Intensive Supervision Courts (ISCs) and problem-solving courts represent a transformative approach within the criminal justice system. They almost seem part of Lord Leveson’s review of the criminal courts because of how they seek to address the root causes of re-offending and reduce the backlog in the criminal justice system. They target the underlying issues that contribute to criminal behaviour, such as mental health disorders, social instability and substance abuse. ISCs and problem-solving courts seek to reduce reoffending rates and improve outcomes for offenders; focusing on rehabilitation, rather than punishment.

What Are they?

Intensive Supervision Courts (ISCs) are designed to handle cases involving offenders with complex needs. They provide enhanced community-based sentences instead of short custodial sentences. Problem-solving courts are a broader category that includes ISCs. They focus on specific issues such as domestic violence, drug addiction and mental health.

Objectives of Intensive Supervision and Problem-Solving Courts

The primary objectives of ISCs and problem-solving courts are to:

• Reduce Reoffending by addressing the underlying issues leading to criminal conduct.
• Enhance Rehabilitation by providing access to treatment and support, to help reintegration into society.
• Improve Public Safety by reducing reoffending.
• Cost-Effectiveness: Community-based sentences are often more cost-effective than custodial sentences.

Commentary from the Magistrates’ Association

The Magistrates’ Association has supported the implementation of ISCs and problem-solving courts. According to Sarah Clarke, Deputy Chair of the Adult Court Committee, the courts have shown notable success in reducing substance misuse and repeat offending. Sarah Clarke underlined the importance of consistency in judicial monitoring and the role of link workers in building relationships with offenders. However, she also emphasised the challenges in administering Mental Health Treatment Requirements (MHTRs) and the need for practical and accessible treatment options.

Tom McNeil, Assistant Police and Crime Commissioner for the West Midlands, praised the positive outcomes of the ISC pilot in Birmingham, where reoffending rates were significantly reduced. He stressed the importance of local justice and the need for services to be accessible to those they support.

Commentary from the Ministry of Justice

The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) launched a pilot of Intensive Supervision Courts in June 2023. Their interim report highlights the early successes and challenges. The report notes that ISCs are a problem-solving approach, aimed at diverting offenders with complex needs away from short custodial sentences and into enhanced community-based sentences. The MoJ stressed the importance of resourcing, partnership working and the identification of pilot candidates as key factors in the success of ISCs.

Evaluation of Intensive Supervision and Problem-Solving Courts

Successes

Reduction in Reoffending: Early evaluations indicate that ISCs and problem-solving courts have been successful in reducing reoffending rates.

Improved Rehabilitation: Offenders who participate often show significant improvements in their mental health, substance use, and overall stability.

Cost Savings: Diverting offenders from custodial sentences to community-based programs, ISCs and problem-solving courts reduces the costs associated with incarceration.

Challenges

Consistency in Monitoring: Ensuring that offenders are consistently monitored by the same judge can be challenging, but is crucial for the success of these programs. Judges will often reserve cases to themselves to deal with breaches of orders, but many factors need to come together if the same judge is to maintain a link with an offender over the long term.

Accessibility of Services: The effectiveness of problem-solving courts depends on the availability and accessibility of support services. If services are too complex or inaccessible, offenders are less likely to comply with their treatment plans.

Utilisation of Treatment Requirements: Programs like Mental Health Treatment Requirements (MHTRs) are often underutilised and this can limit the effectiveness of problem-solving strategies. The ISCs place an additional burden on an already overstretched Probation Service.

Future Prospects

The future success of ISCs and problem-solving courts will likely depend on several factors:

Continued Support and Funding: Ensuring that these programs receive adequate funding and support from the government and other stakeholders. Accurate assessment of the results and cost-benefit is crucial in this regard.

Expansion of Services: Expanding the availability of support services and making them more accessible to offenders will enhance the effectiveness of these courts. Again, this will depend largely upon the MOJ’s cost-benefit analysis.

Ongoing Evaluation and Adaptation: Regular evaluation of these programs will help identify areas for improvement and ensure they continue to meet the needs of offenders, victims and the wider community.

Conclusion

Intensive Supervision Courts and problem-solving courts represent a positive approach to addressing the causes of criminal behaviour. Focusing on rehabilitation and support, these courts have the potential to reduce reoffending rates, improve public safety, and provide cost-effective alternatives to custodial sentences in appropriate cases. Challenges need to be addressed, but the early successes of these programs suggest they are a valuable addition to the criminal justice system.