Liam Zamudio was awarded Commended in the 2026 Mike Guilfoyle Prize
Probation sits at the frontline of the criminal justice system. Practitioners are responsible for protecting the public, enforcing the orders of the court, and supporting individuals to move away from offending behaviour. In practice, this often means working with people whose lives have been shaped by trauma, addiction, unstable housing, fractured relationships and long histories of marginalisation.
After many years working across prison and community settings, I have often reflected on what genuinely makes probation effective in practice, and how much the work continues to teach those who do it. For many practitioners, effectiveness is not an abstract policy concept, but something observed in everyday work. It can be seen in the gradual stabilisation of chaotic lives, in moments when individuals begin to think differently about themselves, and in the quiet accumulation of decisions that move someone away from further harm.
Over the past decade probation has undergone significant reform, culminating in the reunification of services within HM Prison and Probation Service in 2021. These changes have created opportunities for greater consistency and strengthened public protection arrangements. As probation continues to develop, its effectiveness can be further strengthened through continued attention to three key areas: professional trust, relational practice, and a realistic understanding of how behavioural change occurs.
Strengthening Professional Trust
Probation has long been recognised as a profession grounded in judgement. Practitioners must interpret risk, motivation and circumstance while balancing enforcement with rehabilitation. As Canton (2011) observes, probation work has traditionally relied upon “the discretionary judgement of practitioners operating within complex moral and social contexts”.
Modern probation understandably operates within robust frameworks of accountability. Structured risk assessment tools, national standards and digital case management systems are essential for defensible practice and public protection. At the same time, research suggests that effective supervision depends not only on structured tools but on the practitioner’s ability to apply informed professional judgement (Raynor and Robinson, 2009).
Experienced practitioners know that risk is rarely static. Levels can shift quickly in response to changes in relationships, housing or substance use. When practitioners are supported to apply their experience and discretion within structured systems, they are often better able to respond proportionately to emerging concerns.
Continued investment in professional development, reflective supervision and practitioner confidence will therefore remain important as probation develops as an evidence-informed profession.
Re-centring Relational Practice
While systems and processes are necessary, probation ultimately works through relationships. Research consistently shows that constructive practitioner-client relationships are one of the strongest predictors of engagement and positive outcomes.
Dowden and Andrews (2004) found that correctional interventions delivered with strong interpersonal skills and pro-social modelling were significantly more effective at reducing reoffending. Ministry of Justice research similarly highlights empathy, collaboration and clear communication as central elements of effective supervision (Ministry of Justice, 2019).
This is something many practitioners observe in everyday work. Practitioner experience reinforces an important point: meaningful change often develops through sustained engagement rather than single interventions.
Ensuring practitioners have the capacity to build these relationships is therefore central to probation effectiveness. Many of the most important developments in supervision occur through conversations, trust-building and gradual changes in self-perception that are difficult to quantify but fundamental to long-term desistance.
Understanding the Nature of Change
Another important consideration is the complexity of behavioural change itself. Contemporary probation practice is strongly informed by the Risk–Need–Responsivity (RNR) model, developed by Andrews and Bonta (2010), which emphasises that interventions are most effective when they are proportionate to risk, target criminogenic needs, and are delivered in ways individuals can realistically respond to.
The RNR framework has provided an important evidence base for modern correctional practice and has shaped many structured interventions used across probation services.
At the same time, research on desistance highlights the importance of identity, relationships and social context in sustaining long-term change. Maruna (2001) demonstrated that individuals who move away from crime often develop a new narrative about themselves, seeing their future as different from their past. McNeill (2016) similarly emphasises the importance of social bonds and supportive relationships in enabling this process.
For practitioners these perspectives are not contradictory but complementary. Structured interventions informed by RNR principles address criminogenic needs, while relational supervision supports the deeper personal changes that allow individuals to sustain new identities and different life trajectories.
Recognising that progress is often gradual and non-linear allows probation practice to remain both realistic and effective. Enforcement remains essential, but its impact is strengthened when combined with support that addresses the underlying drivers of behaviour.
Supporting the Workforce
Probation effectiveness is closely linked to the wellbeing and development of its workforce. The role requires resilience, ethical judgement and the ability to engage constructively with individuals experiencing crisis and instability.
HM Inspectorate of Probation (2021) highlights the importance of reflective supervision, manageable workloads and professional development in sustaining effective practice. When practitioners feel supported and valued, they are better able to provide the stability and guidance that individuals on probation often lack elsewhere in their lives.
Investment in the professional confidence and wellbeing of probation staff therefore benefits not only the workforce itself but also the communities that probation seeks to protect.
Conclusion
Probation’s effectiveness ultimately rests on the quality of the human work taking place between practitioner and client. Systems, processes and performance frameworks provide essential structure, but they cannot replace professional judgement, relational engagement and an evidence-informed understanding of behavioural change.
As probation continues to develop following recent reforms, strengthening professional trust, maintaining a focus on relational practice and supporting the workforce will help ensure the service remains both effective and resilient.
At its best, probation represents one of the justice system’s most hopeful ideas: that people are more than the worst thing they have done, and that with accountability, support and professional guidance, safer futures can be built. The task of probation is therefore not only to manage risk, but to create the conditions in which change becomes possible.
The Mike Guilfoyle Essay Prize is annual competition, co-hosted by the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies and Napo, that honours the legacy of Mike Guilfoyle. Mike was a dedicated probation officer and active Napo member, and this competition aims to encourage reflections on all that is valuable and important in probation.
This year’s essay question was What needs to change for probation to be more effective?
