Prison Me No Way funding (FOI)

Request

In regards to the new scheme to replace Prison Me No Way I request the following.

A

Monies paid through government to deliver the Prison Me No Way scheme.

B

Monies allocated to deliver a new scheme in it's place including cost of manpower such as business analyst and other functions of support.

C

Rationale for redefining the scheme and a list of KPI in regards to how CYPES will measure its success.

D

Also the employee within government who is reporting manager for this scheme.

Response

B

Monies allocated to deliver a new scheme, including the cost of manpower such as business analyst and other functions of support, is £60,000 per annum.

C

The Prison Me No Way (PMNW) charity is UK-based and is still running but the Jersey scheme has been paused whilst it is reviewed.  A decision was taken to review the approach to ensure that the funding available best meet the specific needs of Children and Young People in Jersey.  This is a key objective for Justice and Home Affairs in 2022 and as such a commitment has been made in the Justice and Home Affairs 2022 Departmental Operational Business Plan.  Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) will be defined as part of the review undertaken by the Business Analyst and will link to the Jersey Performance Framework (available on www.gov.je)  specifically – 'Jersey experiences low levels of crime' and 'All children in Jersey grow up safely'.

Jersey Performance Framework (gov.je)

D

The scheme is managed by Justice and Home Affairs. 

When deciding whether to release the name of individual staff members it is necessary to take into account a number of factors such as:

• whether disclosure is linked to other sensitive personal information
• the reasonable expectation of the employee for their name to be released into the public domain
• whether there is a legitimate public interest in the release
• the rights and freedoms of the employee
• the potential consequences of disclosure.
  

In this instance we do not believe that there is a wider legitimate public interest in releasing the name of individual staff members, rather the release would only serve to satisfy a single requester.

Taking this into consideration, along with the department's responsibility to protect the rights and freedoms of individuals who are merely carrying out their work duties, we conclude that these factors outweigh any argument in favour of release. Article 25 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 is therefore applied.

Articles Applied

Article 25 - Personal information

(1) Information is absolutely exempt information if it constitutes personal data of which the applicant is the data subject as defined in the Data Protection (Jersey) Law 2005.

(2) Information is absolutely exempt information if –

(a) it constitutes personal data of which the applicant is not the data subject as defined in the Data Protection (Jersey) Law 2018; and

(b) its supply to a member of the public would contravene any of the data protection principles, as defined in that Law.

(3) In determining for the purposes of this Article whether the lawfulness principle in Article 8(1)(a) of the Data Protection (Jersey) Law 2018 would be contravened by the disclosure of information, paragraph 5(1) of Schedule 2 to that Law (legitimate interests) is to be read as if sub-paragraph (b) (which disapplies the provision where the controller is a public authority) were omitted.