [This report found that the reconviction rate for curfew orders was the highest rate of all disposals for young offenders.]

• National Audit Office (NAO) (2006) The Electronic Monitoring of Adult Offenders, Report by the Comptroller and Auditor General, London: Audit Office.

Probation theory and practice

• Beaumont, B. (1999) 'Assessing risk in work with offenders' in Parsloe, P. (ed) Risk Assessment in Social Care and Social Work, London, JKP pp 119-131. [A long chapter focused on adult offenders which reviews the historical development of risk assessment and actuarially-based practice in different criminal justice and probation processes, critiquing its knowledge base. A further chapter in this volume by the same author reviews prediction research.]

• Bhui, H.S. (2005) 'Probation's heritage and future' Probation Journal Vol 52: 5-7. [A recent analysis of the development of probation practice.]

• Howard Journal of Criminal Justice (2004) Special issue on desistance from crime, Vol 43(4). [The article by Farrall and Maruna entitled 'Desistence-Focused Criminal Justice Policy Research' looks at the coming together of this type of research and the (re-) emergence of concern with 'what works' in offender management policy and the resulting tensions; other articles discuss recent empirical research.]

• Hutchinson, S. (2006) Countering catastrophic criminology: reform, punishment and the modern liberal compromise', Punishment and Society 8(4) 443-67.

• Kemshall, H. (2003) Understanding Risk in Criminal Justice, Milton Keynes, Open University Press. [If you are interested in the concept of risk more widely, this text offers detailed introductory material on concepts of risk and risk assessment generally.]

• National Offender Management Service (2006) Improving Prison and Probation Services: Public Value Partnerships, Home Office: London.

• National Offender Management Service (2006) Working with Probation to Protect the Public and Reduce Re-offending. Home Office: London.

• Oldfield, M. and Grimshaw, R. (2008) Probation Resources, Staffing and Workloads 2001-2008. London, Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, King's College in association with NAPO.

• Vanstone, M. (2008) 'The International Origins and Initial Development of Probation: An Early Example of Policy Transfer' Br J Criminol Vol 48, 735-755.

Rehabilitation

• Priestley, P. and Vanstone, M. (eds) (2010) Offenders or Citizens? Readings in Rehabilitation, Cullompton, Willan.

Sentencing Guidance

• Sentencing Guidelines Council (2004)New Sentences: Criminal Justice Act 2003, Section 1 Part 1- The Community Sentence

What works?

• Burnett, R. and Roberts, G. (eds) (2004) What Works in Probation and Youth Justice: Developing Evidence-Based Practice. Cullompton, Willan Publishing.

• Harper, G. and Chitty, C. (eds) (2005) The impact of corrections on re-offending: a review of "what works" (3rd ed) Home Office Research Study 291 London: HORDSD. [This review notes that data from the recent Offender Assessment System (OASys) suggests that offenders have on average 4 problems - such as accommodation, unemployment or substance mi-use - which contribute to them committing a crime and so rehabilitation programmes should be planned with the aim of addressing these problems. Poor basic skills contribute to unemployment and so should also be addressed. The report evaluates particular programmes in adult prisons and young offender institutions as well as during probation. The researchers found one major problem was that a higher number of people than expected dropped out of programmes. They also stressed the need for good programmes of integration back into the community on release from prison.]

• Moore, R., Gray, E., Roberts, C., Merrington, S. and Taylor, E. (2006) Managing Persistent and Serious Offenders in the Community. Cullompton, Willan Publishing.

• Robinson, G. (2005) 'What Works in Offender Management?' Howard Journal Vol 44(3) 307-318.