« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
HM INSPECTORATE OF PRISONS
Report on HM Prison Glenochil
3. CUSTODY AND GOOD ORDER
Security and Safety
3.1 During the past 12 months there have been no escapes. The security audit carried out in June 2003 highlighted several areas where action was necessary. In response to the report Glenochil produced a security audit action plan. At the time of inspection all critical issues had been addressed. Contingency Plans are updated on a regular basis and are comprehensive and designed for the establishment. The control of drugs entering the prison is reflected by the low positive rate returned under the Mandatory Drug Testing Scheme.
3.2 During the past 12 months there had been two serious prisoner-on-prisoner assaults (against a KPI target of eight) and two serious assaults by prisoners on staff (against a KPI target of two). Within this period there had been 11 minor prisoner-on-prisoner assaults and 12 minor prisoner-on-staff assaults. There had been no deaths in custody during this period.
3.3 Prisoners complained about the practice of searching them at random on their return from work/activity. The complaint was that such searches were conducted in public. The Inspectorate observed random searches on an unannounced basis and concluded that the searches were conducted correctly.
3.4 Glenochil has an Anti-Bullying Strategy in place. The strategy has been well publicised to prisoners, visitors and staff and a range of information is displayed around the prison. There is also a direct-dial, confidential access answering machine, which allows prisoners to report any acts of bullying and intimidation. An anti-bullying strategy officer, who oversees the implementation and audits the results of this policy, has been appointed.
3.5 Prisoners raised no concerns about their personal safety within the prison.
Segregation Unit
3.6 The current Segregation Unit, ('E' Hall), is in need of refurbishment and redecoration. Only basic maintenance and cleaning is being carried out because SPS plan to construct a new Unit. At the time of inspection six prisoners were held within the unit, five of whom had been transferred from other establishments for various reasons. All six prisoners were interviewed by the inspection team and all made comment about the internal appearance of the Unit and the poor conditions of the showers. They all stated that relationships with staff in the Unit were good.
Orderly Room
3.7 Three Orderly Room proceedings were observed. The proceedings were carried out appropriately and according to the SPS guidelines. Correct documentation, record keeping and adherence to recognised practice were evident.
3.8 The room used as an Orderly Room is the office in the Segregation Unit. The office is small and contains an "L" shaped desk. There is very little floor space. The adjudicating manager sits at the horizontal leg of the desk, the clerk sits to the right, and immediately to the left and right in front of the adjudicator sit two officers, both facing the prisoner. The prisoner entering the room is faced by these two officers and is escorted by the supervising officer. Given the size of the room this appears, and no doubt could be, intimidating. Unlike common practice in SPS, the officers face the prisoner throughout the proceedings rather than sitting behind him and outwith his vision.
3.9 Prisoners alleged that the Orderly Room was somewhere they went to be found guilty. To test this allegation, the proceedings of the previous two months were examined. Of 235 instances where an Orderly Room appearance reached a conclusion, only eight cases were dismissed. This figure appears low. Further analysis shows that of the Orderly Room appearances in this period, only 27 pleas of "not guilty" were entered and that of these, seven were dismissed (i.e. approximately 25% of those pleading not guilty were effectively found to be not guilty). Issues around the Orderly Room were discussed with local management. Local management should review the arrangements for, and operation of, the Orderly Room.
Prisoner Complaints Procedure
3.10 There were 1306 returns for prisoner complaints for the period May 2002 - March 2003. The figure for the period April 2003 - August 2003 was 462. The majority of complaints were listed under "others", e.g. not allowed play stations, price of items in the canteen. Other areas complained about were property, award of supervision category, and food.
3.11 CP1 forms are issued in the Halls. The establishment operates a system of asking the prisoner what his complaint is to try and resolve the problem at the earliest stage. If the prisoner does not wish to discuss his problem the form is then issued. All other CP forms are issued without question.
3.12 The Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) is headed by a Unit Manager who is solely responsible for that task, with the rest of the panel being drawn across the multi-disciplinary field. Since April 2003 the ICC have heard 114 cases brought to them: 21 of these cases were upheld.
Night Duty
3.13 The establishment has a team of staff dedicated to carrying out patrols throughout the night. This has led to focused training and an increase in confidence and competence.
3.14 When a prisoner is required to leave the establishment under escort during the night, the night shift is reduced by three and although this happens very rarely it might be worthwhile having in place a backup contingency.
3.15 A member of the health centre staff is part of the night shift team. It appears that most of the nurse practitioner's time is taken up by administrative work during this period. Sometimes they may need to see a prisoner who presents with a medical problem but this is a fairly rare occurrence. The time taken covering a full time night shift nursing post is almost equivalent to two full time day shift posts.
Relationships
3.16 In general, relationships were relaxed, with first name terms being the norm. Prisoners were treated with decency and dignity. The 2003 Prisoner Survey also reports positive relationships: 90% of prisoners said that they get on OK, quite well or very well with Officers.
3.17 However, in discussions with groups and individual prisoners it was reported that some staff could be "petty" and that prisoners never got the benefit of the doubt over an issue. The prison has a culture of control, but the rationale for these levels of control is clearly to protect prisoners rather than to subjugate them. It creates a safe environment and in many ways makes life easier for those who want to do their sentence without fear of intimidation from other prisoners or exposure to drug related activities.
« Previous | Contents | Next »