'Strong case' for expanding mentoring schemes to cut reoffending, finds evaluation

A “strong case” exists for the expansion of mentoring services as part of efforts to reduce reoffending, according to new research.

An evaluation of six Scottish Government-backed schemes found mentoring helped individuals “learn constructive, non-criminal ways of addressing problems”. 

Six public social partnerships (PSP) - collaborations between third sector and public sector organisations - have been allocated funding since 2012 to specifically target prolific young male offenders and female offenders.

RELATED CONTENT

Early release changes will 'jeopardise public safety', experts warn

MSPs pass Community Justice Bill amid ongoing concerns over funding

Community Safety minister Paul Wheelhouse refuses to rule out compulsory redundancies after community justice shake-up

Current funding for the PSPs under the Reducing Reoffending Change Fund (RRCF) is set to run until next March after ministers extended the initial three-year funding envelope amid concerns over the short space of time in which to secure sustainable long-term investment. 

“There is strong evidence from this evaluation that mentoring is an effective approach which helps mentees to learn and implement constructive, non-criminal ways of addressing problems in their lives and to reduce risk factors associated with offending behaviour,” states an independent evaluation by a team of academics.

Researchers were unable to assess whether the long-term aims of reducing reoffending and increasing integration have been achieved due to time constraints and the inability to compare the results for those that received mentoring with a similar group that did not.

But their report added: “In combination with a wider system of support - and mentoring also helps engagement with other services - the evidence suggests that this will, in the long term, contribute to a reduction in reoffending. There is therefore a strong case for the continuation and expansion of mentoring services.”

However, the evaluation concluded that evidence as to whether mentoring services are best provided via the PSP model is “less clear”. Each of the six PSPs to receive RRCF funding has been led by a third sector organisation, among them Sacro, Includem and Action for Children.

“One element in the assessment of whether the PSP model has been successful is whether the services are sustained beyond the current funding period – and that will not be known until after funding expires in 2017,” the report adds.

“What is clear, however, is that the model has led public sector partners to a significantly increased appreciation of the expertise and potential contribution of the third sector.”

The evaluation suggested that many individuals mentors worked with would benefit from a longer period of engagement than six months. Researchers also suggested a mix of national and local PSPs in the same field is “potentially problematic” given the potential for duplication and competition over funding.

Professor Gill McIvor and Dr Margaret Malloch of the University of Stirling, the University of Glasgow’s Professor Fergus McNeill, and Professor Bill Whyte and Dr Steve Kirkwood of the University of Edinburgh worked on the evaluation alongside a team from Ipsos MORI Scotland.