| Description | Follow up inpsection of HMP Peterhead |
|---|
| ISBN | (Web Only) |
|---|
| Official Print Publication Date | |
|---|
| Website Publication Date | July 20, 2005 |
|---|
Listen
LAST INSPECTION 21-22
JANUARY 2004
ISBN
0 7559 2599 8
This document is also available in
pdf format (243k)
CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION
2. PREAMBLE
3. KEY ISSUES AND NEW
DEVELOPMENTS
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 The visit to HMP Peterhead was made as part of a
programme to visit every prison each year in which a full
inspection is not being made. In the course of such visits
the purpose is to follow up points of note from previous
inspections, to examine any significant changes, and to
explore issues arising from the establishment's own
assessment of itself. It should not be seen as an attempt
to inspect the whole life of the establishment.
1.2 The Inspection Team comprised:
Andrew McLellan HMCIP
Rod MacCowan HMDCIP
David McAllister HMACIP

ANDREW R C McLELLAN
HM CHIEF INSPECTOR OF PRISONS
May 2005
2. PREAMBLE
2.1 The installation of electric power in all the cells
at Peterhead is now complete. This marks a significant
improvement in the conditions for prisoners. They now have
access to kettles and to television sets. This installation
has been long awaited and it is welcome. There is now no
prison in Scotland with no electric power in any cell.
2.2 Slopping out, however, remains. Every report on
Peterhead criticizes slopping out: but still it remains.
Slopping out can never be anything other than disgraceful:
it is, however, less bad this year in Peterhead than it has
been. No longer are prisoners sharing cells in Peterhead:
and this does make slopping out less disgraceful than
before. But the conditions in which prisoners live in
Peterhead will never be decent while slopping out
continues.
2.3 There is now a very small number of prisoners in
Peterhead who live in very good conditions. The re-opening
of the old Peterhead Unit in the form of a local 'top-end'
provides for 10 prisoners to have access to proper toilet
facilities, to live in well-appointed cells, and to have a
measure of freedom and responsibility within the unit. In
terms of preparation for release for long-term prisoners
this development marks real improvement. It is still,
however, a very long way short of the opportunities for
preparation for release which may be available to prisoners
in other prisons.
2.4 Real improvement can also be seen in another crucial
aspect of preparation for release. The last two reports
have expressed dismay at the small number of prisoners
doing the STOP programme, the programme for sex offenders
which is at the centre of the strategy seeking to reduce
re-offending. This report indicates that the numbers have
increased considerably, and that the overall target for
programme completions has been exceeded. Nevertheless, in
the course of this short inspection the Inspectorate was
still concerned that some prisoners might not be given the
opportunity to address their offending behaviour in a
timely manner, at a relevant point in their sentence.
2.5 Peterhead therefore deserves recognition for some
progress. However, there is a new concern about the amount
of time which prisoners are spending locked up in their
cells
. The uncertainly over the future of the prison is
also as great as ever. It is not simply that managers and
staff and prisoners are no more clear now than they were
one year ago about what will happen: it is also that the
uncertainty itself has had one more year to have its
effect.
3. KEY ISSUES AND NEW
DEVELOPMENTS
Reducing Re-offending
3.1 There has been a marked improvement in the number of
completions of the STOP programme in the last year. In
2003-04 there were 14 completions of the core programme and
no adapted or extended programmes were run. In 2004-05
there were 17 completions of the core programme; and an
adapted and extended programme along with a rolling
programme were also run. In total there were 42 completions
of STOP in 2004-05. This increase is to be welcomed. Site
accreditation for the Core 2000 programme was achieved
during the year. Site accreditation for the adapted and
extended programmes has now been sought.
3.2 Other programmes run during the year were as
follows:
| Completions |
|---|
| Cognitive Skills | 24 |
|---|
| Anger Management | 13 |
|---|
| Relationships | 36 |
|---|
| Sensible Drinking | 20 |
|---|
3.3 The overall target for programme completions was
exceeded in 2004-05.
3.4 It is also very encouraging to note that a
"Motivation to Change" project has started. A working group
of psychologists and programmes staff has been established
to identify areas which inhibit involvement in STOP and
improve processes and interventions. Focus groups have been
held; a questionnaire has been issued examining
communication and approach styles; and literature reviews
have been carried out.
3.5 Despite all of these encouraging moves, the
Inspectorate was still concerned that some prisoners might
not be given the opportunity to address their offending
behaviour in a timely manner, at a relevant point in their
sentence.
Physical Conditions
3.6 The most striking difference since the last
inspection is the physical conditions in which prisoners
live: there is now no cell sharing. This has improved
conditions considerably. So too has the completion of the
Electric Power in Cell project. This means that all
prisoners now have a range of additional facilities
including television.
3.7 Apart from the former Peterhead Unit (now serving as
an enhanced 'top-end' regime for Peterhead) all prisoners
still live in cells without toilet facilities. Uniquely in
the Scottish Prison Estate, chemical porta-potties are in
use. This is extremely unsatisfactory. Plans to allow
access to toilet facilities during lock up periods were
submitted, but SPS decided that prisoners will not be
allowed access to toilets during lock-up periods. The
'top-end' facility now provides very good living conditions
for 10 prisoners.
3.8 At the time of the last inspection, plans were also
being made to give prisoners in 'E' Hall (the former cells
area) access to toilets during lock-up. At the time of this
inspection these plans had not reached a conclusion.
3.9 Plans to improve the visiting arrangements have also
been unsuccessful in attracting funding from SPS, and
visitors occasionally still require to wait in a bus
outside the prison.
3.10 The Gymnasium has not been replaced or
upgraded.
Access to Work and Regime
Opportunities
3.11 Problems remain in terms of prisoners' access to
purposeful activities. All prisoners who are assessed as
suitable are allocated a job during induction. However, the
quality of some of these jobs is variable; the workshops
are sometimes closed due to staffing difficulties; and in
some areas there is little to do when they are open. If
workshops are closed, most prisoners are locked in their
cells, with little alternative activity available. This
still needs to be addressed.
Prisoner Management
3.12 The development of an enhanced regime for Peterhead
by developing the former 'Peterhead Unit' into a 10 cell
'top end' facility is showing some progress. Careful plans
are also being made to develop opportunities for prisoners
to begin to prepare for release by creating limited and
closely managed opportunities for some work in the
community.
3.13 Prisoners who do not wish to take part in the STOP
programme are no longer held together in 'B' Hall. This has
removed the stigma of 'B' Hall being a 'downgrade' hall.
The move appears to have been handled very well with few
problems emerging.
3.14 Arrangements for induction have been improved by
the creation of a designated Induction Unit in 'B' Hall
Annexe and by the introduction of the local model of the
SPS National Induction programme. Induction is well
structured and very well documented.
3.15 National targets for Sentence Management are still
not being met. The prison has an appropriate structure in
place, which involves one manager in each hall responsible
for Sentence Management, two full time Risk and Needs
Assessment Officers and 20 Officers who also do Risk and
Needs Assessments. A sample of folders was examined and
these were kept to a reasonable standard. However, a common
complaint from prisoners was that they had little routine
contact with Personal Officers. Some claimed that a lack of
contact with a personal officer meant that that officer
does not have the skills or knowledge to make assessments.
The Sentence Management Scheme does not require regular
contact between the prisoner and the Personal Officer to be
recorded, consequently the annual Action Plan may be the
only evidence of contact.
3.16 There had been no escapes in the twelve months
prior to the inspection.
Health
3.17 Healthcare was criticized by prisoners. However,
the nurse triage system is well developed, and despite the
criticism, only two formal complaints had been made to the
Health Centre during the year. The Health Centre aims to
prioritize cases and ensure that all prisoners can see the
doctor within three sessions. Issues over the late delivery
of some medicines have been resolved by one nurse taking on
a pharmacy liaison role and meeting fortnightly with the
pharmacy supplier. It is welcome to note that a Mental
Health Team has now been established. The issue of
over-the-counter medication has not been resolved.
ACT
3.18 Ninety per cent of staff have received the
appropriate level of ACT training. Social work provision is
to be increased, which will allow the social work unit to
be more involved in ACT.
Education and Learning
3.19 The Education Contract had just been awarded at the
time of inspection to a supplier new to Peterhead. This had
led to some anxiety about what this would mean for
education and learning. Accreditation of the practical
elements of SVQ courses has been addressed by switching
from the SQA to City and Guilds courses. This is however a
short term solution which the new provider will need to
address.