Offender Management: Theories, Community Sentences, and NGO Roles

This report provides a comprehensive overview of offender management, delving into various punishment theories such as deterrence, retribution, prevention, and reformation. It examines the roles of different organizations within the national offender management system, highlighting the fragmentation, weak incentives, centralization, siloed working, and disjointed provisions that characterize the system. The report further discusses community sentences imposed by courts, including unpaid work, rehabilitation activities, and drug treatment programs. It also emphasizes the crucial role of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in offender rehabilitation through strategies like rehabilitation programs, employment opportunities, and education. Finally, it outlines measures of community offender management, such as drug abuse programs, psychological support, and the implementation of reformative and preventive theories, ultimately aiming to reform offenders into responsible and law-abiding citizens. Desklib provides access to this report along with a wealth of other solved assignments and study resources.

OFFENDER
MANAGEMENT

TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................................................3
Task 1 ..............................................................................................................................................3
Role of offender management .....................................................................................................4
Community sentence imposes by courts......................................................................................5
Role of Non-governmental organization (NGO's).......................................................................6
Measures of community offender management...........................................................................6
CONCLUSION ...............................................................................................................................7
REFERENCES ...............................................................................................................................8

INTRODUCTION
Offender management can be defined as the managerial function which seeks to
accomplish the overarching goals of crime reduction, protection of public, punishment and
reform offender into good person. In simple word to manage various type of offenders in prison
on the basis of criminal justice system. Offender manager plays essential role to manage
offenders in both within prison system and within community. Manager has main function to
protect public and prevent re-offending by receiving punishment and commands from the court.
Additionally, manager supports offender to redeem their lives and resist future victims of crime.
This report covers theories of punishment and sentencing.
Task 1
Theories of punishment and sentencing
There are various theories of punishment which is used by judge to punish different type of
offenders. Theories are-
Deterrence: It is most popular theory which is designed to educate criminals. Even this
theory supports criminal to reform their lives by resist themselves to re-offend any type of crime.
The main goal of the theory to keep criminal away from crime and reform them into good
person. Deterrent theory is classified into parts specific deterrence and general deterrence. In
specific deterrence, punishment is organized in that way which educates criminal that whatever
they offend it was wrong. Additionally, it creates a fear among offender that punishment can be
repeated when they offend (Williams, and et.al., 2017). On the other hand, general deterrence is
designed to avoid future crime. It also creates fear in common citizen to not do what they did.
Retributive Theory : It is quite old theory for justification which is organized for giving
punishment. This theory forces that a person who have done wrong deed should deserve
punishment. This theory is fully based on some principles such as a person can't arrest unless
they don't break the law. There are some condition which express that a person considers as an
offender. For example when a person offend similar crime which have done before. When a
person perform a crime considers as the culprit.
Prevention theory: It is used to resist offender to repeat the criminal act by giving
punishment for death, imprisonment. The main goal of theory to keep safe public from criminals.
This theory is specially designed to those offenders who shows anti-social behaviour due to
psychological and biological handicap.

Reformative theory: The reformative theory is specifically planned to reform offenders
lives. The main objective of the punishment is to reform wrong deed offender into right deed
person. This theory supports criminal to become good citizen as munch can possible.
Role of offender management
There are some approach in which offender management plays essential role in different
range of organization. Overall department works together to manage offender in national
offender management. Approaches are-
Fragmentation: Offender management is wider criminal justice system due to wide
number of agencies involvement along with receiving of criminal justice (Maguire and Raynor,
2017). It highly complicated and disjointed system which suffers from large number of
complicated relationship. For example UK's current system is classified into 43 police forces
areas 13 prosecution regions while 21 community rehabilitation organization, seven court service
areas. Apart from this seven national probation service regions, seven court service regions,
eleven prison regions and 375 councils. Thus, each department is fragmented and disjointed in
England, UK. The structure of criminal justice system includes Police which creates strategies to
capture criminal. While CPS has role to segregate criminal based on the gender. Courts
determine crime of offender and gives punishment (Lockyer and Heys, 2016). Probation
department classified offender on the basis of their probation period in prison. On the other hand,
local authorities maintains those offenders in prison who offend crime but not in major scale for
example bank robbery. Recently rehabilitation program also adds for enhancing complexity of
system.
Weak incentives: this is another approach of offender management where gives financial
benefits to local policy when they divert people from reducing re-offending. For example when
local police authority resist offender to commit crime or expose criminal before criminal activity
becomes part of reward strategy.
Centralization: Criminal justice system is highly centralized due to some reasons such as
local authorities take effective decision to reduce crime where they offer their services. On the
other hand national authority also centralize because they make decision to trap the biggest
criminal who keeps wrong deed. Due to highly mix of crimes across the country needs to adapt
different types of services. For example: London is most popular place of UK where has high
rate of drug offences, violence and gang related crime Dyer and Biddle, 2016). Each criminal

needs to treat different types of services which is incorporated into offender management. They
manage each type of criminal in different type of services and punish by different punishment
theory.
Siloed Working: The policy is organized to deal with different types of offenders. Front-
line practitioners and operational experts which includes social services or police officers helps
offender management to develop flexible policy. These policy supports offender management to
transform rehabilitation into good citizenship.
Disjointed provision: Offender management manages drug addicted criminal and
psychological offender on the basis of different types of policy services.
Community sentence imposes by courts
A community sentence which combines punishment along with activities that executes by
community. To treat offender in community requires 13 requirements which is imposed by
courts. For example some criminals gives alcohol and drug treatment to determine the reason
that why they have offended crime (King, Hopkins and Cornish, 2018). Even serious courts
imposed curfew on offender, the main of this restriction to keep they away from trouble. The
basis requirements which is imposed by courts for community and offenders.
 Offender have to do work for 300 hours in return they are not paid for work. In simple
word unpaid work which is done by offender non-stop as punishment.
 Court instructs rehabilitation activities requirements which is undertaken by offender
management to mange rehab criminals.
 Courts creates rehabilitation programs to reform behaviour of offender. It is managed by
offender management who includes various activities for rehabilitation offender so that
they stay out from criminal activities (Kernsmith, Comartin and Kernsmith, 2016).
 Courts impose community sentence for those offenders who have commuted crime due to
drugs. Therefore, drug rehabilitation treatment is given by offender management as
offender consent.
 Foreign travel is prohibited by court for offenders. Where offender management resist
victims to go out either they belong to common community or they belong to power
community.

Role of Non-governmental organization (NGO's)
Non-governmental organization are those organizations which is organized to give their
services to public so that they can live their life happily. It is non-profit organization which is
influenced by government. Such kind NGO's gets funds from privet and public sectors. These
organization plays essential role to manage offenders and reform them into good citizens. They
apply various strategy to handle offenders and transform their behaviour into positive direction.
Strategies are-
Conduct rehabilitation program: It is quite good strategy which is executed by Non-
governmental organization to manager drugs addicted offenders, juveniles and children who
have offended crime. NGO's involves them into different activities like dancing, singing and
other in which they interest ((Hudson and Jones, 2016). By the rehabilitation program volunteers
who offers their free cost services to keep hope that they will reform offenders into good citizen,
supports them to determine their crime which they commit either intentionally or unintentionally.
NgO's inspires offender to redeem their life by leading in their behaviours.
Employment: NGO's offers job opportunity to offender to lead change in their behaviours
by doing work hard in job. This strategy is not only lead change in their behaviour but also
transform them into responsible citizen.
Education: Most of the offenders are juvenile aged who have committed crime due to
financial problem or psychological issue. NGO's provides education to offender for leading
change in their personality and behaviour. According to NGO, education is weapon which helps
people to determine that which is wrong deed or what is right deed.
Measures of community offender management
There are various approaches which is used by offender management to manage
community offenders. For example Rehabilitation program which is conducted by offender
management to arrange different types of drug abuse offender. Even psychologically suffered
offenders also manage by offender management where gives drug treatment to redeem their
mental health. Unpaid work up to 300 hours strategy is good strategy which makes them relies
that they did wrong deed and make them responsible citizen (Hoggett, McCartan and
O’Sullivan, 2020). Reformative and preventive and deterrent theories are organized for
offenders to make them relies that they did wrong lead change in their behaviour. Punishment
theory has goal to change behaviour of offenders so that they don't repeat crime in the future.

These punishments are not only imposed on the victims but also local community. Thus, overall
strategies are used to reform offenders into good citizen.
CONCLUSION
It can be concluded various punishment theories such as deterrent, reformative and
preventive and retributive Theory. The range of organizations and their roles involved in
offender management and focuses how they work together has been summarized in report.
Community sentences that are imposed by courts can be concluded in report. Non-governmental
organizations offenders has been summarized in report. It can be concluded community offender
management effectiveness by measuring approaches.

REFERENCES
Books and Journals
Dyer, W. and Biddle, P., 2016. ‘Enhanced Support for High Intensity Users of the Criminal
Justice System’: An Evaluation of Mental Health Nurse Input into Integrated Offender
Management Services in the North East of England. Social Policy and Society. 15(1).
pp.43-55.
Hoggett, J., McCartan, K. and O’Sullivan, J., 2020. Risk, discretion, accountability and control:
Police perceptions of sex offender risk management policy in England and
Wales. Criminology and Criminal Justice.
Hudson, K. and Jones, T., 2016. Satellite tracking of offenders and integrated offender
management: a local case study. The Howard Journal of Crime and Justice. 55(1-2).
pp.188-206.
Kernsmith, P., Comartin, E. and Kernsmith, R., 2016. Fear and misinformation as predictors of
support for sex offender management policies. J. Soc. & Soc. Welfare. 43. p.39.
King, S., Hopkins, M. and Cornish, N., 2018. Can models of organizational change help to
understand ‘success’ and ‘failure’in community sentences? Applying Kotter’s model of
organizational change to an Integrated Offender Management case study. Criminology &
Criminal Justice. 18(3). pp.273-290.
Lockyer, K. and Heys, R., 2016. Local commissioning, local solutions: devolving offender
management. London: Reform Research Trust.
Maguire, M. and Raynor, P., 2017. Offender management in and after prison: The end of ‘end to
end’?. Criminology & Criminal Justice. 17(2). pp.138-157.
Rowe, M., Irving, A. and Soppitt, S., 2018. The legitimacy of offender management programmes
in a post-TR l.
Williams, K.M and et.al., 2017. The use of meta-analysis to compare and select offender risk
instruments: A commentary on Singh, Grann, and Fazel (2011). International Journal of
Forensic Mental Health. 16(1). pp.1-15.