Custodial Review edition 69 by Steven Mitchell

Custodial the

Review

The Custodial Review informing the Prison, Customs & Immigration and Police Services Edition 69

Grand design? Talking to Guy Baulf, about HMP Thameside In this issue: Making it work at Doncaster. Raising the bars: a joined-up approach to tackling reoffending. HMP Lewes wins the prestigious award â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Prison Library of the yearâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;. Transforming Rehabilitation: assessing the impact on the workforce.

www.thecustodial.co.uk For thousands of products, services and links

Contents Issue 69 Annual Subscription £30 Free to qualifying individuals

the Custodial Review Editorial Sales: Derek Cooper Tracy Johnson Tel: 01234 348878 sales@custodialreview.co.uk Administration: Lyn Mitchell Design/Production: Amanda Wesley Publisher: Steve Mitchell

2 News 12 14

Making it work at Doncaster Grand design? Talking to Guy Baulf, about HMP Thameside

Raising the bars: A joined-up approach to tackling reoffending

HMP Lewes wins the prestigious award ‘Prison Library of the year’

The Cascade Foundation

Transforming rehabilitation: Assessing the impact on the workforce

More news

Product showcase

The cover pictures are of The Clink in Cardiff. The new LED lighting in a Manchester custody suite, HMP Grampian, the new SPS prison being built by Skanska

The publisher will consider financial reimbursement for relevant articles. If you have an article, or wish to compose one, on a relevant topic then please contact the publisher on stevem@pirnet.co.uk. Its subject to acceptance so please contact prior to starting and will appear on the Custodial website.

Custodial Review is now accepting articles from serving officers and staff within the whole custodial industry. All articles will appear on the Custodial website and will appear in the magazine subject to the Publishers discretion. Approx length 1500 to 2000 words. We are also pleased to accept news and information. Please contact the Publisher, Steve Mitchell, stevem@custodialreview.co.uk or on 01234 348878 for more details.

The Publisher holds all copyright and any items within may not be reproduced in any way, for any purpose, without the written permission of the Publisher. This publication contains Crown Copyright material reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen’s Printer for Scotland.

Copyright: the Custodial Review Published by Review Magazines Ltd, Clifton House, 4a Goldington Road Bedford MK40 3NF. Tel: 01234 348878 Fax: 01223 790191 E-mail: thecustodial@pirnet.co.uk Website: www.thecustodial.co.uk HM Prisons Executive and the Home Office do not sponsor or in any way support this Publication in any substance, commodity, process, equipment, editorial or service advertised or mentioned in this book, nor are they responsible for any inaccuracy or statement in this publication. Whilst every care has been taken to ensure accuracy, the information contained within, this publication is based on submissions to the Publishers who cannot be held responsible for errors or omissions. The Publishers cannot be held responsible for any article, advertisement, picture or photograph supplied by Advertisers and Associations which may contravene the Official Secrets Act or that have not first been cleared by the Home Office of Prisons Executive, should that have been necessary.

Are you getting your copy? Qualifying individuals within the Custodial sector can receive a FREE copy of the Custodial Review. If you are not receiving your copy, or you have a colleague who would like one, let us know! We will need your name, title, position & FULL address. Custodial Review is THE magazine for the Immigration, Customs, Prison and Police services. It’s growing all the time and more popular than ever. To obtain your copy, or to subscribe please forward your up-to-date information to: The Custodial, Review Magazines Ltd, Clifton House, 4a Goldington Road Bedford MK40 3NF. Tel: 01234 348878 Fax: 01223 790191 Email: sales@pirnet.co.uk or go onto www.custodialreview.co.uk and click ‘Subscribe’.

Custodial the

review

the Custodial Review

NEWS

Nacro calls for voluntary sector to play bigger role after continued rise in reoffending In the wake of new figures published by the Ministry of Justice showing more than 400,000 crimes committed by people who reoffend, Nacro says the voluntary sector can make a real difference. Nacro’s Strategic Development Director, Graham Beech, sharing a platform with Justice Secretary Chris Grayling at the Centre for Social Justice, stressed the opportunities for the voluntary sector in the criminal justice system. Graham Beech, said: ‘Despite a reduction in overall crime rates, the latest figures show an alarming upward trend in reoffending among a hard core group. The voluntary sector has a critical role to play in reducing it and it is time to fully involve organisations like Nacro, with a track record of delivering successful, value for money services in communities. The voluntary sector not only engages offenders on licence and community sentences, but also delivers services that tackle complex problems and multiple needs at the same time. It has a proven track record in rehabilitation, the key to reducing reoffending. ‘Voluntary sector organisations are able to bridge the gap between offender and community, building positive relationships which not only challenge an individual to change but also open doors to achieve lasting success. This enables people to put their offending behind them and move on with their lives, gain employment and be productive members of their communities.

This approach is not without its challenges for the sector, but the people we work with, and the communities we work in, need us to be there. We have a right to negotiate on our own terms, to stand tall and lead change. In doing so we have a real opportunity to make a significant impact on crime in this country.” Nacro is the UK’s biggest crime reduction charity. Dedicated to reducing crime and changing lives in hundreds of communities across England and Wales, it is made up of more than 1,200 staff and volunteers and runs more than 200 different projects. Nacro’s work focuses on three areas – before, while and after people are in trouble:

•

Crime prevention and early intervention – stopping young people getting into trouble by running services which steer them away from crime, teach them new skills and create new opportunities. Offender management – working with people in prison, on post-release licences and on community sentences, challenging them to stop offending and equipping them with skills and opportunities so they can move away from crime and give something positive back to their communities. Resettlement – helping offenders cope after serving a prison sentence so they can settle back into the community, find somewhere to live and access education, training or a job.

NEWS

Greater Manchester Police officer found guilty of common assault A Greater Manchester Police officer has been found guilty of common assault following an investigation by the Independent Police Complaints Commission. Sergeant Richard Miller, 46, was found guilty following a trial at Manchester Magistrates' Court. He has been fined £500 and ordered to pay costs and compensation. The conviction relates to an incident in Chadderton Custody Suite on 15 July 2012 in which the officer used excessive force on a 33-year-old man. The IPCC investigation found that Sgt Miller used excessive and inappropriate force when he dragged the handcuffed man along the floor of the custody suite. The man had been arrested earlier on suspicion of assaulting a police officer during an incident at the Star Kebab and Pizza takeaway in Yorkshire Street, Oldham at 4.30am that day. It transpired he had sustained a broken arm during the arrest. The IPCC investigation built a picture of events outside the takeaway and in the custody suite from CCTV footage and witness accounts. While it is believed the man sustained the injury to his arm during his arrest there is no evidence that this was as a result

NEWS

of deliberate, excessive force. Instead the investigation found it occurred due to the application of a recognised arm hold by an officer and then the ensuing struggle resulting in the man and the officer falling to the ground. However, the actions of Sgt Miller in the custody suite were found to be wholly inappropriate. CCTV footage showed the officer entering the van dock area before approaching the police van in which the man was sitting. Within seconds Sgt Miller forcibly removed the man before using the handcuffs to drag him more than 30 metres into the custody suite. The audio recording from the suite picked up the man's screams of pain. Once it was identified that the man had an arm injury he was taken to hospital for treatment. The IPCC investigation identified that a police constable and two custody detention officers witnessed Sgt Miller's actions but failed to challenge him. As a result the IPCC found the three had a case to answer for misconduct. IPCC Commissioner James Dipple-Johnstone said: “The CCTV footage which captures the actions of Sgt Miller is truly shocking. Using handcuffs to drag a detainee through a custody suite is wholly inappropriate. To do it to someone who is injured and screaming out in pain is inhumane. Sgt Miller tried to defend his actions by saying he was dealing with an ‘unwilling and non-compliant’ detainee. That is no defence. Police officers are trained to deal professionally in such a situation. Sgt Miller acted unprofessionally and abused his position of authority.”

Notice to all Christian prison chaplains The Plymouth Brethren Christian Church would like to make all Christian chaplains aware of the support service they offer as part of the charitable work they carry out in providing free bibles and gospel literature in the vital work that you do! The bibles are compact and hard-backed and are the New Translation by Mr J. N. Darby. There is also a selection of short gospel tracts which are available in many different languages. Request your free bibles and tracts now by emailing: biblepacks@gmail.com the Custodial Review

Page 4

NEWS

HMP Rochester - improvement needs to continue HMP Rochester wasn’t an easy prison to run but managers had clear plans for improvements, said Nick Hardwick, Chief Inspector of Prisons, publishing the report of an announced inspection of the prison and young offender institution in Kent. HMP Rochester is a complex institution going through considerable change. An older part comprises the original borstal and a newer part opened in 2008. Rochester has long experience of managing younger offenders. From 2011 the establishment became dual purpose and now also holds a growing adult category C population. Inspectors had some concerns about safety, and insufficient progress had been made in providing respectful conditions, but the activity provided for prisoners had improved and resettlement services were satisfactory. Inspectors were pleased to find that: • prisoners were treated reasonably well upon arrival;

•

• • • • •

NEWS

self-harming prisoners were usually well cared for, although too many were held in segregation without justification; the approach to security had improved significantly with procedures now applied with greater proportionality; staff-prisoner relationships were mostly good; the provision of activity was much improved and prisoners spent less time in their cells; the management of learning and skills was now more strategic and working to an encouraging plan; and resettlement services generally were reasonably effective.

However, inspectors were concerned to find that: • levels of violence and the use of force were reducing, but were still too high; • strategies to reduce violence and bullying were in place but needed to be more rigorous; • the approach to reducing violence among younger prisoners required improvement, although staff had moved decisively to tackle a recent brief spate

• • • •

NEWS

of organised fighting in this group; the use of illicit drugs was too high; much of the older accommodation was in a relatively poor condition; the prison’s approach to the promotion of equality and diversity was lacklustre; and take-up of activity was still too low and inspectors still found too many prisoners on the wings during the working day doing nothing.

Nick Hardwick said: ‘Rochester is not an easy prison to run. It is a complicated and mixed institution where change feels ever present. The prison was heading in the right direction and managers seemed to be working to a clear vision and plan, although this had yet to translate fully into clear improvements in outcomes for prisoners. The prison faced a number of operational risks as it implemented its strategies which will require confident management.’ Michael Spurr, Chief Executive Officer of the National Offender Management Service (NOMS), said: ‘I am pleased that the Chief Inspector has recognised the progress being made at Rochester.

NEWS

Nick Hardwick, Chief Inspector of Prisons

Michael Spurr, Chief Executive Officer of the National Offender Management Service (NOMS)

‘The prison has improved during a period of considerable change, with rising levels of activity and good relationships between staff and prisoners. ‘The Governor and his staff are building on this good work by addressing the concerns raised in the report, particularly tackling the level of violence.’

HMP Nottingham - improvements made, despite changes HMP Nottingham had experienced many changes and increased its population, but had still made some improvements, said Nick Hardwick, Chief Inspector of Prisons, publishing the report of an unannounced short follow-up inspection of the local jail. HMP Nottingham held just over 1,000 men with over a third on remand and a small number aged under 21. It had almost doubled in size since its last inspection in 2010 and its focus had moved away from being a community prison to a local prison. At its last inspection in 2010, inspectors found that the prison was achieving reasonably good outcomes for prisoners in all four healthy prison tests: safety, respect, purposeful activity and resettlement. This short followup inspection found sufficient

progress had been made on safety, respect and purposeful activity but insufficient progress on resettlement. Inspectors were pleased to find that: • significant steps had been taken to improve the safety of vulnerable prisoners and to ensure they had equitable access to the regime; • use of the special cell had ceased; • actions to address significant issues raised by black and minority ethnic prisoners relating to staff-prisoner relationships had been identified, but not yet implemented; • sufficient purposeful activity places were now available; and • recommendations about education and training had mostly been achieved with

significant improvements in qualification rates. However, inspectors had some concerns: • there were still no constructive interventions to change the behaviour of perpetrators or support victims of bullying; • insufficient progress had been made in resettlement - there was no up-to-date needs analysis or action plan and offender supervisors were not seeing prisoners regularly enough; and • some prisoners waited too long when a transfer to another prison was needed, and there were no interventions to address attitudes, thinking and behaviour. Nick Hardwick said: ‘HMP Nottingham had

Page5

experienced considerable changes since our last inspection with a significantly increased population and a change in role. Despite these challenges, there has been a positive response to some key findings from our last inspection.’ Michael Spurr, Chief Executive Officer of the National Offender Management Service (NOMS), said: ‘I am pleased that the Chief Inspector has noted the good progress being made at HMP Nottingham. ‘During a period of considerable change the governor and staff have worked well to follow the previous report’s recommendations with some significant improvements made. ‘Work will continue to further improve performance, particularly with regard to resettlement.’ the Custodial Review

NEWS

Colnbrook Immigration Removal Centre – noticeable progress Colnbrook was generally well managed and making progress, said Nick Hardwick, Chief Inspector of Prisons, publishing the report of an announced inspection of the immigration removal centre (IRC) near Heathrow. Colnbrook is one of the more secure and ‘prison-like’ facilities in the IRC estate. It holds just over 400 mainly adult male detainees, as well as a small number of women. Provision for women was due to expand. Serco had decided not to re-tender to run the centre at the imminent conclusion of its current contract. Colnbrook had been on a consistent path of improvement and was safer than inspectors had found it in the past.

•

• •

levels of violence, the amount of administrative separation and the use of force had been steadily reducing; security was proportionate and many of the excessive restrictions seen at previous inspections had been lifted; initiatives were in place to assist the

HMP Cardiff – reasonably good outcomes for prisoners HMP Cardiff was a reasonably good prison but its approach was sometimes too casual, said Nick Hardwick, Chief Inspector of Prisons, publishing the report of an announced inspection of the local prison in Wales. HMP Cardiff is busy and overcrowded. At the time of the inspection it held over 40% more men than it was designed to hold. More than half the prisoners were on remand or had sentences of less than six months. In our survey, one in five prisoners told us they had a disability, more than one in three said they had emotional or mental health problems, two out of five had a problem with drugs and one in three had a problem with alcohol. Managing this needy and transient population and keeping them safe was challenging. There had been five self-inflicted deaths over the past year, four in custody and one shortly after release. The prison had taken action to learn and implement lessons arising from these tragedies and at the time of the inspection, the number of self-harm incidents was low. Inspectors were pleased to find that:

•

reception and first night procedures were good;

the Custodial Review

NEWS

resolution of conflict; relationships between detainees and staff were constructive, but more could have been done to exploit this strength with better personal officer work and more active promotion of diversity; access to recreational facilities for men was reasonable and there was enough paid work for those who wanted it; and some good one-to-one coaching was offered in education.

•

• •

• • •

• • • •

•

NEWS

•

NEWS

Michael Spurr, NOMS

and processes in managing the removal of the most complex cases and most vulnerable detainees were in many cases disproportionate; and the reasons why websites or foreign news media were blocked were unclear to both detainees and staff.

there was still significant evidence of constant low-level anxiety and fear among detainees, linked to the uncertainties of lengthy immigration processes, exemplified by a notable number of detainees who had been held for extended periods without resolution of their cases; although the centre was relatively new, the cleanliness and decorative state needed improvement, and the worst environment was the cramped and dirty ‘first night last night unit’; welfare support was reasonable, but not administered systematically, meaning the needs of individuals could be missed; the use of the ‘first night last night unit’

Nick Hardwick said: ‘Some of Colnbrook’s difficulties were structural – for example, the prison-like character of the institution – but others just required attention by managers, like cleanliness, diversity management and removing unnecessary impediments to communication. A more serious rethink was needed about the use of the ‘first night last night unit’, and there were too many cases of damaging long-term detention, which needed urgent resolution by UKBA. These are important shortcomings, but overall this report describes improving outcomes in a generally well-managed centre that has made noticeable progress since the last inspection.’

prisoners at risk of self-harm said they felt well supported, although case management required improvement; levels of violence were low, as was the use of force and segregation; provision for prisoners with substance misuse problems was satisfactory and this continued with very good ‘through the gate’ support after prisoners left the prison; the prison was generally clean; staff-prisoner relationships were positive and prisoners said most problems were sorted out by wing staff without the formal complaints system being needed; health care was good, mental health provision particularly so; and a fully employed prisoner would have around nine hours out of cell a day, and the quality of activity on offer was generally good.

•

However, inspectors were concerned to find that:

•

Nick Hardwick, Chief Inspector of Prisons

Inspectors were, however, concerned to find that:

Inspectors were pleased to find that:

•

action to reduce the supply of drugs was sometimes too casual, and the management of searching and testing required improvement; one landing was being used to hold prisoners on the ‘basic’ level of the incentives and earned privileges scheme, which amounted to segregation without the safeguards and governance arrangements a formal segregation unit would have; Page 6

•

for almost half the population not engaged in activity, time out of cell was less than three hours a day; the prison held a small number of lifesentence and indeterminate-sentence prisoners whose needs were not effectively met and who should be held elsewhere; and offender management and resettlement services were not sufficiently geared to the transient population.

Nick Hardwick said: ‘HMP Cardiff’s strengths lie in its caring and experienced staff who ensure that outcomes for most prisoners are reasonably good in most areas. However, the approach of the prison as a whole is sometimes too casual and this creates the risk that particularly vulnerable individuals can fall through the net and some poor practices develop unchecked. Michael Spurr, Chief Executive Officer of the National Offender Management Service (NOMS), said: ‘Cardiff has made great progress in creating a safe environment for the complex and transient population it holds and I am pleased that the Chief Inspector has highlighted the hard work that staff have put in to facilitating this. ‘Work is continuing apace to further improve performance and care for all prisoners, particularly with regard to resettlement and purposeful activity.’

British-made quality and reliability from the Supersafe range of mattresses and pillows by Carpenter As the number one name in custodial bedding, Carpenter’s Supersafe range of mattresses and pillows offers constant new levels of innovation, with products designed specifically for the demanding environments of prison cells, custody suites and immigration centres. The Supersafe all-in-one mattress with built in pillow is the latest development from Carpenter and is offered with a vandal resistant cover, which now incorporates welded seams reducing the opportunity of sabotage while still providing flammability performance as specified by the Ministry of Justice (MOJ). All Supersafe products utilise Fireseal foam cores, a world class fire retardant, flexible foam, ensuring finished mattresses meet the full requirement of BS7177,Very High Hazard and FTS15, making them ideal for high-risk environments. Carpenter’s Supersafe range is supplied into all of the UK’s publically operated prisons and a significant share of privately operated prisons, along with the police custody cell market.Various cover options are available, one such being Polytran which can be easily wiped clean, therefore extending the life cycle of the finished mattress or pillow. Supersafe mattresses and pillows are produced and recycled in the UK. Carpenter’s zero waste system has saved the MOJ in excess of £1million per year based on landfill and incineration costs. For further information on Carpenter Ltd Supersafe range contact: sales.uk@carpenter.com

Page 7

the Custodial Review

NEWS

YJB reduces number of commissioned places in youth custody The number of custodial places the Youth Justice Board for England and Wales commissions for under-18s is to be reduced by more than 350. This decision follows a significant reduction in the numbers of children and young people being placed in youth custody. In April 2013 the under-18 population was 1,292, down from 1,811 or 29 per cent since April 2012 and a 60 per cent reduction since the population peak of 3,200 in 2002. Frances Done,YJB Chair, said: ‘Due to the significant and welcome reduction in the number of children and young people sentenced to custody, the YJB will be reducing the number of custodial places it commissions. ‘Over the next few months, the YJB will withdraw fully from all three remaining girls’ under-18 Young Offender Institution units, which will mean a reduction of 41 custodial places. In April 2013 these three units only held eight girls. ‘These units are: the Josephine Butler Unit at HMP Downview, Surrey; the Mary Carpenter Unit at HMP Eastwood Park, Gloucestershire, and the Rivendell Unit at HMP New Hall, West Yorkshire. ‘Individual arrangements will be made with those girls currently within the units to minimise any disruption to them. Girls will either serve out their sentence, or be transferred to alternative suitable accommodation. Those arrangements will take into account the welfare, rehabilitation and long-term wellbeing of those detained, and in consultation with the girls and the relevant Youth Offending Teams. ‘In future, girls remanded or sentenced to custody will be placed in an appropriate Secure Children’s Home or Secure Training Centre. ‘Furthermore the YJB will be reducing the number of commissioned places at Hindley under-18 YOI, Greater Manchester, by 192, and Wetherby under-18 YOI, West Yorkshire, by 120, which both house young men. ‘Both these under-18 YOIs will remain open and the YJB will continue to commission sufficient places to service the demand for custody.’

the Custodial Review

NEWS

Youth Offending Team initiative helps reduce offending An initiative which ensures young people, who have committed minor offences, address their poor behaviour but do not receive a criminal record, is helping to reduce levels of offending. The scheme, commissioned by Newcastle Youth Offending Team, provides specialist early intervention within 48 hours of a child receiving a police Community Resolution. Community Resolutions (CR) are used by a number of police forces and are given to children aged between 10 and 17, who have committed a minor offence. The youngsters are made to apologise and to make amends, but do not accumulate a criminal record for what in many cases is just poor behaviour. In many areas a CR is the end of the matter, however Newcastle YOT has set up an innovative supporting process, which means children and their families are visited by skilled case worker within two days of the offence. During the meeting a case worker will assess the reasons a child offended and whether there are any risk factors, such as: family difficulties, low self esteem, peer pressure or anger management, which may make the young person more likely to get into trouble with the law. The assessment tool, which is known as Onset, also covers factors such as victim awareness and the team offer one-to-one support, group work and positive interventions to help reduce the likelihood of young people getting into trouble with the police. Since this new initiative was launched in April 2012, 181 young people have been through the process, and it is estimated that for those engaging with the service they are 37% less likely to offend. Following a competitive tendering exercise, Catch22, a forward looking social business, with extensive experience of providing services that help young people in tough situations to turn their lives around, was successful and now employs a dedicated team across Newcastle to run the support initiative. This new initiative, known as the Newcastle Community Resolution Service, covers the entire city, whereas the YOTs previous range of diversion programmes targeted specific areas. In addition the service costs around £150,000 less per annum.

Page 8

Lin Hinnigan, Chief Executive of the Youth Justice Board, who recently visited Newcastle YOT, said: “Community Resolutions have proved very successful in providing quicker outcomes for victims, ensuring children face up to their actions and reducing the number of first-timeentrants into the criminal justice system. ‘This innovative scheme by Newcastle YOT supports this approach, by helping tackle the root causes of any poor behaviour, which may be related to low self-esteem, peer pressure, or other welfare needs. ‘By positively engaging with young people and their families at the outset, we are able to challenge poor attitudes and behaviour, provide positive interventions and ultimately reduce offending. ‘Furthermore I am glad to see that an effective third sector organisation like Catch 22, has been commissioned to run this service, and is using its expertise to make a difference.’ Newcastle Youth Offending Team Manager, Paul Brownlee, said: ‘Our approach to addressing young peoples’ behaviour, meeting the needs of victims and supporting the police to reduce offending is paying dividends. ‘The Community Resolution scheme has proven its worth in Newcastle and we are now working with other YOTs to embed the model across the Northumbria police force area.’ Joanne Lockey, Project Co-ordinator, Catch22 Early Intervention and Restorative Justice in Newcastle said: ‘The service provides an important opportunity for young people to see the full consequences of their actions, and is having real impact across the city. We know that early intervention and prevention services are cost-effective and essential. ‘It is better for children and young people, for families and communities and for taxpayers to identify problems early and intervene effectively. ‘Through one-to-one work the young people we work with look at how their behaviour has affected the victims and start to see things from their point of view. Our approach increases their understanding and empathy for others, and makes them less likely to re-offend.’

NEWS

Inspection of youth offending work: Blackpool needs to improve further Progress had been made in youth offending work in Blackpool but it needed to improve further and be better managed, said Liz Calderbank, Chief Inspector of Probation, publishing the report of a recent joint inspection of the work of Blackpool Youth Offending Team (YOT).

•

NEWS

unsatisfactory. Case managers knew a lot about the children and their lives and were very committed to supporting them, but did not always recognise the things that made them vulnerable to harm, either by others or by their own behaviour; and governance was unsatisfactory. A previously supportive but ineffectual Board was gradually changing to one populated by suitably senior representatives from partner agencies, but at the time of the inspection did not provide sufficient strategic leadership or ensure the delivery of effective outcomes.

This joint inspection of youth offending work in Blackpool is one of a small number of full joint inspections undertaken by HM Inspectorate of Probation with colleagues from the criminal justice, social care, education and health inspectorates. Inspectors focus on five key areas: reducing the likelihood of reoffending, protecting the public, protecting children and young people, ensuring that the sentence is served and the effectiveness of governance.

However, inspectors were pleased to find that, overall:

This inspection followed a critical core case inspection of the YOT, undertaken by HMI Probation in 2009.

Inspectors made recommendations to assist Blackpool in its continuing improvement, including: on strengthening the Board, providing a performance management system, improving practice to ensure management of risk of harm to others and vulnerability are central to work undertaken with children and young people, and ensuring initial assessments and their reviews are completed to a sufficient quality.

More recently, inspectors were concerned to find that overall:

•

work to reduce reoffending was unsatisfactory, largely due to deficiencies in the assessment which looked at why a young person had committed the offence. Although the delivery of interventions was strong, this was undermined where the assessment had not used information from partner agencies, or identified the correct work to be done or where work was not undertaken in the right order; work to protect the public and actual or potential victims was unsatisfactory. This was mainly due to deficiencies in assessment again, and planning to manage the risk of harm, which then drove through into delivery; work to protect children and young people and make them safer was

•

work to ensure the sentence was served was good. Engagement with children and young people was good and valued by them and their parents/carers. Good efforts were made to ensure that the young person co-operated with the order of the court, and, where necessary, enforcement was carried out promptly.

Liz Calderbank said: ‘Progress had undoubtedly been made by Blackpool since our last inspection. However, for a YOT to be fully effective, it must be supported by a Management Board that provides strategic leadership and direction for its managers. Board members must challenge practice, examine performance and drive the high quality provision of services to those children and young people who offend or who are likely to offend. We found that the YOT Manager and Chair of the Management Board were working hard to re-establish the Board

Page 9

NEWS

to both support and scrutinise the work of the YOT. However, in the absence of a basic performance management system, they were unable to monitor performance effectively, review outcomes or hold partner agencies to account for their delivery.’ ‘Although children and young people engaged well with staff and generally complied with their order, the effectiveness of interventions was too often undermined by the quality of assessments. Further attention needed to be given to managing the risk of harm children and young people might pose to others, and to their vulnerability.’ The new inspection programme of youth offending work, based on a risk-proportionate approach, was agreed by Ministers in December 2011. Under this programme, full joint inspections are targeted primarily on areas where there are significant concerns about the effectiveness of youth offending work, based primarily on the three national youth justice indicators, supplemented by other measures, such as recent inspections. Occasional inspections are undertaken in areas that report high performance, in order to maintain a benchmark for good practice. In Blackpool, performance had been declining on the national youth justice outcome measures for both custody and reoffending. Inspectors also wished to establish if action taken after Blackpool’s last inspection in 2009 had resulted in sustained improvements in performance. These inspections focus on issues not subject to other forms of external scrutiny: work to reduce the likelihood of offending and reoffending by young people; the management and minimisation of the risk of harm that a young person may pose to other people; safeguarding young people from harm (from their own actions and others); and work to ensure they serve their sentence. The inspections are led by HMI Probation, with participation by Ofsted, CQC and HMI Constabulary (and in Wales by the corresponding Welsh inspectorates, Healthcare Inspectorate Wales, Estyn and Care and Social Services Inspectorate Wales).

the Custodial Review

NEWS

YJB Chair Frances Done launches new youth offending service Three councils have joined forces to establish a new Youth Offending Service, designed to pool expertise, drive down youth offending and give better life chances to those young people caught up in the criminal justice system. Cheshire West and Chester Council, Halton Council and Warrington Council, will merge their existing Youth Offending Teams to create a single service, which will continue to ensure children and young people complete community orders, get the most appropriate rehabilitation and offer support around mental welfare, health issues, education and training. The new team, to be called Cheshire West, Halton and Warrington Youth Offending Service, will include specialist youth justice workers, Probation Officers, Police Officers and health and education professionals, from across the three councils. The YOS will also ensure young people face up to the consequences of their actions and give reparation to victims through the use of Restorative Justice methods. In launching the service at Walton Hall, Warrington, on Friday 28 June 2013,YJB Chair Frances Done, said: “I am sure by joining forces, these three local authorities, will be able to provide a Youth Offending Team, which remains focused on rehabilitating young people and protecting the public, while being much more cost effective. “Furthermore, I am confident this new approach will bring together the best local expertise, who can respond to community issues, helping drive down youth offending and reducing the number of people who get caught up in the youth justice system.” Cheshire West and Chester Council’s Executive Member for Children and Young People’s Services, Councillor Mark Stocks, said: “Youth crime across our area is reducing but we want to drive it down even further to ensure our communities become even safer and more attractive places to live and work and visit. “Young people have been placed at the very heart of this new service, with dedicated staff working closely with individuals to get to the root of why they have chosen to behave in an anti-social manner or commit crimes. “Advice and support will be targeted at each person on an individual basis to ensure that they are helped on to the right path and the chance of re-offending is kept at a minimum. “By combining our skills and experience throughout three authorities we are keeping a high quality workforce focussed on the task in hand - to reduce youth crime for the benefit of everyone.” the Custodial Review

NEWS

HM Inspectorate of Probation: Changes must be implemented carefully Some good work was being undertaken with adults and young people who had offended, although concerns remain, said Chief Inspector of Probation Liz Calderbank, publishing HMI Probation’s annual report, her last as Chief Inspector. The Chief Inspector of Probation warned, however, that the proposals in the Government’s Transforming Rehabilitation strategy will introduce far-reaching changes, and those changes must be implemented without a decline in the quality of work undertaken. During inspections, HMI Probation examines a representative sample of cases of individuals who have offended to judge whether work is being done sufficiently well with them to achieve the required outcomes of each case. Inspection should focus on key aspects of work that cannot easily be measured by other means. To reflect this, inspection work gives a prominent focus to public protection and child protection. In 2012-13, HMI Probation continued to make good progress, to schedule, on the longerterm regular inspections of youth and adult offending work. This work included:

•

• • • •

•

starting our new risk-proportionate programme of Inspection of Youth Offending Work, completing four full joint inspections and 19 short quality screenings; completing one remaining Core Case Reinspection under our previous programme of Inspection of Youth Offending Work; completing the remaining five inspections under the programme of adult offending work (OMI 2); continuing to develop the successor programme, Inspection of Adult Offending Work, throughout the year, including four pilot inspections; completing 22 inspections of offender management in prisons, jointly with HMI Prisons, to examine the work undertaken with prisoners and assess its effectiveness in changing their attitudes to offending and behaviour; publishing four joint thematic reports, led by HMI Probation, on children and young people who sexually offend, looked after children, transitions from youth to adult services and a follow-up inspection of electronically monitored curfews; and contributing to a further two published reports on disability hate crime, led by HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate, and restorative justice, led by HM Inspectorate of Constabulary. Page 10

Liz Calderbank, Chief Inspector of Probation

The Ministry of Justice recently published “Transforming Rehabilitation: A Strategy for Reform”, which sets out Government plans to change the way in which offenders are managed in the community. Liz Calderbank said: ‘While we have found evidence of much good practice, the findings from our inspections highlight some of our concerns. We have already started to plan for how we inspect in the new environment and our new adult inspection programme has been specifically designed to take account of a range of different providers working with adults who offend. We will build on this work in the forthcoming year. ‘The Government’s proposals will introduce far-reaching changes to the way in which work with adults who have offended will be conducted in the future. Some will undoubtedly bring improvements and we welcome the focus on reducing reoffending and the emphasis to be given to the key role played by the public sector in keeping people safe. The changes rely for their funding on the economies to be introduced by contracting out a large proportion of the work currently undertaken by Probation Trusts and are going to be implemented in a very short time, allowing little opportunity for the development of a shared working culture. Both the scale and the pace of change is considerable and we are concerned, as an inspectorate, that it is taken forward and implemented without any drop in the quality of work already achieved.’ Custodial Review is now accepting articles from serving officers and staff within the whole custodial industry. All articles will appear on the Custodial website and will appear in the magazine subject to the Publishers discretion. Approx length 1500 to 2000 words. We are also pleased to accept news and information. Please contact the Publisher, Steve Mitchell, stevem@custodialreview.co.uk or on

01234 348878 for more details.

Page 11

the Custodial Review

Making it work at Doncaster Peter Jones is the Senior Justice Manager of the Alliance Offender Management Team for Catch22 at HMP Doncaster which is the establishment where the payment by results trial is being conducted. He is therefore one of the key personnel in the programme. Peter is a Chartered Manager and recipient of a Butler Trust commendation in 2012 for his work in transforming substance misuse services. He arrived at this job after an interesting career path. Originally intending to be a police officer he passed out from Public Service College with a distinction. Diversifying from a Police career he joined the NHS in 1999 and worked in a specialist drug and alcohol detox unit of a major hospital. In 2000 an opportunity to work with the CARAT drug team at HMP Doncaster presented itself, this subsequently led to further community roles with Open Access Services, Needle Exchange Programmes, Drug Rehabilitation Requirement programmes and a Bail Support Project Officer post to name just some of the roles he worked in. He returned to HMP Doncaster in 2010 to manage the CARAT Team within which he previously worked. Following a promotion to Senior Manager, Peter was seconded to Catch22 for two years to manage the PBR pilot programme and Offender Management Team. Peter recently transferred permanently to Catch22 joining as a Senior Justice Manager in the same PBR role. Custodial Review When did you become involved in the Payment by Results programme and what drew you to it? Peter Jones I joined the PBR programme in October 2011 just as it was starting. It appealed to me because I’ve always worked in the rehabilitation field and I am a proactive person who looks to make things work. Wherever I have been if, I see a gap in a service or process that’s causing it to be less than effective then I will put it right. I have seen a lot of projects that just didn’t work as intended, they were always well intentioned but all too often poorly managed, funded or badly administered. Managing the PBR rehabilitation programme was a role I was offered by Serco, it had the brief of making rehabilitation interventions actually produce consistent and measurable results. It offered the opportunity to get the right programmes in the right place at the right time without the dead-hand of bureaucracy getting in the way. I felt that it was my opportunity to really make a difference by doing the job properly from day one with an organisation that would be pragmatic. CR How did you go about deciding what needed to be done, and what did the process discover? the Custodial Review

PJ We used a system called process mapping. Using this we break down a large process into small units to see how they fit together and where they fail to deliver the needed outcome. By reducing it all into very small steps it’s possible to examine each one individually and looking at ways to improve them and also improve how they link to each other. Very little work had been done with the under 12 month sentenced prisoners historically and as a result many of them returned time after time. Previous Basic Custody Screening processes offered light touch interventions with little follow up or throughcare. What was needed was a method to manage the process end to end with an offender-centred approach and we also needed to find a way of actually measuring an inmate’s progress. CR So how did you go about designing a system to manage and deliver the interventions needed for the contract? PJ We started with a clean sheet! By looking at the existing processes in detail we realised that each department in the prison had valuable interventions or support to offer but this was not always offered at the right time. The problem with this was that the system wasn’t joined up; it worked in silos, each department doing its particular role irrespective of what other departments were doing. We found that a major problem wasn’t the interventions, it was that too often an inmate would receive interventions in an order that they could not manage because of their personal circumstances or short sentence length. To organise this properly, we designed a bespoke case management system, called the Neo system, to provide a case management solution for those offenders serving less than 12 months. No off the shelf package was available so I worked with a company called Meganexus to create a system that offered a needs led assessment, created a SMART support plan and gathered detailed Management Information to generate monthly reports. The Neo system enables allocated case managers to provide sequenced interventions in line with the prisoners’ level of need, risk, complexity and sentence length. One case manager is allocated to each inmate as they are received in reception, where we fully assess them, design a support plan and refer to interventions and service providers. The one case manager, one assessment approach promotes therapeutic alliance avoiding repeat assessment and questioning. CR Is it the management system that is the key to making the interventions work? PJ It’s one of them, without it we would not be able to quickly determine what works and what does not, the management system produces some very detailed reports that lets us look at what is going on in a lot of detail. If it indicates when something is not right, that Page 12

it’s not working, then we can rapidly change an intervention or introduce something that fits the needs of the offenders. The ability to rapidly amend what we do is another essential part of making the system work, this is possible because of how the pilot contract is designed. The PBR contract gives us huge flexibility to change our interventions and methods as circumstances require. The decisions are taken in house by the management team without the need to refer the decision to someone outside the prison. I don’t think we would be able to react so quickly without the contract’s flexibility, which is inherent to the private sector and to Serco’s relationship with Catch22. With this flexibility we can bring in new interventions quickly, this is very important too. For instance there are two programmes; one is a Families First programme called Daddy New Born where babies are bought into prison so that the fathers can bond with them. Another is a Social Kitchen where families can cook a healthy balanced meal together. Both of these were decided upon and instigated very quickly. The results seem to speak for themselves as so far a local analysis of footfall of offenders returning HMP Doncaster show that 6 out of 10 prisoners receiving family interventions do not return to the prison. Investing in them is good common sense, as well as financial sense. Another example is that we have a team of 56 Catch22 Volunteer Mentors who provide befriending and advocacy support upon release; we have also have a group of ex-offenders as part of this group who are successfully integrating into society by providing peer support helping others do the same. So we are allowing ex-offenders back into their old prison as Catch22 Volunteer Mentors to be matched with and provide peer support to offenders due for release. This an innovative approach that Governors might not have had the opportunity to support in the past. Another example is drawn from the high percentage of military veterans we get; fortunately there are additional resources available that we can access in order to help with their specific needs. A retired Lt Colonel, a Captain, and a psychotherapist are assisting Catch22 deliver the Veterans in Custody service supporting the rehabilitation of exmilitary personnel and helping them with PSTD issues. Much of this is only possible because the Director John Biggin is very supportive and will invest in interventions that produce results. CR John Biggin, in an interview 2 years ago, said to me that a lot of the problems occur when the inmate gets the other side of the gate, what have you done about that? PB Catch22 Community Based Case Managers are one of the key parts of our programme as they now provide support

through the gate reaching out with support into our local communities. Historically short term offenders were release with little or no support. Offenders are now supported for up to 12 months after release during which time our goal is to prevent reoffending by a minimum of 5%, set against base data from 2009. We rely on the community based case managers to ensure that positive progress and change achieved on the inside is maintained on the outside. The case managers are responsible for ensuring the offender accesses support from services such as drug programmes, education, training and work schemes that are available in the wider community. Each offender has a tailored plan for release which can be accessed in the community on the Neo system using mobile IT. Community Based Case Managers are based with Integrated Offender Management Teams regionally with Police and Probation teams managing risk through a multi-agency approach. CR I interviewed John Biggin just as the programme started, he explained to me that the inmates in the PBR programme were known as cohorts and that after a year the first results of the programmes you have been speaking of will be known. Have you achieved the 5% reduction the contract demands without ‘cherry picking’ to obtain the results? PJ We took a conscious decision at the onset of the programme to keep all the under 12 month sentenced offenders at Doncaster, around 92% of these are local prisoners. Catch22 offers support to all offenders entering the establishment and has taken active steps to ensure cherry picking does not take place, steps which were reviewed in 2012 in an MOJ report as best practice. The MOJ recently released mature half year results for the first cohort released. Interim results show that the payment-by-results pilot at HMP & YOI Doncaster is well on the way to reaching our goal in reducing re-offending through a caseworker-led approach and a focus on improving outcomes. CR What is the size of the sample you are calculating those figures on? PJ By the end of this year we will have approx. 1800 in-cohort released inmates who will have been through all or part of the programme. That will give us a good strong sample to base our future actions on. CR You have said that you like to spot the non-functioning gaps in a service and fill them. What have you seen over the last 2 years that wasn’t working? PJ It was not so much the interventions that needed to be radically altered although many have been improved. It was the order and timing of how they were sequentially delivered that has made a difference. The flexibility of the delivery model we now use enables Case Managers to be reactive to a prisoners

needs as they change. Now that we have case management systems like Meganexus, also known as the Neo system, we can now provide tailored interventions that meet the changing needs of the prisoners we support. Interventions such as TrackWorks and the industries on offer at Doncaster including Textiles and the Design and Print workshops. This has made the difference. CR I believe there is £2 million at stake if the 5% reduction isn’t achieved, so will you make the 5% reduction? PJ As we are delivering joined up quality services I’m very confident we will. We have taken a bold step to put Catch22 and offender management at the heart of how the prison operates. If a case manager does not know about something the inmate is doing then it should not be happening. Catch22 create a support plan for the inmate and it’s the central driver for coordinating each prisoner’s activities. Embracing this approach, we can ensure that whatever the presenting level of need, risk, immediacy or complexity, the right intervention is delivered at the right time. In providing end to end case management, Catch22 aim to sequentially offer access to support that prioritises each offender’s immediate substance misuse, physical and mental health needs upon reception. Each offender is then guided into education services ensuring that their entry level qualifications are sufficient to engage fully with the wider interventions and programmes identified. Offenders that engage fully with support and sentence plans are then invited to apply for employment within the prison gaining wider skills and experience. CR Catch22 are an external provider, they were contracted in to carry out the rehabilitation work.You were an employee of Serco and managing it, there would seem to be a break in the chain of command there, so how did it work in practice? PJ During the 2 year secondment I was line managed by Catch22 but remained an integral part of the Doncaster Senior Management Team. My role was, and still remains, to enhance the close working relationship Catch22 has with Serco through regular communication and management meetings. The partnership works well as all parties are working together towards a common goal. Payment by Results is recognised as a whole prison approach with the prison becoming the intervention with each department playing a part. Serco and Catch22 are pioneering this model of offender management and the electronic systems that support delivery. The methods we use are new and have never been tried before, particularly with the under 12 month cohort group. We are confident that the innovative model we are developing will be rolled out nationally and shape the landscape for future prison delivery models. Page 13

CR Why did you recently transfer from Serco to Catch22? PJ After the 2 year secondment to Catch22 my role was due to be reassessed, had I stayed with Serco then I would have probably had to take a different route, into residential or into security. My passion has always been with working with people and creating good solid services around tackling problem issues that meet the needs of the service user. I would possibly lose that if I went into other areas of prison work. Catch22 are a growing social business holding efficiency and effectiveness at the core of the way they do things by focusing on value and on evidencing the way they make a high impact on the people they work with. Catch22 is a great organisation to work for and have a very wide and diverse portfolio of opportunities and services to work in. These include Offender Management, Learning and Employability, Adolescence and Family Care and Substance Misuse and Mental Health. My interests and experience make it the obvious way to go for me with Catch22. CR How about the future? What’s to come from Catch22 working with offenders? PJ The simple answer is ‘a lot’, this programme is one PBR pilot site. Catch22 are also working alongside Serco in HMP Thameside and HMP Ashfield. Serco are also negotiating contracts to operate the South Yorkshire cluster of prisons including HMP Lindholme, Moorlands and Moorlands Open. This will mean that Serco operate all the establishments in the South Yorkshire region including Doncaster as the remand facility. Within South Yorkshire we have one Police Authority, 4 prisons, and a Probation Trust. This makes South Yorkshire an ideal area to join all criminal justice services and agencies together providing a joined up working model regardless of where an offender is on the criminal justice cycle. We currently have Police and Probation officers from Integrated Offender Management Teams coming into the prison to engage offenders alongside the Catch22 Offender Management Team. We seek to enhance and grow this existing joint working relationship with Catch22 developing a best practice model of joined up offender management across the region. CR Thank you for talking to the Review. the Custodial Review

Grand Design? Guy Baulf, about HMP Thameside HMP Thameside is on the south side of the Thames next to HMP Belmarsh. Opened a year ago it’s run by Serco and is about as new a prison as it’s possible to get. The Director is Guy Baulf, who worked his way up the prison hierarchy the hard way from Prison Officer to Governing Governor. He left the state sector and went to work for Serco when he was the Governor of HMP Bedford. Since then he has been the Director of HMP Lowdham Grange in the Midlands then holding a similar post at an Australian prison in Queensland. He is now looking forward to his next challenge which is his retirement in June 2014. Guy took responsibility for the new prison from the time the contract was awarded to it becoming fully operational. I wanted to know just what was involved in doing what must be the custodial equivalent of ‘Grand Designs’. CR Custodial Review GB Guy Baulf CR How do you start out with a big piece of land and end up with a shiny new, fully functioning prison? GB It started with the specification document that’s was put out by the MOJ to all interested parties. It detailed the type of prison, where it will be, the outcome they wanted and what must and must not be done. It goes without saying that it also states this is to be done as economically and environmentally soundly as possible! The Serco bid team then analysed it and broke it down into a set of proposals as to how this would be achieved. We then put our proposals together in a ‘Bid Document’, and once the governance section within in Serco had approved it then we put in our Bid to the MOJ. We then spent the next 12 months discussing our, and others, proposals with the MOJ and the other bidders working to a final solution. At the end of the process the MOJ announced the winner and why they were the best. The contract was then drawn up with all the relevant schedules etc. It was signed and it was at that point that I became involved. I had to thoroughly understand the contract and start the process of creating the prison

the Custodial Review

operations and our contract delivery. I was responsible for overseeing the build, mobilisation, transition and all the operational phases. Our preferred builder was Skanska, we have a long positive relationship with them and together have gained a lot of experience on previous projects. Both Serco and Skanska have learnt from past experience and as Skanska are always looking for the lowest cost of construction and we are looking for the lowest cost of operation so the correct design of the building was met, which to operate is essential, get the design right and the prison is less expensive to operate because it takes less staff and energy. The trade-off between the conflicting interests means we eventually come to a compromise that serves the needs of both parties. In the case of Thameside we have a contract for a 900 prisoner capacity local prison with facilities commensurate with that role with

Page 14

a population size similar to Belmarsh next door, but in under half of the ground area. We concluded a radial design for the wings was the most advantageous and placed the support facilities such as kitchens, gym, laundry and admin etc. into the available space. Once the plans were signed-off it was down to the builders, the banks, the council, the MOJ and I to get the process to the point where inmates can be accepted. This is a PFI contract, so all parties have a keen interest in making sure their part is right, as they have to pick up the bill if it is not. There is also a huge procurement process to furnish and equip the prison; at one time I had 17000 different lines of procurement running! You name it and we ordered it! Some of the equipment was supplied in the build contract for instance the dental and x-ray machines were installed by Skanska but the uniforms, radios, handcuffs etc. were all procured by

Serco. To do this I received a budget and an instruction not to spend a penny more! Something we have to remember is that in 25 years we have to hand over this prison as a working unit and in good condition with no dilapidations. So we have to build and run it with that in mind, it’s not possible to design, build and equip it just to last for the contract period. CR How about staffing? There are already 2 prisons within walking distance and there is no shortage of work in the area. So what do you do to recruit the 350 staff you need with the specialist skills required? GB We put various adverts out specifying the range of skills we sought. It eventually went out into the local area, to Serco staff and nationally in order for us to find the huge range of staff we sought, it turned out that we recruited 80% of the staff from the Greenwich area. We then booked Charlton Athletic Football ground for 2 weeks to carry out the massive selection procedure which included a set of tests including English and Maths. From the subsequent results we were able to filter people through to the most appropriate role for further selection before offering the successful candidates employment contracts when the Prison was handed over to us in January 2012. CR When you were at Bedford and Lowdham Grange you had a strong ethos of how the prison officers were going to operate. How did you go about building an ethos into Thameside with the core of the staff new to the role? GB In the recruitment campaign we made our values clear so there could be no doubt about the type of person we were looking for. Everyone who was interviewed and accepted was given training by the management team on how we wanted people to behave and why. At every training course that we ran in the buildup to opening I spent an hour explaining to

the staff my vision of how the prison was going to run and why it was going to be that way. At the end of each course I spent more time doing the same. We ran a total of 20 training courses and no one missed out on hearing this message from me. We still continue this process by having one afternoon a month when all staff meet up and I explain what’s going on. We cover what’s going well and not so well and our approach to developing the prison’s delivery. I’m plainspoken during these meetings as it’s the only way in my opinion to get staff’s total buy in. Staff like to have the full facts. The ethos of the prison isn’t just set by the staff, it relies on prisoners behaving as they should and knowing what to do. A new inmate learns much from the others around them. So setting the ethos was assisted by bringing in prisoners from established prisons, notably HMP Dovegate and HMP Lowdham Grange to assist the new inmates to settle in, they probably helped the staff to do so too.

Page 15

CR Addressing reoffending has now been moved front and centre, even for short term prisoners, the Chief Inspector of Prisons states it should be a central plank of every prisons regime. So how do you build tackling offending behaviour as a matter of habit into the ethos of the prison? GB We do at the beginning of custody with the remand process and at the end of custody with the resettlement and reintegration. What we don’t do is the middle bit, which would be done by a training prison. Coincidentally this prison is being extended over the next two years to include a training prison, so we will then be carrying out the whole process. Our reoffending programme must be seen in the context of our operation. As a local prison we only discharge about 70 sentenced people per month, this is because our population is 75% remand and 25% sentenced. The continues overleaf u

the Custodial Review

Grand Design? continued

the Custodial Review

Page 16

sentenced section of the population carries out the roles of mentors, kitchen staff, safer custody observers and doing the other important inmate jobs around the prison as part of their rehabilitation. In the bid document it stipulated that we must work with external partners for the intervention programmes. So we have established contracts with appropriate external providers. Catch 22 handle all the sentence management and resettlement. Turning Point manages all the drugs and alcohol rehabilitation. Care UK are responsible for the healthcare, this was procured by the MOJ through what was the local PCT. The Skills Funding Association commissioned the Education delivery which is now managed and run by A4E. CR Do you operate a Payment by Results Programme here? GB No we do not, were we a training prison it would be feasible to do it, however the number of movements we have at present mean I cannot control who I am responsible for. We are only 25% sentenced and each one may only spend a short time here before release, therefore, I would become responsible and have to pick up the bill for other providers short comings. CR This prison was built to be ‘green’, by that I mean it was constructed to the highest economic standards of energy conservation and environmental guidelines, how do you keep it that way? GB It’s been designed into the buildings so that will not change over the life of the prison. Prisons used to be built almost entirely out of reinforced concrete which is not the most environmentally friendly of materials. However, here we have been very selective about what has been used to construct particular sections. If it’s an area where the prisoners live it’s been constructed to a very high security standard. Many of the administration buildings are outside the secure area so are built in the most economical and energy saving way possible which is facia brick, steel frame and softwood. Both types of construction were as energy efficient as it’s possible. BREEAM is a build and design standard that measures sustainability, our buildings were awarded ‘outstanding’ on the house and kitchen block. As result of this, in the winter, we rarely need to switch the heating on full as the insulation is so efficient; however, in the summer we need to keep the fans on to keep ourselves cool! Energy efficiency in the prison isn’t the only factors we had to consider. Other saving measures that have been designed-in is the ability to heat using our waste cooking oil, we also have a composter unit to turn waste food into compost. On the more proactive front we are working to bring down our use of landfill and have reduced out-waste to 3 tonnes a

week down from 12 tonnes. We have set up recycling teams and we will get landfill down to zero but it will take a while. We also put in a car plan so that the impact on the local roads is reduced to a minimum. We encourage the use of public transport by charging for car parking or allowing free parking if two people travel in the car. To encourage this we also allow shift patterns to be changed. There are also 2 electric points for charging electric cars in the car park and it’s free to the user! Our recruitment policy also helps with the environment because as 80% of our staff are local, so the majority walk or cycle into work, although this proportion changes in the winter months. CR When you were the Director of Lowdham Grange you had some rather controversial policies on preventing self-harm, one being the installation of telephones in cells. Have you followed a similar policy here? GB It’s one of the things I did in Lowdham Page 17

Grange; you may recall that I put telephones in cells at Lowdham to reduce the self-harm and to give the prisoners greater responsibility. I did it because we could also save money by consolidating the regime to a normal working day and better resource the time out of cell. This also had an impact on improving staff working hours by stopping prisoners having to be out of their cells in order to use telephones until late into the night. By putting the telephones in the cells I was able to change the shift patterns and so pay for the system in a couple of years. We were happy, so was the customer, the staff and the prisoners were too. It also prevented bullying over phone cards and position in the old phone queues. It retained contact with home and so reduced self-harm because they could contact their loved ones day or night. CR What else is to come for this shiny new prison? continues overleaf

the Custodial Review

Grand Design? continued

GB We do have the training resettlement prison wing starting construction next year, other than that nothing new. Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;m still working on up-skilling the staff and making sure all the procedures we brought in at the beginning are functioning properly. When we opened the prison the majority of the staff were nervous, timid and unsure, this was despite the 10 week training courses we had run. The experienced managers were on the wings every day advising and showing the way to manage the prisoners, but nothing accounts for experience, which only comes with time. Itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s taken a while for procedures to settle down, now we have to improve what we do. CR Thank you for talking to the Review again.

the Custodial Review

Page 18

190mm Wide Ad 2.qx8_Layout 1 25/07/2013 17:08 Page 1

\ Specialists in Fire Protection for the Custodial Sector \ Hydramist® is a safe, efficient and fast-acting water based fire suppression system designed to combat fires in custodial establishments and police investigation centres. For more information call us on 0800 975 7462 or visit www.fireworks-ltd.com

• Watermist absorbs fire energy • Rapid suppression • Binds high percentage of smoke particles reducing smoke and toxic gases • Assists evacuation • Water based system presents no risk to personnel or the environment • Easy-to-use systems • Minimal training required

Over 150 installations in England and Wales

Page 19

the Custodial Review

Raising the bars: a joined-up approach to tackling reoffending during Chance 2 Change will have an opportunity to act as peer mentors and mentoring will continue to be a major feature once participants are released back into the community into the second phase of Raising the Bars.

Peer mentors for the Chance 2 Change programme at HMP Portland.

With prisoner rehabilitation programmes up and down the country claiming success in reducing reoffending rates, it can seem a tall order for any one organisation to say “we are genuinely different and what we do actually works.” However, that’s exactly what CIC Beyond Youth is able to claim through its Chance 2 Change programme and this success is now being taken forward into a new partnership with the launch of the Raising the Bars initiative. The thinking behind Raising the Bars stems from a recognition that so-called joined-up services for prisoner rehabilitation are not producing consistent and convincing end results, with a subsequent heavy financial and societal cost. Emma Morris, Managing Director of Beyond Youth, felt that much more could be done – and quickly. “Specific initiatives from the Government to address all the areas associated with prisoner rehabilitation are always to be welcomed but we strongly believed that more could be done by linking up two existing and highly successful partners in their respective fields.” Beyond Youth spoke to 200 potential users in custody in 2012 to assess the need for this type of approach and the response was overwhelmingly positive. Of those questioned, 100% said that this type of project would be their best chance of breaking the cycle of offending, while 96% said that their needs in these areas were not currently being met either in prison or on release. Furthermore, 88% said that they had no confidence in the agencies they currently had access to. Consultations with bodies including the London Probation Trust, Shelter and local housing providers also confirmed that there was a clear gap in services that could be filled with a structured initiative that provided an intensive level of support. The result is Raising the Bars in which Beyond Youth is working with leading social housing provider Home Connections to address the core areas of behavioural difficulties, housing and job opportunities that are linked to reoffending. The initiative, funded by The Big the Custodial Review

Lottery Fund for two years, was launched in May 2013 and pilot projects are about to get underway at HMP Wayland in Thetford, Norfolk and HMP East Sutton Park in Maidstone, Kent. Chance 2 Change The initial element of Raising the Bars is Beyond Youth’s group-based intervention programme Chance 2 Change, which has already led to a non-reoffending rate of around 74% amongst participants in prisons and Young Offender Institutions. Chance 2 Change is an eight-session programme that uses the principles of Cognitive Behavioural Therapy to tackle the root causes of offending and antisocial behaviour, based on the central premise that offending is an addiction and that negative behaviours can be challenged and replaced with new and positive beliefs. The key criteria for involvement is a willingness to attend and as far as Emma Morris, who devised Chance 2 Change, is aware, it is also the only programme in prisons in which the content is led by the participants and not by staff. “From our own research and knowledge of other programmes, what makes Chance 2 Change different is that it is the only intervention that is not focused around the actual offence committed. Our unique approach starts with the psychological shift that is essential, but often overlooked, in order for any offender to maintain a crime-free life post-release. When you add this to the fact that the content of sessions is developed by those taking part, it becomes a very powerful means of addressing the underlying emotional causes of offending.” Those who show enthusiasm and potential Page 20

Housing With a 12-year history of being the market leader in its field, Home Connections is ideally positioned to partner Beyond Youth in a joint approach to providing housing solutions for those coming out of prison. They have secured a pan-London tender to deliver contracts to all boroughs and 300 housing associations and so will be able to assist and work with prisoners returning to the community in many areas. Arranging and maintaining a stable home environment is one of the most important factors in successful long-term prisoner rehabilitation and Raising the Bars is aiming to provide a continuity of care in this aspect that sets the standard for others to emulate. “All too often, housing for those coming out of prison is left to family and friends and as is well-recognised, this means that there is an alarming rate of homelessness and street sleepers in this group,” said Emma Morris. “Home Connections is the ideal partner for us because they pride themselves on being the preferred choice for housing associations and have a pioneering culture that enables them to deliver a breadth of housing solutions across different areas. I am confident that they will help us to identify accommodation options to provide participants with a secure base so that they can then be in a position to maintain jobs successfully.” Employment and Evaluation The final element in Raising the Bars involves finding employment opportunities, an area in which Beyond Youth already has significant experience. A number of other organisations will also be involved, including Start Up Now, Bright Ideas Trust and Women’s Wisdom for those who are looking to start up their own business. REDS10, A Fairer Chance and Good People will also assist in locating a range of employment and training options. Raising the Bars is underpinned by a comprehensive evaluation system that will assess every aspect, with the aim of gathering robust evidence that will lead to a sustainable programme beyond the two-year pilot project. As for the future, Emma Morris is confident that Raising the Bars will deliver real and lasting results. “This approach will give participants the best chance to lead law-abiding and fulfilling lives in the community which will benefit not just them, but society as a whole.” For more information visit www.raisingthebars.org.uk

Page 21

the Custodial Review

HMP Lewes wins the prestigious award ‘Prison Library of the year’ Rachel Sweeny has been the Librarian at HMP Lewes since 2010, she arrived in the post somewhat by chance after obtaining a degree in English and History at Sussex University during which she decided that a career as a Librarian appealed to her. Openings in that sphere are few and far between and as the qualification to become a Librarian is to hold a Masters in information studies, she studied and achieved this at Brighton University during which time she also worked in a public library. After she qualified, the post of Librarian at HMP Lewes came up, an application was made and she was successful.

CR You and the library received an award, what was it and why did you get it? RS The library received one last year, it was from The Chartered Institute of Library Information Professionals, it’s awarded by the Prison Library group and it was for becoming the Prison Library of the Year. We received it because we always try to go the extra distance, we don’t ever think that we have done enough and are always looking for something else that can help our users engage with what we have to offer. To this end we have set up reading groups on wings that cannot get to the Library, like the vulnerable groups, we also hosted a career day here in the Library as there are always benefits to working with other departments in the prison. We devoted a whole day to it and had 40 inmates attend, we had external speakers, including ex-offenders who spoke on what they have been able to do since leaving and the problems they have overcome. We also had staff from this prison talking on what advice and support there is available within the prison. Another contributory factor is the Family Time programme we ran, this is an extension of Story Book Dads, I the Custodial Review

got the inspiration for it from a conference I attended, it’s a book making project. The prisoners make personalised books that are then sent to their children. I managed to get funding for this and the first course lasted 8 weeks. During this time we incorporated a variety of different themes, one was to write a poem, to enable this I bought in a creative writing tutor who worked with the prisoners on writing poetry. Another aspect of the course was to write a children’s story. Children’s librarians attended one of the sessions to discuss children’s books and talk about how stories can be shared with children. On another occasion a teacher visited and told the dads what a day in school is like. This is so fathers can relate to their children’s experience of school even though they are not there on a day to day basis to hear about it in person. Another teacher spoke of how to play with children, why a child plays and what a child sees and learns when they are playing. All of this experience was used by the dads to create the books. It became a very personal message from the parent to the child and helped to foster and maintain the better family links. As well as improve the quality of the prisoner’s appreciation of literature. I feel all of these contributed to being awarded the prize. CR Pressure is on public spending so I’d like to know what you do as this is not a large facility, and public libraries have huge amounts of books and thousands of members, the Prison library here is limited to 750 ‘members’ at the most and it’s not a huge room that its housed in. So what does your job involve that makes it almost full time? RS We have about five thousand books here, and the room is what you see. I worked full time from September 2010 to Sept 2012 Page 22

and now work part time whilst doing another library role as well. There is another librarian who works the other two days, as well as a full time and a part time library assistant so between us we keep the Library open all week. We provide the space for prisoners to read and study, also to read and research for recreational purposes. What is different from the role in public libraries is that we have also become involved with several other aspects in prison work, one of them being improving literacy. It’s one of the reasons I wanted this job as it is a huge problem in all prisons. The average reading age in prisons is about nine and the Library has a great opportunity to try to improve this. CR You almost need to create your own clientele from scratch! So how do you go about it and how many prisoners actually use the library? RS About 30-40% of the prison population now use the facility and we are driving that number up with a range of projects that includes a programme run by a charity called Toe by Toe. It’s a mentoring system where we train prisoners with a fairly good standard of reading to work with prisoners whose reading is poor. We also run a weekly reading group that encourages all levels of reading and this has proved particularly popular. Finding those people who would be interested, if sufficiently attracted to what we offer, is part of the issue, if they are not engaging in any activity then it’s more difficult for us to engage with them. As we are a local prison, and the average stay is about 8 weeks, we do not have a lot of time to encourage the less inclined ones who are probably the ones who would most benefit so we have to be very proactive, that is a big part of the job. CR How do you go about attracting the less

The study area

inclined reader and the short term prisoner? RS We go out to them! We do this by putting books in the first night centre; we also go out the segregation unit and the healthcare wing that do not have the access many of the other prisoners do. It gives us a chance to interact with them at a very early stage and at a time when they may be glad of something that can engage there imagination. CR How are you funded, who runs the library service here and how has it changed since you joined? How did you decide what books and materials to choose? RS We do an annual survey, asking the prisoners what they would like to read, what equipment they would like to have available and what sort of surroundings they would like to have. Poetry is in demand, especially love poems. We are also able to borrow books from other East Sussex Libraries if we do not have it here. This is a really beneficial part of the service we offer as nearly all prisoner book requests can be satisfied. CR On the ‘outside’ the popularity of electronic media is gaining ground very fast. Kindle book readers are really starting to make significant inroads into paper publishing and many latest novels are only published in electronic format. Do you see this being addressed within the prison library system? RS I cannot see how that would be possible anytime in the near future as any form of personal computer or reader is simply not allowed. From another point of

view it’s very advantageous within a prison that the prisoners come to one central area to collect and browse books as it gives an opportunity to interact with them and advise them on what books they might enjoy. One of the great things about this job is that the prisoners come in here just to be somewhere different, they might come to use one of the computers we have here for correspondence or coursework, or perhaps they are waiting to go into an education class. This gives us the opportunity to get them to pick up a book; so we use displays, or a more direct approach to achieve this. We may approach them and suggest a particular type of book or a specific author, by engaging them in direct conversation we can find out what they like, if they have a reading issue or just need getting over the problem of what book to choose! So in many ways an electronic library would be counterproductive to us.

thinking approach you have, what do you have planned for the future?

CR With regards to the computers, is there any internet or intranet available on them to assist with studying?

ES We have ‘Free Flow’ here, that enables greater use of the facility than in prisons who do not operate it so we do get people able to just walk in here and browse. However I think it was the ability to run the courses that really made the difference, the Family Time courses make such a difference to the prisoners who use them and it has a real effect on keeping families in touch with one another. It’s really encouraging when a prisoner who cannot read takes part in Toe by Toe, then comes to the reading group and reads aloud. It’s a fantastic feeling to be able to help that happen.

ES We do not have any access to the internet however the machines are networked and the prison is being equipped with Virtual Campus in the near future and we will have access to that resource sometime soon. It will have CV building tools, information about jobs and education resources. CR You do not seem like the sort of person who lets the grass grow under your feet, you won this award because of the forward Page 23

ES I want to progress with the career days we hold here. The prison is setting up a centre of excellence for business and we are involved in that project too. We will be the main hub for the project and we are going to be stocking a lot of good books that cover business issues. I want to expand the reading group into more areas, there isn’t any coverage in healthcare at present and I wish to do something about that. Areas like that present a specific challenge as some of them they cannot get to the Library to choose books, so we have to spend time with them and make recommendations based on their interests. We have specific opening times for vulnerable groups. CR Is there a particular prison policy that has helped you develop the library and its greater use by the prisoners that enabled you to win the award?

CR Thank you for talking to the Review. the Custodial Review

The Cascade Foundation

The cascade foundation launched a new approach to supporting and educating prisoners and others with dyslexia and other learning difficulties. Sec of State for Justice Rt Hon Chris Grayling MP launched this exciting new charity in the Jubilee Room, at the House of Commons on 5th June.

reduction in the re-offending rate amongst participants to 5.9% (compared to about 70% nationally) a drop in the number of assaults in that prison to a third of its previous rate. The research shows that

•

53% of prison inmates have dyslexia and the percentage rises with the inclusion of other related learning difficulties.

•

17% of prisoners have suffered traumatic head injuries which have left them with learning difficulties (compared to between 1% and 2% of the general public)

•

72% of the prison population of England and Wales leave prison without being able to read or write sufficiently well to cope with basic daily life

•

Approximately 70% of prisoners nationally reoffend within 4 years of their release (50% within 12 months)

The pilot project in Chelmsford prison entitled ‘Dyslexia Behind Bars’ (2006-2008)

Jackie Hewitt-Main and Sir David Ramsbotham,

•

reduced the reoffending rate of participants to just 5.9% ,

•

reduced the assault rates in the prison to a third

•

and achieved considerably higher rates of literacy amongst those participants by the end of the pilot.

The event was hosted jointly by Lord Addington, Rebecca Harris MP and Jackie Hewitt-Main, founder of The Cascade Foundation and director of the ‘Dyslexia Behind Bars’ project.

“I used to be a proper rogue, but now I’m turning.” After more than 40 previous prison sentences, 37-year old Tony completed Jackie’s programme and has not re-offended since his release 6 years ago.

Jackie Hewitt-Main’s innovative project ‘Dyslexia Behind Bars’ resulted in a dramatic

The Cascade Foundation, with the support of The Manchester College, Doncaster Prison,

the Custodial Review

Page 24

Jackie Hewitt-Main and Lord Addington

Serco, government and other agencies is now about to extend its reach across the nation’s prisons, which will reduce the crimerate, save the country billions of pounds and transform the lives of thousands of prisoners and their families. This was the dual launch of the new charity The Cascade Foundation and also its founder Jackie Hewitt-Main’s new book, ‘Transforming Prisoners’ Lives’, told through the prisoner’s own harrowing stories it records the development and success of the project. Some of these ex-prisoners were at the launch event, along with former prison officers, a probation officer, senior police officers, prison education directors, Trustees and Patrons of The Cascade Foundation, Lords, Baronesses, MPs a barrister and other key individuals.

Transforming Rehabilitation: assessing the impact on the workforce The Government has issued a series of proposals to transform the rehabilitation of adult offenders in the community and help drive down reoffending rates.

service which can help offenders overcome the barriers that prevent them from turning their lives around. However, these proposals will not just affect offenders, they will have serious implications for practitioners working within the existing probation structure and employed in the delivery of rehabilitation services more widely. What will change?

Currently, statistics show that many people who go through the justice system go back to their old ways within months of being released from prison. Figures for adult offenders convicted or released from custody in the year to December 2010 show that 57.6% of prisoners who served under 12 months reoffended within a year and 35.9% of prisoners sentenced to 12 months or more reoffended within 12 months. The implications of reoffending are significant, not only for the offenders who find themselves trapped in a cycle of crime, and of course for the victims of their crimes, but also for the public purse, with the National Audit Office estimating that the cost of reoffending by those serving short term sentences is between £9.5 billion and £13 billion. In order to address these issues, a fresh approach to rehabilitation has been outlined in the Government consultation paper Transforming Rehabilitation, which outlines a number of proposals aimed at developing a the Custodial Review

One of the biggest changes suggested within the Transforming Rehabilitation proposals is that a more comprehensive provision of supervision and rehabilitation will be put in place for those leaving prison having served less than 12 months. Currently it is the medium and high risk offenders that receive the more intensive service. This new supervision, as part of roughly 70% of the National Offender Management Service’s existing probation work, will be privatised, with contracts opened up to competition and awarded to new providers who can demonstrate the ability to deliver services in an innovative, efficient and cost effective manner. Contracts will be awarded on the basis of broadening the ‘payment by results’ model designed to incentivise providers, and learn from the pilots such as the ‘through the gate’ example in South Yorkshire. In addition, management of these contracts will be centralised, with a number of regional contract package areas informing the commissioning process. The existing Probation Service will remain responsible for assessing risk, writing sentence recommendations and determining breach Page 26

for all offenders but will directly manage only those offenders deemed to be a high risk, with medium and low-risk individuals falling under the remit of private contractors. How will this affect probation workers? Obviously these changes will have a huge impact on practitioners across the workforce, both existing and those considering starting a career within the sector, and a number of organisations have already expressed concerns. One potential problem identified is that existing Probation Officers could become de-skilled as they only work hands-on with high risk offenders, and over time may lose the wider skills set developed through their current broader remit. Concerns have been expressed that this development could potentially compromise their ability to effectively assess risk, which remains a major function of the role within the model proposed. For people wishing to enter the probation service in the future, they could have issues moving between the private and public sector as they may not have ready access to the breadth of work based learning opportunities required to amass experience with high, medium and low risk offenders in the same way that existing workers do, meaning their future career opportunities could be limited. An additional issue that will need to be considered and addressed by providers is how they ensure they develop and maintain a competent workforce able to provide a high quality and safe service. Currently, all Probation staff are able to develop and train whilst working within the public sector Trusts, enabling them to experience a variety of

roles at different levels and work in a mix of different environments. This facilitates the development of a solid skills base upon which to make critical decisions as to the way offenders are managed. Currently this ‘on the job’ competence and experience is captured within a robust and recognised qualification pathway for practitioners which enables them to gain both vocational and academic recognition. With the splitting up of probation and rehabilitation services comes the challenge of creating a competent workforce with recognised skills and knowledge across a mixed economy of competing providers. Providers and the Government will be looking for innovative and effective ways of delivering services but it remains to be seen how the new providers will choose to train and develop a high quality workforce whilst remaining competitive. Similarly it is unknown at this stage how a consistent model of facilitating the talent pipeline across a diverse range of employers, able to manage risk at all levels, can be established through a competition in which providers will be developing a range of

innovative approaches to workforce planning and development. What steps need to be taken? While these issues are likely to be an understandable cause for concern for current Probation workers, they are not insurmountable and a number of possible solutions have already been proposed. We are also seeing that all providers share a common interest in establishing a consistent approach to standards of competence in practice and quality of delivery. For example, a number of commentators have suggested the creation of a professional institute for the probation ‘profession’ or a similar central body which can oversee the training and professional development of both public and private sector workers. Such a body could also promote careers within the profession and possibly act as a hub for research and a centre of excellence. Other possible developments and a real opportunity for all employers and those successful in securing contracts for service

provision, include the creation of collaborative partnerships between the Probation Service and private providers around the training and development of probation practitioners, perhaps through the use of sponsored secondments or work placements. Such arrangements could help ensure the secure pipeline of future talent that will be needed to deliver professional high quality services for the protection of the public and rehabilitation of offenders. Skills for Justice is working with the National Offender Management Service, Ministry of Justice and a range of other employers and stakeholders to discuss the possible scenarios and identify options that can best support the new structures and relationships that will be created. Their aim is to ensure that all employers, practitioners and professionals have access to efficient, effective and high quality development opportunities and are equipped with the requisite knowledge and skills to allow them to be recognised as delivering excellent services to the highest standard.

La Moye, Jersey: A safe and well-led prison La Moye prison had been transformed, both physically and in terms of improved practice, said Nick Hardwick, Chief Inspector of Prisons, publishing a report on an inspection of the Jersey prison. La Moye prison was previously inspected by HM Inspectorate of Prisons in 2005. This 2013 inspection was at the initiation and invitation of the Jersey authorities. The prison faces the continuing and considerable challenge of providing the full range of custodial services for men, women and young people in one location.

locked in their cells during the working day;

•

prisoners had sentence plans and the prison had good links with community services, such as probation; and

•

reintegration planning was generally very good.

However, inspectors were also concerned to find that:

Nick Hardwick, Chief Inspector of Prisons

•

although rare, it was possible for detainees under the age of 18 to be held in La Moye which fell well short of accepted practice and standards prevalent in the UK;

While women prisoners were well cared for, services could be improved by a more active consideration of their specific needs in custody.

•

the segregation unit was a poor facility and some aspects of its practice needed to be more accountable;

•

there were comparatively few incidents of self-harm but some practice, such as care planning, needed to improve; and

•

some security practices were disproportionate.

‘Overall this is a very good report. La Moye is well led, and outcomes for prisoners were reasonably good or better in all our tests of a healthy prison. The prison was far better organised than we found when we last visited, and the stability of the institution was clearly evident. If criticism is to be made, it is that the prison had adopted a quite paternalistic approach to prisoner care, although we clearly discerned a platform from which it could further progress. A more developed and considered engagement with the needs of minorities – not least young people and women prisoners – should be high on the list of new priorities.’

Inspectors were pleased to find that:

•

all categories of prisoners, including women and young adults, reported positively about feeling safe, and the number of violent incidents recorded was low;

•

most of the accommodation was new and of a very high standard;

•

the excellent quality of staff-prisoner relationships was a key strength, and could be developed further;

•

the quality and range of learning and skills provision were very good and the quality of teaching was impressive;

•

most prisoners had very good access to time unlocked, although a fifth were still

Inspectors also felt that there were significant disadvantages in keeping separate the very few young adults held in La Moye. Integrating them with the rest of the population would limit their relative isolation and improve their access to the regime and other services. Page 27

Nick Hardwick said

the Custodial Review

NEWS

Morton Hall Immigration Removal Centre - Safe and effective Morton Hall was a safe establishment which supported the detainees it held, said Nick Hardwick, Chief Inspector of Prisons, publishing the report of an announced inspection of the immigration removal centre (IRC) in Lincolnshire. Morton Hall served as a women’s prison for many years, and latterly held a high proportion of foreign national women. In May 2011 the prison was re-roled as an immigration removal centre. At the time of the inspection it held 362 adult men. The transition was not easy and a series of incidents culminated in an act of concerted indiscipline at Christmas in 2012. However, this inspection found an impressive establishment that was safe, calm and positive. Inspectors were pleased to find that:

•

physical security had been upgraded proportionately following the previous incidents;

•

staff-detainee relationships were very good;

HMYOI Ashfield - work needed to prevent further deterioration There were high levels of violence at HMYOI Ashfield, and more work was needed to prepare young people for release or transfer as the prison re-roled, said Nick Hardwick, Chief Inspector of Prisons. Today he published a report on an unannounced inspection of the young offender institution (YOI) near Bristol. In January 2013, the Justice Secretary announced plans to close HMYOI Ashfield and re-role it as an adult prison. The inspectorate decided to proceed with their planned inspection in February 2013 to ensure that the young people who continued to be held there were held safely and decently during the transition and that plans to ensure their move to another establishment or release were well managed. At the time of inspection, Ashfield was just one-third full and held 123 young people, most aged 16 or 17. Detailed feedback was given to the establishment immediately after the inspection. Inspectors were concerned to find that:

•

despite the reduction in numbers held, there had been a sharp increase in self-harm incidents since the closure announcement;

the Custodial Review

•

NEWS

detainees said they felt safe, the number of violent incidents was low and there was effective care and support for detainees at risk of suicide and self-harm;

•

‘Rule 35’ reports, which assess fitness for detention of detainees with special illnesses, or those who have experienced torture, were of good quality and had led to the appropriate release of some men;

•

a community agency, Children’s Links, provided good support to meet detainees’ welfare needs and dealt with some complex cases;

•

there was a good communications centre where detainees could use the internet and email and maintain contact with families and friends, although they could not use Skype or social networking sites; and

•

the range of activities was good and facilities had been imaginatively adapted to meet the needs of the new population.

However some practices were inappropriate for an establishment where people were not held because they have been charged with a criminal offence. Detainees were locked in their rooms at 8.30 in the evening, staff carried batons inappropriately and all

•

the number of formal disciplinary proceedings was high, and fights and assaults accounted for two-thirds of the charges laid;

•

levels of violence were high and staff said there had been an increase in the overall number of violent incidents since the closure announcement;

•

use of force by staff was also high in 2012 and two young people had suffered broken bones following staff use of force;

•

young people were routinely stripsearched when they entered or left reception;

•

there was a lack of effective joint strategic planning between the Youth Justice Board (YJB) and Ashfield; and

•

poor communication between the interested parties was causing confusion and agitation.

However, inspectors were pleased to find that:

•

despite the levels of violence, young people did not say they did not feel safe;

•

the segregation unit had closed since the last inspection;

•

there were some good systems to address the particularly poor behaviour of some young people;

•

the environment was reasonable and

Page 28

NEWS

detainees were handcuffed if they had to be taken out of the centre. Inspectors were also concerned that:

•

what caused most anxiety and stress for detainees was concern about their immigration status and potential removal and some people had been held for very long periods – one for almost three years; and we were told detention was justified in some cases because there was a high risk the detainee would reoffend if released, but there was nothing detainees could do, as they could have done in a prison, to demonstrate their risk of reoffending had reduced.

Nick Hardwick said: “Good relationships, support to help detainees resolve their practical worries, and enough useful activity combined to create a safe and effective establishment. Staff at Morton Hall are to be commended on the way they have managed the transition from the prison’s old role and overcome initial difficulties with determination and skill. The inspection identified some areas where improvement is required but Morton Hall now has very strong foundations on which to build.”

young people could have telephones in their cells;

•

relationships between staff and young people were good, and staff put their own anxieties about the change aside and did not let this affect their dealings with the young people; and

•

young people had good access to education and training, but it was increasingly difficult to motivate the young people and a concern that provision for those transferring elsewhere would not be linked to the work they had done at Ashfield

Nick Hardwick said: ‘We have reported our concern about high levels of violence at a number of recent inspections of YOIs holding children and young people. At Ashfield too, young people’s safety was compromised because they were exposed to unacceptable levels of violence – and there is some evidence the situation has deteriorated since the closure decision was announced. Planning for the closure was not effectively coordinated between the YJB and Ashfield, and the needs of individual young people were not carefully considered. The anxiety and uncertainty this created may well have contributed to the tension at the establishment. It certainly means that young people were not being adequately prepared for transfer or release.’

NEWS

HMP Drake Hall was a well led prison which continued to improve, said Nick Hardwick, Chief Inspector of Prisons, publishing the report of an announced inspection of the women’s prison in Staffordshire.

•

most accommodation was of a reasonable quality and women had good access to the grounds;

•

staff-prisoner relationships were mostly good;

HMP Drake Hall was last inspected in 2010 when inspectors described it as an improved institution providing reasonably good or better outcomes for women. This more recent inspection describes a similar picture with good or reasonably good outcomes for prisoners across inspectors’ four healthy prison tests: safety, respect, purposeful activity and resettlement.

•

women were unlocked all day and there was sufficient activity for all;

•

learning and skills provision was developing and there was a useful range of vocational training; and

•

the prison had a good resettlement strategy with clear objectives and there had been some early attempts to measure the success of resettlement outcomes in the community.

Inspectors were pleased to find that: most women said they felt safe and arrangements to support new arrivals were effective;

•

most safety indicators, such as levels of violence, use of force and proportionality of security measures were consistent with a safe prison;

•

although levels of self-harm were high, women in crisis received good quality care;

Findings from Inspection of HMP/ YOI Lewes HMP/YOI Lewes was a generally safe and decent prison but needed more meaningful work and training for prisoners, said Nick Hardwick, Chief Inspector of Prisons, publishing the report of an unannounced inspection of the Sussex local jail. HMP/YOI Lewes provides a mixture of traditional and more modern accommodation and has grown in recent years, now holding up to 742 men. The population is mixed with a significant number of unconvicted prisoners, a small number of young adults and some vulnerable prisoners. At its last inspection in 2010, inspectors described the prison as in transition, but commendably safe and improved. This full unannounced inspection found an establishment that continues to produce reasonably good outcomes against most healthy prison tests, although previous concerns on the quality of activity and regime remain. Inspectors were pleased to find that

•

Lewes was a generally safe prison, although three prisoners had tragically taken their own lives since the last inspection;

NEWS

Nick Hardwick, Chief Inspector of Prisons

HMP Drake Hall – a safe, effective and wellled prison

•

However, inspectors were concerned to find that:

•

both the segregation unit and the gated observation cell required relocation or refurbishment;

•

the utility rooms were in a surprisingly poor condition; and

•

recorded incidents of self-harm were low and self-harm prevention measures seemed adequate, although some aspects required attention; the prison environment was reasonably good and the quality of staff-prisoner relationships continued to be a strength;# the provision of health care was good; and outcomes for resettlement were reasonably good and had the potential to be impressive. Structures for offender management and reintegration were complex, developing and new and needed to be embedded further.

• • •

However, inspectors had some concerns:

• • • • •

time out of cell was limited, and inspectors found just under two-fifths of the population locked up during the working part of the day; teaching needed improvement and there was too little vocational training, while much of the work on offer was mundane; induction arrangements could be better and the management of vulnerable prisoners on arrival could be improved; substance misuse and detoxification arrangements required better coordination; and provision across the resettlement

Page 29

NEWS Michael Spurr,

• a Chief

Executive Officer of NOMS

few more negative staff had a disproportionate impact on women’s perceptions and some expressed negative views about low-level victimisation. Nick Hardwick said: ‘This is a good report. Drake Hall was well led by the governor and we sensed that managers had an energy and commitment focused on continuous improvement. Women were treated well and we had confidence that improvements could not only be sustained but built upon.’ Michael Spurr, Chief Executive Officer of the National Offender Management Service (NOMS), said: ‘I am pleased that the Chief Inspector reports that Drake Hall is generally performing well and is providing a respectful and safe environment for the women it holds.’ ‘The progress in delivering education, purposeful activity and learning and skills opportunities is particularly positive and the Governor and his team will build on this and take forward recommendations from the report.’

pathways was reasonable, but more was needed to address the offending behaviour of the sex offender population. Nick Hardwick said: ‘Overall this is a good report. The progress we identified previously has been sustained, and the prison’s strengths, notably the safe and decent environment, continue. Work is in place to strengthen the prison’s approach to resettlement further, although the lack of progress in getting prisoners in to meaningful work is disappointing.’ Michael Spurr, Chief Executive Officer of the National Offender Management Service (NOMS), said: ‘I am pleased that the Chief Inspector recognises the progress that has been made at Lewes and the respectful and safe environment it provides for the prisoners it holds. The report also notes the improvements to resettlement work, which helps to reduce re-offending and protect the public although more needs to be done for the potential of that work to be fully realised. ‘The Governor and his staff are working to further improve performance particularly with regard to purposeful activity as highlighted in the report.’

the Custodial Review

NEWS

IPCC investigating ‘near miss’ at Medway custody suite The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) is investigating a ‘near miss’ at Medway custody suite. Kent Police has informed the IPCC that on 11 July 2013, two officers were called to attend an address where a 40-year-old man was believed to have taken a suspected overdose. Paramedics also attended the property and provided medical treatment. The man refused to be taken to hospital and following inquiries by the officers, the man was arrested for offences reported earlier that day and was taken into custody. The IPCC has been told that on his arrival at Medway custody suite at 5.10pm the custody sergeant was informed that the man had taken a suspected overdose and had mental health issues. The man was placed in a cell and, according to police records, he was later found to have tied a t-shirt around his neck, blue in the face and not breathing. The t-shirt was removed and the IPCC understands he was later taken to Medway Hospital where he was declared fit for detention and interview and was returned to custody. On 12 July, the man was interviewed, charged and released on bail at 4.25pm. On 13 July following reports of concern for his welfare, the IPCC has been told that officers attended at his home and found the man unwell. He was taken to hospital by ambulance and has since been released from the intensive care unit to a separate ward where he remains as a voluntary patient on a mental health ward.

NEWS

To apply for your free copy of the Custodial Review, please fill in the relevant information and fax back on: 01234 352737 or visit: www.custodialreview.co.uk/crsubscribe Your details Name:.............................................................................................

Job Title:.........................................................................................

Establishment:...............................................................................

........................................................................................................

Kent Police referred the matter on 15 July and the IPCC determined that it will independently investigate. IPCC Commissioner Mary Cunneen said: “IPCC investigators have met with the man to explain our role and outline the investigation which is examining the decision to convey him to police custody rather than hospital after the initial arrest and the care he received at Medway custody suite. “This will focus on the actions taken and decisions made by the arresting officers and custody staff in their dealings with the man and the circumstances of his release and the pre-release risk assessment. “Actions and decisions taken in relation to the man’s mental health and the disclosure of a prior overdose are also being examined.

Address:.........................................................................................

........................................................................................................

“The IPCC is also considering whether Kent Police’s policies and procedures in relation to policing mental health, detention in custody and any other relevant procedures were followed.” Kent Police referred the matter two days after the man was taken to hospital and this delay also forms part of the investigation.

........................................................................................................

PRODUCT SHOWCASE

Postcode:.......................................................................................

New anti ligature and easy clean heating system for secure applications New from UK manufacturers DiscreteHeat, is a high security version of their popular ThermaSkirt radiant skirting heating. Developed from their NHS & Healthcare version, the new ‘EasyClean LST’ incorporates an antitamper mounting system that integrates the skirting heating panel into the vinyl floor and walls for a completely sealed, hygienic and anti-ligature solution. With proven high energy efficiency, combining the skirting and heating in one also saves capital cost and installation time as well as maximising useable space. Available in single height for small rooms and double height for larger spaces, ThermaSkirt is available in a choice of colours.

Telephone:.....................................................................................

Email:.............................................................................................. Custodial Review is FREE to qualifying individuals TEL : 01234 348878 FAX : 01223 790191 www.custodialreview.co.uk/crsubscribe

For more information T 01942 88 00 66, visit www.discreteheat.co.uk or email martin@discreteheat.co.uk

the Custodial Review

Page 30