Recurring concern

Failure to maintain complete and timely probation records

Get email alerts

Request correction

First reported 12 Jun 2019•Latest report 29 Aug 2019

Definition

What this concern includes

Includes failures to create, maintain or update complete and timely records of probation supervision, contacts, assessments, decisions and actions when those records are needed for safe offender management and continuity between probation staff.

Not included

Excludes generic probation staffing, accommodation, workload or supervision deficiencies where probation-record reliability is not the unsafe condition.
Excludes failures to communicate or transfer information when the underlying probation records are complete and the problem is only later information sharing.
Excludes clinical, prison, care-home and other non-probation records unless the assertion explicitly concerns the same probation-record process.
Excludes failures in the substantive quality of a supervision decision or intervention where the relevant probation records were complete and timely.

Reports: 2
Individual concerns: 2
Date range: 2019–2019
Stated actions: 4

Reports over time

Reports about this concern issued each year.

* 2026 is projected from reports observed to 7 Sep 2026.

Most frequent recipients

Reports about this concern sent to each recipient.

Ministry of Justice2

Probation Service2

Greater Manchester Police1

HM Prison and Probation Service1

Lancashire Constabulary1

National Police Chiefs’ Council1

National Probation Service1

Northumbria Police1

Concerns and responses across reports

Only concerns grouped under this recurring concern are included. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

29 Aug2019
Manchester North
Concerns raised1
1. Poor or absent records by SPOs and ACOs
This report raised 14 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response 3
1. Action
  Publish updated guidance on professional-judgment decision-making and recording in NDelius through the EQUIP database.
  Stated by HM Prison and Probation Service and Ministry of Justice and Probation ServiceStated completed
2. Action
  Publish strengthened evidence-based guidance on licence compliance, engagement, decision-making and accountability for recording professional judgment.
  Stated by HM Prison and Probation Service and Ministry of Justice and Probation ServiceStated completed
3. Action
  Roll out the National Supervisory and Line Management Framework, including required supervision, practice observation, case review and recording oversight.
  Stated by HM Prison and Probation Service and Ministry of Justice and Probation ServiceStated in progress
AI-generated summary

Michael Hoolickin · Prevention of Future Deaths report

This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

Report summary

Michael Hoolickin was attacked and stabbed in an unprovoked assault on 14 October 2016 and died at Manchester Royal Infirmary on 17 October 2016. The report identifies organisational and management failures in supervising the perpetrator, including failures concerning drug testing, information sharing and provision of relevant information, which resulted in a missed opportunity to initiate recall to prison. The Inquest found that this probably contributed to Michael Hoolickin’s death, although it was not causative of the attack.

Read the report on judiciary.uk
Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted
PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.
PFD Monitor interpretation
Poor or absent records by SPOs and ACOs
Wider context from the report
“The Court had serious concerns as to the poor records or complete lack of records particularly by SPOs and the ACOs. ”
Source location
Michael Hoolickin · Prevention of Future Deaths report
Page 5 · concerns
Open source report
Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation
Publish updated guidance on professional-judgment decision-making and recording in NDelius through the EQUIP database.

Verbatim wording from the response
“HMPPS is engaged on a programme of work to modernise tools available to probation practitioners in their management of offenders. Those responsible for this work closely with operational staff in NPS to ensure that changes we make reflect their priorities and support front line staff in the way that they work. The team will look at the issues raised in this case as soon as possible, and establish what improvements can be made quickly. The team will consult front line staff to ensure any solutions developed reflect practitioners’ needs. Updated Guidance on professional judgment decision making and recording on NDelius has already been added to the EQUIP database.”

Source location
2019-0292-Response-from-HM-Prison-and-Probation-Service-Redacted.pdf
Page 2 · response
Published 25 October 2019
Open published response
Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation
Publish strengthened evidence-based guidance on licence compliance, engagement, decision-making and accountability for recording professional judgment.

Verbatim wording from the response
“Lack of clarity and specific instructions to the NPS on the system of SPO and ACO warnings issued to offenders and serious concerns as to the poor records or complete lack of records particularly by SPOs and the ACOs.”

Source location
2019-0292-Response-from-HM-Prison-and-Probation-Service-Redacted.pdf
Page 2 · response
Published 25 October 2019
Open published response
Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation
Roll out the National Supervisory and Line Management Framework, including required supervision, practice observation, case review and recording oversight.

Verbatim wording from the response
“At no stage after March 2016 was the offender’s OASys risk assessment updated. Moreover, the lack of formal supervision meant this was not addressed.”

Source location
2019-0292-Response-from-HM-Prison-and-Probation-Service-Redacted.pdf
Page 2 · response
Published 25 October 2019
Open published response
12 Jun2019
Sunderland
Concerns raised1
1. Lack of contemporaneous probation computer records
This report raised 8 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response 1
1. Action
  Roll out the national Supervision and Line Management Framework across National Probation Service divisions, including required supervision meetings, practice observations and recording of challenged decisions.
  Stated by HM Prison and Probation ServiceStated in progress
AI-generated summary

Miss Nguyen Ngoc Quyen · Prevention of Future Deaths report

This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

Report summary

Miss Nguyen Ngoc Quyen died on 15 August 2017 at Success Road, Shiney Row, Houghton Le Spring; her death was consistent with the effects of fire. The report identified concerns about failures to act sufficiently, promptly and in a coordinated manner on known breaches of life licence conditions, including failures in information sharing between the Police and Probation Service, alongside wider organisational and supervision failings.

Read the report on judiciary.uk
Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted
PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.
PFD Monitor interpretation
Lack of contemporaneous probation computer records
Wider context from the report
“The Inquest highlighted many other issues: - • The Probation Service in Sunderland had staffing and accommodation problems. Operations and efficiency appeared to be in stark contrast between North West and North East. • The time spent with ████████ was short and in a working environment not conducive to meaningful engagement. • Unwin undermined the supervisory process by attending appointments with his child and not progressing in a more timely way the request to create a portfolio of his employment, culminating in an unsigned reference dated 25th July 2017. • There were no contemporaneous computer records from 13th December 2016 until 18th August 2017, the day before ████████ appeared in Court for murder. ”
Source location
Miss Nguyen Ngoc Quyen · Prevention of Future Deaths report
Page 2 · concerns
Open source report
Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation
Roll out the national Supervision and Line Management Framework across National Probation Service divisions, including required supervision meetings, practice observations and recording of challenged decisions.

Verbatim wording from the response
“To better support front line probation staff in the effectiveness of their supervision of offenders a new national Supervision and Line Management Framework has been developed and is being rolled out across the NPS Divisions during 2019. This work forms part of the National Probation Service 2020 Change Programme and has been developed using ideas and evidence from the Skills for Effective Engagement Development and Supervision Programme (SEEDS). This Framework is designed to ensure a consistent and appropriate level of management oversight through practice supervision sessions and observation of practice. Through observation of practice senior probation officers will be able to see whether staff are being sufficiently challenging and adopting a properly investigative approach in their face to face supervision of the offender.”

Source location
2019-0194-Response-by-HM-Prison-and-Probation-Service
Page 2 · response
Published 15 August 2019
Open published response

Data last updated 7 September 2026

What this concern includes

Not included

Reports over time

Concerns raised1

Poor or absent records by SPOs and ACOs

Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.3

Concerns raised1

Lack of contemporaneous probation computer records

Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1

Actions described in response 3

Actions described in response 1