SSESW DD

<img src="https://cms25.neocities.org/Double%20Diamond%20Images/QandSupLaptopPPP.png" alt=""; width="60%"> Use your understanding of the ''Double Diamond'' to help Q navigate this challenge. Q is a Sociology student who is on placement at the headquarters of the Prison Service. Their supervisor explains to Q that the team is reviewing procedures for early release assessments following updates to sentencing and rehabilitation legislation and looking for ways to improve how early release cases are reviewed and communicated. ''What could Q suggest as a good first step?'' • [[Review current early release policies->S2G]], case review data, and recent legislation. Speak with staff involved in risk assessment, probation, and rehabilitation to understand the challenges they face. • Given the potential for early release policies to be criticised in the media, Q could suggest it’s important to start with [[ensuring that eligibility rules are tight->S2B]].

<img src="https://cms25.neocities.org/Double%20Diamond%20Images/SupervisorHappyYYY.png" alt=""; width="60%"> Q’s supervisor agrees that this is a good first step which aligns with the ''Discover'' phase of the ''Double Diamond''. ------------------------------- Over the next week, Q collects and analyses data: • A recent audit shows inconsistencies in how early release decisions are documented. • Staff interviews reveal that officers sometimes interpret “rehabilitation progress” differently. • Public feedback shows confusion about why some prisoners are released early while others aren’t. • Legislative updates emphasise the need for transparency and evidence-based decisions. • A recent case drew media criticism after unclear communication about the reasoning behind release. That’s a lot of information. ''How might Q ''Define'' the problem?'' * “How might we make the early release process [[more consistent, transparent, and evidence-based, while maintaining fairness and public trust?->S3G+1G]]” * “How might we [[design a new checklist for early-release decisions->S3B+1Go1]]?” * “How might we [[improve communication in the criminal-justice system->S3B+1Go2]]?”

<img src="https://cms25.neocities.org/Double%20Diamond%20Images/SupervisorNotHappy.png" alt=""; width="60%"> Q’s supervisor cautions “That might look decisive, but it risks making policy changes without consulting the evidence. Let’s start by understanding what’s happening.” ------------------------------------ Over the next week, Q collects and analyses data: • A recent audit shows inconsistencies in how early release decisions are documented. • Staff interviews reveal that officers sometimes interpret “rehabilitation progress” differently. • Public feedback shows confusion about why some prisoners are released early while others aren’t. • Legislative updates emphasise the need for transparency and evidence-based decisions. • A recent case drew media criticism after unclear communication about the reasoning behind release. That’s a lot of information. ''How might Q ''Define'' the problem?'' * “How might we make the early release process [[more consistent, transparent, and evidence-based, while maintaining fairness and public trust?->S3G+1B]]” * “How might we [[design a new checklist for early-release decisions->S3B+1Go1]]?” * “How might we [[improve communication in the criminal-justice system->S3B+1Go2]]?”

<img src="https://cms25.neocities.org/Double%20Diamond%20Images/SupervisorHappyYYY.png" alt=""; width="60%"> Q’s supervisor agrees. “That’s a good way to frame it. It’s clear enough to guide us but still open to creativity. It aligns with the ''Define'' phase of the ''Double Diamond''” ---------------------------- Q and their supervisor join a task group with policy analysts, probation officers, and communications staff. At their first meeting, they review what other justice systems are doing to make custody decisions clearer and fairer. They find good evidence-bases for the following initiatives: • Checklist frameworks for decision-making (used in Scotland). • Public-facing summaries that explain the reasoning behind early release. • Staff training on unconscious bias in assessments. Q’s supervisor asks Q what they think the next step should be. ''What should Q suggest?'' • [[Pick one of the ideas that worked elsewhere->S4B+2G]] (e.g. the checklist framework used in Scotland). It’s a tried and tested method, so we should start planning now how we could implement it here. • [[Continue ideating->S4G+2G]]. Combine inspiration from what has worked elsewhere with new “What if” questions e.g. what if every release decision had a short public summary written in plain English? What if rehabilitation officers co-reviewed risk assessments to ensure consistency? What if the Prison Service ran public information sessions to explain how early release decisions are made.

<img src="https://cms25.neocities.org/Double%20Diamond%20Images/SupervisorNotHappy.png" alt=""; width="60%"> Q’s supervisor says “That’s certainly ambitious, but it’s a bit too broad for what our team can influence right now. The ''Define'' phase works best when the problem is focused enough to act on. Let’s go with How might we make the early release process more consistent, transparent, and evidence-based, while maintaining fairness and public trust?” ------------------------------ Q and their supervisor join a task group with policy analysts, probation officers, and communications staff. At their first meeting, they review what other justice systems are doing to make custody decisions clearer and fairer. They find good evidence-bases for the following initiatives: • Checklist frameworks for decision-making (used in Scotland). • Public-facing summaries that explain the reasoning behind early release. • Staff training on unconscious bias in assessments. Q’s supervisor asks Q what they think the next step should be. ''What should Q suggest?'' • [[Pick one of the ideas that worked elsewhere->S4B+1G+1B]] (e.g. the checklist framework used in Scotland). It’s a tried and tested method, so we should start planning now how we could implement it here. • [[Continue ideating->S4G+1G+1B]]. Combine inspiration from what has worked elsewhere with new “What if” questions e.g. what if every release decision had a short public summary written in plain English? What if rehabilitation officers co-reviewed risk assessments to ensure consistency? What if the Prison Service ran public information sessions to explain how early release decisions are made.

<img src="https://cms25.neocities.org/Double%20Diamond%20Images/SupervisorNotHappy.png" alt=""; width="60%"> Q’s supervisor says “Designing a checklist might be part of the solution later, but you’re jumping to the solution too quickly. The ''Define'' stage should focus on the challenge itself, not one possible output. Let’s go with How might we make the early release process more consistent, transparent, and evidence-based, while maintaining fairness and public trust?” ------------------------------ Q and their supervisor join a task group with policy analysts, probation officers, and communications staff. At their first meeting, they review what other justice systems are doing to make custody decisions clearer and fairer. They find good evidence-bases for the following initiatives: • Checklist frameworks for decision-making (used in Scotland). • Public-facing summaries that explain the reasoning behind early release. • Staff training on unconscious bias in assessments. Q’s supervisor asks Q what they think the next step should be. ''What should Q suggest?'' • [[Pick one of the ideas that worked elsewhere->S4B+1G+1B]] (e.g. the checklist framework used in Scotland). It’s a tried and tested method, so we should start planning now how we could implement it here. • [[Continue ideating->S4G+1G+1B]]. Combine inspiration from what has worked elsewhere with new “What if” questions e.g. what if every release decision had a short public summary written in plain English? What if rehabilitation officers co-reviewed risk assessments to ensure consistency? What if the Prison Service ran public information sessions to explain how early release decisions are made.

<img src="https://cms25.neocities.org/Double%20Diamond%20Images/SupervisorHappyYYY.png" alt=""; width="60%"> Q’s supervisor agrees. “That’s a good way to frame it. It’s clear enough to guide us but still open to creativity. It aligns with the ''Define'' phase of the ''Double Diamond''” ---------------------------- Q and their supervisor join a task group with policy analysts, probation officers, and communications staff. At their first meeting, they review what other justice systems are doing to make custody decisions clearer and fairer. They find good evidence-bases for the following initiatives: • Checklist frameworks for decision-making (used in Scotland). • Public-facing summaries that explain the reasoning behind early release. • Staff training on unconscious bias in assessments. Q’s supervisor asks Q what they think the next step should be. ''What should Q suggest?'' • [[Pick one of the ideas that worked elsewhere->S4B+1G+1B]] (e.g. the checklist framework used in Scotland). It’s a tried and tested method, so we should start planning now how we could implement it here. • [[Continue ideating->S4G+1G+1B]]. Combine inspiration from what has worked elsewhere with new “What if” questions e.g. what if every release decision had a short public summary written in plain English? What if rehabilitation officers co-reviewed risk assessments to ensure consistency? What if the Prison Service ran public information sessions to explain how early release decisions are made.

<img src="https://cms25.neocities.org/Double%20Diamond%20Images/SupervisorNotHappy.png" alt=""; width="60%"> Q’s supervisor cautions. “It’s tempting to copy ideas directly, but what works elsewhere might not be the best thing to meet our needs. Let’s continue ideating, combining inspiration from what has worked elsewhere with our own ideas.” ----------------------- At the next meeting of the task group, they engage in a series of ideation activities before narrowing down to focus on four ideas: • An internal evidence dashboard to support assessors with their decision making. The dashboard would combine case data, evidence summaries, and visual risk indicators. • Multidisciplinary co-review panels (including an independent observer) to jointly review the case and produce a consensus decision. • Plain English case summaries to help communicate decisions. • A Reintegration Passport which provides a concise plan listing services, appointments, and key contact points. Q’s supervisor says: “These are all interesting possibilities. We will need to present a report to management so they can decide how to take things forward. What do you think we should do next?” ''What should Q suggest?'' • We should present all of them, but the [[Plain English case summaries->S5B+2G+1B]] seems like the easiest one to implement, so we should highlight that one. • Before presenting these to management, [[let’s compare the options using a cost-impact matrix->S5G+2G+1B]]. We could then consult staff beyond the task group to get their feedback on the proposals.

<img src="https://cms25.neocities.org/Double%20Diamond%20Images/SupervisorHappyYYY.png" alt=""; width="60%"> Q’s supervisor agrees “That’s a smart approach. The ''Develop'' phase of the ''Double Diamond'' is about exploring a range of ideas before narrowing down” ---------------------- At the next meeting of the task group, they engage in a series of ideation activities before narrowing down to focus on four ideas: • An internal evidence dashboard to support assessors with their decision making. The dashboard would combine case data, evidence summaries, and visual risk indicators. • Multidisciplinary co-review panels (including an independent observer) to jointly review the case and produce a consensus decision. • Plain English case summaries to help communicate decisions. • A Reintegration Passport which provides a concise plan listing services, appointments, and key contact points. Q’s supervisor says: “These are all interesting possibilities. We will need to present a report to management so they can decide how to take things forward. What do you think we should do next?” ''What should Q suggest?'' • We should present all of them, but the [[Plain English case summaries->S5B+3G]] seems like the easiest one to implement, so we should highlight that one. • Before presenting these to management, [[let’s compare the options using a cost-impact matrix->S5G+3G]]. We could then consult staff beyond the task group to get their feedback on the proposals.

<img src="https://cms25.neocities.org/Double%20Diamond%20Images/SupervisorNotHappy.png" alt=""; width="60%"> Q’s supervisor cautions. “It’s tempting to copy ideas directly, but what works elsewhere might not be the best thing to meet our needs. Let’s continue ideating, combining inspiration from what has worked elsewhere with our own ideas.” ----------------------- At the next meeting of the task group, they engage in a series of ideation activities before narrowing down to focus on four ideas: • An internal evidence dashboard to support assessors with their decision making. The dashboard would combine case data, evidence summaries, and visual risk indicators. • Multidisciplinary co-review panels (including an independent observer) to jointly review the case and produce a consensus decision. • Plain English case summaries to help communicate decisions. • A Reintegration Passport which provides a concise plan listing services, appointments, and key contact points. Q’s supervisor says: “These are all interesting possibilities. We will need to present a report to management so they can decide how to take things forward. What do you think we should do next?” ''What should Q suggest?'' • We should present all of them, but the [[Plain English case summaries->S5B+1G+2B]] seems like the easiest one to implement, so we should highlight that one. • Before presenting these to management, [[let’s compare the options using a cost-impact matrix->S5G+1G+2B]]. We could then consult staff beyond the task group to get their feedback on the proposals.

<img src="https://cms25.neocities.org/Double%20Diamond%20Images/SupervisorHappyYYY.png" alt=""; width="60%"> Q’s supervisor agrees “That’s a smart approach. The ''Develop'' phase of the ''Double Diamond'' is about exploring a range of ideas before narrowing down” ---------------------- At the next meeting of the task group, they engage in a series of ideation activities before narrowing down to focus on four ideas: • An internal evidence dashboard to support assessors with their decision making. The dashboard would combine case data, evidence summaries, and visual risk indicators. • Multidisciplinary co-review panels (including an independent observer) to jointly review the case and produce a consensus decision. • Plain English case summaries to help communicate decisions. • A Reintegration Passport which provides a concise plan listing services, appointments, and key contact points. Q’s supervisor says: “These are all interesting possibilities. We will need to present a report to management so they can decide how to take things forward. What do you think we should do next?” ''What should Q suggest?'' • We should present all of them, but the [[Plain English case summaries->S5B+2G+1B]] seems like the easiest one to implement, so we should highlight that one. • Before presenting these to management, [[let’s compare the options using a cost-impact matrix->S5G+2G+1B]]. We could then consult staff beyond the task group to get their feedback on the proposals.

<img src="https://cms25.neocities.org/Double%20Diamond%20Images/SupervisorNotHappy.png" alt=""; width="60%"> Q’s supervisor cautions. “It’s tempting to lock onto what seems like the simplest option, but this could be short-sighted. We don’t yet know if it’s the most effective solution overall. The ''Develop'' phase of the ''Double Diamond'' is about exploring a range of ideas before narrowing down. That’s why a comparison across multiple criteria would be useful.” ----------------- Q, their supervisor, and the task group create a cost-impact matrix and invite staff, a small group of probation partners, and two trained community observers to score each against key criteria. The results shows that: • Front-line staff say a dashboard would help consistency but emphasise it must be able to integrate with existing systems and agreement would need to be reached on the visual risk indicators. • Community representatives and communications staff strongly favour plain English summaries. • Probation partners like the Reintegration Passport idea, although they feel there will be challenges to make it operational and worthwhile. • Community representatives like the idea of co-review panels but warn about training needs. After analysing the results, Q’s supervisor says: “This is a mixed picture. How do you think we should present this to management?” ''What should Q suggest?'' • From our research, most people expressed interest in the [[dashboard idea->S6B+3G+1B]], so we should present it as our recommendation. • We should include all projects in the report but recommend [[a phased approach->S6G+3G+1B]]. Piloting the Plain English summaries and the Reintegration Passports would be easier than the other ideas, so we could start there, while designing requirements for a prototype evidence dashboard and ''Develop''ing a pilot for co-review panels.

<img src="https://cms25.neocities.org/Double%20Diamond%20Images/SupervisorHappyYYY.png" alt=""; width="60%"> Q’s supervisor agrees. “That’s a smart approach. In the ''Develop'' phase, we should consider solutions from different angles and get input from a broad range of people.” --------------------- Q, their supervisor, and the task group create a cost-impact matrix and invite staff, a small group of probation partners, and two trained community observers to score each against key criteria. The results shows that: • Front-line staff say a dashboard would help consistency but emphasise it must be able to integrate with existing systems and agreement would need to be reached on the visual risk indicators. • Community representatives and communications staff strongly favour plain English summaries. • Probation partners like the Reintegration Passport idea, although they feel there will be challenges to make it operational and worthwhile. • Community representatives like the idea of co-review panels but warn about training needs. After analysing the results, Q’s supervisor says: “This is a mixed picture. How do you think we should present this to management?” ''What should Q suggest?'' • From our research, most people expressed interest in the [[dashboard idea->S6B+4G]], so we should present it as our recommendation. • We should include all projects in the report but recommend [[a phased approach->S6G+4G]]. Piloting the Plain English summaries and the Reintegration Passports would be easier than the other ideas, so we could start there, while designing requirements for a prototype evidence dashboard and ''Develop''ing a pilot for co-review panels.

<img src="https://cms25.neocities.org/Double%20Diamond%20Images/SupervisorNotHappy.png" alt=""; width="60%"> Q’s supervisor cautions. “It’s tempting to lock onto what seems like the simplest option, but this could be short-sighted. We don’t yet know if it’s the most effective solution overall. The ''Develop'' phase of the ''Double Diamond'' is about exploring a range of ideas before narrowing down. That’s why a comparison across multiple criteria would be useful.” ----------------- Q, their supervisor, and the task group create a cost-impact matrix and invite staff, a small group of probation partners, and two trained community observers to score each against key criteria. The results shows that: • Front-line staff say a dashboard would help consistency but emphasise it must be able to integrate with existing systems and agreement would need to be reached on the visual risk indicators. • Community representatives and communications staff strongly favour plain English summaries. • Probation partners like the Reintegration Passport idea, although they feel there will be challenges to make it operational and worthwhile. • Community representatives like the idea of co-review panels but warn about training needs. After analysing the results, Q’s supervisor says: “This is a mixed picture. How do you think we should present this to management?” ''What should Q suggest?'' • From our research, most people expressed interest in the [[dashboard idea->S6B+2G+2B]], so we should present it as our recommendation. • We should include all projects in the report but recommend [[a phased approach->S6G+2G+2B]]. Piloting the Plain English summaries and the Reintegration Passports would be easier than the other ideas, so we could start there, while designing requirements for a prototype evidence dashboard and ''Develop''ing a pilot for co-review panels.

<img src="https://cms25.neocities.org/Double%20Diamond%20Images/SupervisorHappyYYY.png" alt=""; width="60%"> Q’s supervisor agrees. “That’s a smart approach. In the ''Develop'' phase, we should consider solutions from different angles and get input from a broad range of people.” --------------------- Q, their supervisor, and the task group create a cost-impact matrix and invite staff, a small group of probation partners, and two trained community observers to score each against key criteria. The results shows that: • Front-line staff say a dashboard would help consistency but emphasise it must be able to integrate with existing systems and agreement would need to be reached on the visual risk indicators. • Community representatives and communications staff strongly favour plain English summaries. • Probation partners like the Reintegration Passport idea, although they feel there will be challenges to make it operational and worthwhile. • Community representatives like the idea of co-review panels but warn about training needs. After analysing the results, Q’s supervisor says: “This is a mixed picture. How do you think we should present this to management?” ''What should Q suggest?'' • From our research, most people expressed interest in the [[dashboard idea->S6B+3G+1B]], so we should present it as our recommendation. • We should include all projects in the report but recommend [[a phased approach->S6G+3G+1B]]. Piloting the Plain English summaries and the Reintegration Passports would be easier than the other ideas, so we could start there, while designing requirements for a prototype evidence dashboard and ''Develop''ing a pilot for co-review panels.

<img src="https://cms25.neocities.org/Double%20Diamond%20Images/SupervisorNotHappy.png" alt=""; width="60%"> Q’s supervisor cautions. “It’s tempting to lock onto what seems like the simplest option, but this could be short-sighted. We don’t yet know if it’s the most effective solution overall. The ''Develop'' phase of the ''Double Diamond'' is about exploring a range of ideas before narrowing down. That’s why a comparison across multiple criteria would be useful.” ----------------- Q, their supervisor, and the task group create a cost-impact matrix and invite staff, a small group of probation partners, and two trained community observers to score each against key criteria. The results shows that: • Front-line staff say a dashboard would help consistency but emphasise it must be able to integrate with existing systems and agreement would need to be reached on the visual risk indicators. • Community representatives and communications staff strongly favour plain English summaries. • Probation partners like the Reintegration Passport idea, although they feel there will be challenges to make it operational and worthwhile. • Community representatives like the idea of co-review panels but warn about training needs. After analysing the results, Q’s supervisor says: “This is a mixed picture. How do you think we should present this to management?” ''What should Q suggest?'' • From our research, most people expressed interest in the [[dashboard idea->S6B+1G+3B]], so we should present it as our recommendation. • We should include all projects in the report but recommend [[a phased approach->S6G+1G+3B]]. Piloting the Plain English summaries and the Reintegration Passports would be easier than the other ideas, so we could start there, while designing requirements for a prototype evidence dashboard and ''Develop''ing a pilot for co-review panels.

<img src="https://cms25.neocities.org/Double%20Diamond%20Images/SupervisorHappyYYY.png" alt=""; width="60%"> Q’s supervisor agrees. “That’s a smart approach. In the ''Develop'' phase, we should consider solutions from different angles and get input from a broad range of people.” --------------------- Q, their supervisor, and the task group create a cost-impact matrix and invite staff, a small group of probation partners, and two trained community observers to score each against key criteria. The results shows that: • Front-line staff say a dashboard would help consistency but emphasise it must be able to integrate with existing systems and agreement would need to be reached on the visual risk indicators. • Community representatives and communications staff strongly favour plain English summaries. • Probation partners like the Reintegration Passport idea, although they feel there will be challenges to make it operational and worthwhile. • Community representatives like the idea of co-review panels but warn about training needs. After analysing the results, Q’s supervisor says: “This is a mixed picture. How do you think we should present this to management?” ''What should Q suggest?'' • From our research, most people expressed interest in the [[dashboard idea->S6B+2G+2B]], so we should present it as our recommendation. • We should include all projects in the report but recommend [[a phased approach->S6G+2G+2B]]. Piloting the Plain English summaries and the Reintegration Passports would be easier than the other ideas, so we could start there, while designing requirements for a prototype evidence dashboard and ''Develop''ing a pilot for co-review panels.

<img src="https://cms25.neocities.org/Double%20Diamond%20Images/SupervisorNotHappy.png" alt=""; width="60%"> Q’s supervisor cautions “Most people expressed interest in the dashboard idea because we had more representation in our research from staff who might use those dashboards. That idea may have more impact for them, but the Reintegration Passport would likely have more impact for our partners. Let’s present a more balanced report which includes all projects but recommends a phased approach.” ---------------------------- Q and their Supervisor write the final report which includes: Short-term recommendations: • Plain English Case Summaries. Introduce brief, anonymised summaries that explain early release decisions in accessible language. • Reintegration Passport. Trial a concise, portable plan that lists post-release services, appointments, and key contacts. Longer-term recommendations: • Evidence Dashboard for Decision Support. ''Develop'' a secure prototype dashboard that combines case data, evidence summaries, and visual risk indicators to help assessors make more consistent decisions. • Multidisciplinary Co-Review Panels. Pilot panels that include rehabilitation and probation staff alongside a trained independent observer to co-review cases. They [[Submit the Report->Good]]

<img src="https://cms25.neocities.org/Double%20Diamond%20Images/SupervisorHappyYYY.png" alt=""; width="60%"> Q’s supervisor agrees “Yes, in this ''Deliver'' phase of the ''Double Diamond'', it’s useful to show that we’ve compared the options fairly and are thinking strategically about short-term actions and longer-term innovation”. ----------------------------- Q and their Supervisor write the final report which includes: Short-term recommendations: • Plain English Case Summaries. Introduce brief, anonymised summaries that explain early release decisions in accessible language. • Reintegration Passport. Trial a concise, portable plan that lists post-release services, appointments, and key contacts. Longer-term recommendations: • Evidence Dashboard for Decision Support. ''Develop'' a secure prototype dashboard that combines case data, evidence summaries, and visual risk indicators to help assessors make more consistent decisions. • Multidisciplinary Co-Review Panels. Pilot panels that include rehabilitation and probation staff alongside a trained independent observer to co-review cases. They [[Submit the Report->Perfect]]

<img src="https://cms25.neocities.org/Double%20Diamond%20Images/SupervisorNotHappy.png" alt=""; width="60%"> Q’s supervisor cautions “Most people expressed interest in the dashboard idea because we had more representation in our research from staff who might use those dashboards. That idea may have more impact for them, but the Reintegration Passport would likely have more impact for our partners. Let’s present a more balanced report which includes all projects but recommends a phased approach.” ---------------------------- Q and their Supervisor write the final report which includes: Short-term recommendations: • Plain English Case Summaries. Introduce brief, anonymised summaries that explain early release decisions in accessible language. • Reintegration Passport. Trial a concise, portable plan that lists post-release services, appointments, and key contacts. Longer-term recommendations: • Evidence Dashboard for Decision Support. ''Develop'' a secure prototype dashboard that combines case data, evidence summaries, and visual risk indicators to help assessors make more consistent decisions. • Multidisciplinary Co-Review Panels. Pilot panels that include rehabilitation and probation staff alongside a trained independent observer to co-review cases. They [[Submit the Report->OK]]

<img src="https://cms25.neocities.org/Double%20Diamond%20Images/SupervisorHappyYYY.png" alt=""; width="60%"> Q’s supervisor agrees “Yes, in this ''Deliver'' phase of the ''Double Diamond'', it’s useful to show that we’ve compared the options fairly and are thinking strategically about short-term actions and longer-term innovation”. ----------------------------- Q and their Supervisor write the final report which includes: Short-term recommendations: • Plain English Case Summaries. Introduce brief, anonymised summaries that explain early release decisions in accessible language. • Reintegration Passport. Trial a concise, portable plan that lists post-release services, appointments, and key contacts. Longer-term recommendations: • Evidence Dashboard for Decision Support. ''Develop'' a secure prototype dashboard that combines case data, evidence summaries, and visual risk indicators to help assessors make more consistent decisions. • Multidisciplinary Co-Review Panels. Pilot panels that include rehabilitation and probation staff alongside a trained independent observer to co-review cases. They [[Submit the Report->Good]]

<img src="https://cms25.neocities.org/Double%20Diamond%20Images/SupervisorNotHappy.png" alt=""; width="60%"> Q’s supervisor cautions “Most people expressed interest in the dashboard idea because we had more representation in our research from staff who might use those dashboards. That idea may have more impact for them, but the Reintegration Passport would likely have more impact for our partners. Let’s present a more balanced report which includes all projects but recommends a phased approach.” ---------------------------- Q and their Supervisor write the final report which includes: Short-term recommendations: • Plain English Case Summaries. Introduce brief, anonymised summaries that explain early release decisions in accessible language. • Reintegration Passport. Trial a concise, portable plan that lists post-release services, appointments, and key contacts. Longer-term recommendations: • Evidence Dashboard for Decision Support. ''Develop'' a secure prototype dashboard that combines case data, evidence summaries, and visual risk indicators to help assessors make more consistent decisions. • Multidisciplinary Co-Review Panels. Pilot panels that include rehabilitation and probation staff alongside a trained independent observer to co-review cases. They [[Submit the Report->Poor]]

<img src="https://cms25.neocities.org/Double%20Diamond%20Images/SupervisorHappyYYY.png" alt=""; width="60%"> Q’s supervisor agrees “Yes, in this ''Deliver'' phase of the ''Double Diamond'', it’s useful to show that we’ve compared the options fairly and are thinking strategically about short-term actions and longer-term innovation”. ----------------------------- Q and their Supervisor write the final report which includes: Short-term recommendations: • Plain English Case Summaries. Introduce brief, anonymised summaries that explain early release decisions in accessible language. • Reintegration Passport. Trial a concise, portable plan that lists post-release services, appointments, and key contacts. Longer-term recommendations: • Evidence Dashboard for Decision Support. ''Develop'' a secure prototype dashboard that combines case data, evidence summaries, and visual risk indicators to help assessors make more consistent decisions. • Multidisciplinary Co-Review Panels. Pilot panels that include rehabilitation and probation staff alongside a trained independent observer to co-review cases. They [[Submit the Report->OK]]

<img src="https://cms25.neocities.org/Double%20Diamond%20Images/SupervisorNotHappy.png" alt=""; width="60%"> Q’s supervisor cautions “Most people expressed interest in the dashboard idea because we had more representation in our research from staff who might use those dashboards. That idea may have more impact for them, but the Reintegration Passport would likely have more impact for our partners. Let’s present a more balanced report which includes all projects but recommends a phased approach.” ---------------------------- Q and their Supervisor write the final report which includes: Short-term recommendations: • Plain English Case Summaries. Introduce brief, anonymised summaries that explain early release decisions in accessible language. • Reintegration Passport. Trial a concise, portable plan that lists post-release services, appointments, and key contacts. Longer-term recommendations: • Evidence Dashboard for Decision Support. ''Develop'' a secure prototype dashboard that combines case data, evidence summaries, and visual risk indicators to help assessors make more consistent decisions. • Multidisciplinary Co-Review Panels. Pilot panels that include rehabilitation and probation staff alongside a trained independent observer to co-review cases. They [[Submit the Report->Poor]]

<img src="https://cms25.neocities.org/Double%20Diamond%20Images/SupervisorHappyYYY.png" alt=""; width="60%"> Q’s supervisor agrees “Yes, in this ''Deliver'' phase of the ''Double Diamond'', it’s useful to show that we’ve compared the options fairly and are thinking strategically about short-term actions and longer-term innovation”. ----------------------------- Q and their Supervisor write the final report which includes: Short-term recommendations: • Plain English Case Summaries. Introduce brief, anonymised summaries that explain early release decisions in accessible language. • Reintegration Passport. Trial a concise, portable plan that lists post-release services, appointments, and key contacts. Longer-term recommendations: • Evidence Dashboard for Decision Support. ''Develop'' a secure prototype dashboard that combines case data, evidence summaries, and visual risk indicators to help assessors make more consistent decisions. • Multidisciplinary Co-Review Panels. Pilot panels that include rehabilitation and probation staff alongside a trained independent observer to co-review cases. They [[Submit the Report->Poor]]

<img src="https://cms25.neocities.org/Double%20Diamond%20Images/QandSupHappyss.png" alt=""; width="60%"> The management team agree to a phased approach. They approve the short-term pilot projects while commissioning further scoping work for the longer-term projects. Q’s supervisor reflects, “This is exactly what we hoped for, small, evidence-based changes that build trust and pave the way for deeper innovation.” ###Congratulations on helping the team achieve this result! You clearly have a good understanding of how to apply the ''Double Diamond''. ''Here is your completion code: SSEW-EM-DD''

<img src="https://cms25.neocities.org/Double%20Diamond%20Images/Qthinkingss.png" alt=""; width="30%"> The management team agree to a phased approach. They approve the short-term pilot projects while commissioning further scoping work for the longer-term projects. Q’s supervisor reflects, “This is exactly what we hoped for, small, evidence-based changes that build trust and pave the way for deeper innovation.” Q has learned a lot about the ''Double Diamond'' through this process. What have you learned about how to apply the ''Double Diamond''? [[Please try again->Start]]