New report reveals shortcomings in probation system and proposes hope-based reform
A new report, co-authored by Dr Jake Phillips, Associate Professor at the Institute of Criminology, highlights how structural issues in the probation system in England and Wales prevent effective rehabilitation, and argues a change in approach is needed.
The report, published by HM Inspectorate of Probation, is titled ‘Hope and Probation: Using the lens of hope to reimagine probation practice’. Phillips argues that effective rehabilitation needs to provide a sense of hope to prisoners.
In this context, ‘hope’ is defined as ‘the perceived capability to derive pathways to desired goals and motivate oneself, via agency thinking, to use those pathways’. Previous discussion about hope in the penal system has largely focused on imprisonment, whilst there has been less consideration about how it may apply in probation.
“We did the research to explore two things,” explains Phillips. “First of all, what people who were on probation were hoping for, in their lives and in getting something out of probation. And secondly, whether probation as a service actually helped people achieve those hopes.”
Experiences of hope
‘Hope and Probation’ collected data through interviewing people with experience of the probation system. Among those interviewed were both former and current service users and probation staff, and people employed in homeless and addiction services. Interviewees also helped design the research, to ensure it was grounded in the realities of probation.
Phillips and his fellow researchers conducted interviews with former probation users and staff on a walk to the town of Hope in the Peak District. Feedback from each walk was used to inform the structure of later interviews. Such an unconventional approach was intended to reduce the power imbalances that often occur when doing research with marginalised people.
“We felt like sitting in an interview room, with a researcher face to face with somebody on probation, creates a power imbalance between the researcher and the person,” says Phillips. “But from our own experience, we knew that if you go on a walk, you often have quite interesting, wide-ranging conversations, which take out some of that power imbalance.”
Based on the responses, the report identified 3 different categories of hope. The first was hopelessness, wherein people on probation felt marginalised. To them, penal supervision was just a form of social control, without any hope for improving their lives.
The next category was institutional hope, wherein people on probation’s priorities were completing their sentence by complying with the institutional structures of probation. This type of hope typically entailed adapting to the conditions of the penal system. People interviewed about institutional hope often spoke about the penal system as something to endure, rather than a means for development.
The final, and most aspirational, form of hope was transformational hope, wherein participants wanted to genuinely move their lives towards something more ‘normal’. Philips also made a distinction between 2 types of transformational hope: formless and concrete. The former included abstract aims such as ‘wanting things to get better’ while the latter included more defined hopes such as marriage or children. Crucially, hopeful narratives are most effective when they contain clear, achievable goals for individuals.
The report explains that the penal system can disrupt such goals, due to the lack of autonomy prisoners have, and the control exerted over them. In order to feel hope, people under probation supervision require a sense of agency that they can use to achieve their goals. When they have this agency, studies show that the likelihood of reoffending decreases.
Deprioritising rehabilitation
Dr Phillips’ research highlighted a bureaucratisation of the prison and probation system in recent decades, with a rise in managerialism. This trend has occurred in many sectors since the 1980s, informed by the ‘new public management’ approach. This approach aims to maximise efficiency in public services, but Phillips criticises it for being overly reductive.
“The service is governed through key performance indicators and targets that are very process-driven,” he explains. “There's been really heavy emphasis on when a report gets done, rather than the quality of that report. Practitioners know they must write a report within 10 days, and that becomes the key: just tick that box, write the report, with much less emphasis on the report’s quality, its accuracy, or the depth of its analysis.”
Philips also argues that new public management and its tick-box culture have shifted the focus to technical compliance over substantive compliance. These types of compliance differ in their focus. The former focuses on prisoners adhering to formal processes, namely sessions for answering questions. The latter is more transformational, focusing on whether the probation system is allowing people to improve as individuals.
Philips found that this focus on technical compliance was aided by a culture of risk aversion in many staff. As they feared being blamed for any incidents, they feel unable to try alternative approaches.
The issue of managerialism and bureaucracy is not confined to the public sector either. Evidence for this comes from the privatisation of the probation services from 2014 to 2021. The companies in charge of the service were similarly bureaucratic and focused on technical compliance. This privatisation also led to a reduction in probation staff due to the lower budgets of many suppliers, creating an ongoing staff shortage.
Overall, these policies have created a penal system that does not consider rehabilitation to be a priority. Moreover, the interviews found that many people in probation were aware of the ‘tick-box’ culture, and felt it was counterproductive to achieving their hopes. Similarly, many participants talked about how the fear of being recalled to prison served to stifle their hopes for the future.
Putting people first
Phillips highlights policies that could create a more person-centred probation system. Such a system would actively engage with prisoners, to help them realise their hopes.
Person-centred practice requires probation staff to understand individuals’ different needs. The support they receive would vary depending on what those needs were. Key to this is allowing service-user engagement, wherein those under probation are involved in producing their own rehabilitation strategies. Phillips also advocates for people with experience of probation to be involved in these strategies, and for renewed emphasis on community-based services.
Returning to Cambridge
Dr Phillips has always had an interest in the penal system. He was a PhD student at the Institute of Criminology from 2008 to 2012 and applied to Cambridge largely due to the expertise many staff had on the subject.
“Doing a PhD can be a bit lonely,” says Philips. “But I didn't find it lonely at the Institute, because you've got a big group of PhD students at any one time. There are always people in the in the department to talk to, to get ideas from and discuss your own ideas.”
Unsurprisingly, his PhD focused on values and culture in the probation service.
“I was interested in how those values were helping practitioners resist macro-level changes around managerialism, punitivism, and risk,” he recalls. His PhD proved to be a catalyst for a much greater exploration of this subject.
Following 12 years at Sheffield Hallam University, Phillips returned to Cambridge in March this year, as an Associate Professor and Director of the MSt in Applied Criminology, Penology and Management. This course is designed for people already in managerial and leadership roles within the criminal justice system. It aims to provide these people with a grounding in criminological theory, to potentially help create alternative approaches in their profession.
“My role as director is to is to oversee the development of the curriculum,” he explains. “I oversee the teaching staff, support students, supervise students. The teaching we do is a combination of teaching delivered by the core course team but also bringing in experts. We have lots of guest speakers such as academic, policy and practice experts from criminology and criminal justice, who come in and deliver stuff directly to students.”
In both of his roles, as a researcher and as a teacher, Dr Jake Phillips has a clear goal: to change the probation service, so that people are at its centre.
“When we asked participants for examples of when probation had been successful in achieving their hopes, it was when there were good professional working relationships,” he summarises. “It was when people had a bit more time to spend than what was allotted and maybe push against the boundaries of what was and wasn't allowed in their working lives.”
Applications for our 2026 MSt courses are open until 2 December 2025.