 |
 |
| Publications |
| Home | Press | Publications | What We Do | Who We Are | Search | Site Map | Contacts | Links | ||||
|
|
|||
| > What We Do > Justice > HMIP |
< Previous | Contents | Next >
9.1 The Senior Management Team was led by the Director, who had been Governor of HMP Aberdeen before taking up his current appointment with PPS some two years prior to our inspection. Reporting to the Director were four ADs, who were responsible for custodial services, residential, programmes and resource and administration services. Also reporting to the Director were the Clinical Manager, the Investigations Officer and the Contract Compliance Officer.
9.2 The AD Custodial Services was the Director's Deputy and was responsible for population management and the secure, orderly operation of the prison. He had been in post for just over one and a half years. Reporting to him were the Operations Managers, who had oversight of routine co-ordination and control, the Security Manager, the Visits Manager, the Reception Manager, the Segregation Unit Supervisor and the Night Shift Manager.
9.3 The AD Custodial Services had considerable experience of working with LTPs in his previous role in the SPS as acting Deputy Governor of HMP Shotts. He represented Kilmarnock's interests at the Heads of Custody Forum, which was chaired by the SPS's Deputy Director of Custody and consisted of the Deputy Governors of the largest SPS prisons. The priority for the Custodial Services function was further to restrict the supply of drugs in the establishment.
9.4 The AD Residential had been in post for four months at the time of our inspection, having previously been employed in PPS's Prisoner Escort Services. Reporting to him were two Managers, each of whom had responsibility for one Houseblock.
9.5 The main issues that were being addressed in the Residential function were staff attendance patterns, the aim being to improve staff continuity in the residential areas. This was considered necessary for the further development of the Personal Officer Scheme and sentence planning, regime development and differentiation, including the establishment of drug free areas as part of a wider initiative to reduce drug use in the prison, and liaison with other SPS prisons to share ideas and experience.
9.6 The AD Programmes had been in post for about one and a half years, having previously worked as the Health Centre Manager at HMP Shotts. His span of control was very wide and included most of the providers of regime services, including industries, social work, education, chaplaincy, PE, prisoner development and offending behaviour.
9.7 Priorities for the Programmes function included the development and integration of sentence planning and consistency in meeting the challenging regime delivery standards. A great deal of work had been carried out to clarify and agree the interpretation of performance measurements for regime delivery, that had to be put in place to enable the development of systems and processes to ensure compliance with the contract.
9.8 The AD Resource and Administration Services was responsible for a range of services including staff training, human resources (HR), accounts, facility management, supplies and catering. A qualified Accountant, he also carried out operational duties, including night visits.
9.9 The Clinical Manager had also been in post for about one and a half years and prior to his present post, he had been a Clinical Manager at HMP Shotts. The main issue that he had to address was the retention of nursing staff, the key elements in their turnover having been pay and the challenge of working in a prison environment. His remarkable contribution to the development of health care services at Kilmarnock is covered in more detail in Chapter 8 of this report. It was recognised that the necessary consolidation and further development of nursing services would only be achieved by a stable and settled nursing work force.
9.10 The Investigations Officer carried out a role unique among Scottish prisons. The purpose of the post was to conduct enquiries into incidents and events and to submit a report to the Director. Investigations could focus on particular incidents as reported in the Incident Management Reports (IMPS) or could address more general or recurring problems that had been identified as possibly requiring subsequent amendment to procedures. The Investigations Officer was responsible for the collation and analysis of IMPS statistics, which helped identify potential problems.
9.11 The Contract Compliance Officer was responsible for the performance management and measurement processes at the establishment. The collection of performance data was critical in identifying areas for improvement and in this respect, the Compliance Officer worked closely with the Investigations Officer.
9.12 Integrated systems had been developed to report performance in achieving the standards agreed in the contract and weekly reports were submitted to the Director and Controller prior to their scheduled meetings. Monthly reports were compiled for PPS Head Office and quarterly reports formed the basis for the contract performance and monitoring meetings between the Custodial Contracts unit of SPS HQ and PPS.
9.13 The Contract Compliance Officer also conducted audits of practice against the procedures specified in the Director's Rules, to ensure that standards were being maintained and that written procedures remained relevant.
9.14 The Management Team presented as a cohesive and determined group who were rightly proud of the progress achieved to date. They had obviously worked extremely hard to achieve the level of performance that we witnessed during our inspection. We were pleased to note that management vacancies at the time of opening had now been filled and this should help to spread more evenly what has clearly been a heavy workload.
9.15 As well as providing clear focus and direction, there were obvious frustrations about operating within the rigid framework of a detailed contract that set higher standards for Kilmarnock than other SPS prisons and which required sometimes lengthy discussion and agreement before some changes could be implemented. However, the roles of Investigations Officer and Compliance Officer in particular were of obvious added value to the operation of the prison and we recommend that consideration should be given as to how such roles could be developed elsewhere in the SPS.
9.16 Although the HR Department came under the direct responsibility of the AD Resource and Administration Services, it was managed by a full-time Personnel Officer who oversaw recruitment and other personnel issues, such as individual contracts, staff grievance, discipline code and sick absence management. There was also a Personnel Assistant and appropriate clerical support. All staff in the establishment were provided with a detailed contract explaining their conditions of employment, which they were required to sign. They were also provided with written information on PPS's grievance, disciplinary and appeals procedure and a comprehensive Staff Handbook.
9.17 All PCO staff underwent a six month probationary period and those who satisfied the standard of the initial training programme were certificated at the end of a six week course and were contracted at that stage. Ongoing assessment and reports were then compiled throughout the remainder of their probationary period. Non-prisoner contact staff had a three-month probationary period.
9.18 Between March 1999 and January 2000, a total of 87 staff from almost every area of the prison had resigned, of whom 45 had been on probation. Exit interviews were carried in every case and these had indicated that the majority had left as they felt unsuited to the prison environment. While this turnover was an issue for a number of departments where continuity was necessary for the development of services and the introduction of new initiatives, it had a particular impact in the smaller groups, such as nursing. We were surprised to note that there was no opportunity for new staff selected to work in Kilmarnock to have some experience of the prison setting to help them reach an informed decision on whether or not they would be suited to work in a prison, prior to leaving existing employment and embarking on an extensive and expensive training programme.
9.19 A local Absence Management Policy was in place for those on sick leave. Details of all sick absences were recorded and line managers were responsible for interviewing staff on their return to work. An independent counselling service was available to staff and there were plans to introduce an Occupational Health Service, which would complement what was already in place. There was an issue around female staff who were pregnant and who perhaps were unable to participate in activities such as C & R, which was necessary if they were to demonstrate their competence in order to retain their PCO certificate. This matter was under review at the time of our visit.
9.20 In overall terms, however, we were generally impressed with the way in which the HR Department was operating. Like other aspects of the establishment, it was developing but the competence and commitment of staff as well as the systems in place were of a high standard.
9.21 The very detailed and exacting contract specification had been translated into Director's Rules, which described how the performance standards would be met and what was expected of staff and prisoners. The coherent local operating procedures specified, in five volumes, how the establishment was to be operated and covered the Vision Statement and issues such as the operating philosophy, HR management, contract compliance and monitoring, security and supervision of prisoners, safety, discipline and good order and the provision of care and positive regimes.
9.22 We found robust systems in place to gather, collate, analyse and report information about actual performance against the standards. There was also a review process for the Director's Rules to ensure that the procedures remained relevant and up-to-date. Where amendments to local procedures were considered to be necessary, systems were in place to incorporate the changes and to notify staff and prisoners accordingly. Similarly, a system was in place to discuss proposals for changes to the operating schedule, which would require agreement with the SPS.
9.23 We were impressed with the way in which the general principles agreed in November 1997 between the then Secretary of State for Scotland and KPSL had been translated into a detailed, coherent and comprehensive set of operating procedures. These included the establishment's communications policy and objectives with cross-references to other appropriate Director's Rules.
9.24 Fundamental to the successful operation of the prison were the monitoring and audit processes that had been put in place to enable each member of staff to understand his or her contribution to meeting the wide range of challenging performance targets that had been set – see also paragraph 4.6.
9.25 Departmental meetings were held weekly to review progress and to consider short term plans. Included in this schedule was the weekly meeting between the Director and the Controller to discuss topical issues. The Director also met on Friday mornings with the PIAC, which is a Committee of representatives from all areas of the prison, including prisoners. Minutes of those meetings were published and plans were being taken forward to record and broadcast the meetings on an information channel, subject to the introduction across the SPS prison estate of in-cell TV.
9.26 The Director also held a Director's hour every month at which he briefed staff on performance and answered questions.
9.27 Ever since the proposal to build the prison had first been announced, there had been a great deal of scrutiny and media interest, some of which had been exaggerated and inaccurate. During the construction and initial operational phase of the project, contact with newspapers and broadcast media had been managed by the SPS's Communications Branch but now that that initial phase had passed, the Director would be handling most of his own media enquiries. In addition, a PR consultancy had been set up with a firm based in Glasgow. The Director spoke of signs of a developing relationship with various sectors, especially the more locally-based media, which he hoped would lead to the presentation of a more balanced and objective view of the prison.
9.28 PPS does not recognise any Trade Unions and so the relationship between staff and management was managed by means of a Works Council, which was the officially recognised organisation for all staff at the establishment. PPS provided legal advice and support through its solicitors and met the costs of the Works Council's administration, which meant that there was no charge to employees for this representation.
9.29 The Works Council consisted of 15 elected staff representatives from all staff groups within the prison. The Council met every month to prepare and submit an agenda prior to the formal meeting between the three key office holders who made up the Executive Committee and the Director and the Personnel Officer. Formal meetings were minuted and minutes widely circulated.
9.30 Although PPS recognised that Section 127 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 effectively excluded the use of strike action as an option in any industrial dispute, it also recognised that to be effective, the Works Council must possess some bargaining power. To that end, an arbitration policy had been established which committed both parties to seek the services of ACAS to reach an agreement in the event that all other methods had failed.
9.31 We met with the Executive Committee of the Works Council, which consisted of the Chairman, Vice Chairman and Secretary. They spoke positively of their relationship with management and of their contribution to the recent pay negotiations, which had been settled following arbitration. One issue that remained to be addressed was disparity in pay between staff at different PPS operated prisons.
9.32 Other key issues raised included the need to re-visit the staff attendance patterns to provide continuity of staffing, particularly in the residential areas and the heavier than expected escort commitment, which had resulted in staff being taken off post to cover escorts. They pointed out that this did not result in restrictions to the prison regime which, in other SPS establishments, would involve closure of industrial work parties or prisoners being locked in their cells.
9.33 Staff facilities were described as inadequate. It was also pointed out that the staff had elected not to take unpaid meal breaks during their shift, as the time taken would have been added on to the shift time leading to a longer working day. Meals were, however, provided by PPS for staff to eat at the same time as the prisoners' meal times.
9.34 Industrial relations at the prison were generally very positive. Staff to whom we spoke, both formally and less formally, were generally satisfied with the structures in place to manage industrial relations and appeared well informed about topical issues.
9.35 The Staff Training Unit was located in the centre of the prison and consisted of a large classroom equipped with appropriate training aids. Two smaller rooms were also available and were equally well resourced for the delivery of training. The Staff Training Officer (STO) was located in a small office within the same building. We noted that there was no learning resource centre or staff library, though we were advised that there were plans to create such a facility within the training unit.
9.36 Responsibility for most of the delivery, co-ordination and administration for training rested with the single STO. Some ad hoc administrative support was provided by the mail clerk but only when she was available. All staff training records were held in the Training Department – but although a new computerised system had been installed, it was not yet operational due to the fact that no one had been trained in its operation.
9.37 The STO had a background in HR and was in the process of attaining a qualification at NVQ level. Her immediate responsibility was to deliver the six week PCO recruit training course, which she herself had undergone on joining the service. Included in this programme was training in H & S, first aid, race relations and hostage management. Induction training was also provided for non-custodial staff, such as chaplains, education officers, administrators and nurses. At the time of our visit, the focus had been predominantly on start-up training for new recruits and the need to maintain competencies in C & R and SDBA, as specified in the contract. Eight competent C & R and six SDBA instructors were ably assisting the STO in achieving this task.
9.38 It was understandable that much of the initial focus for training had been directed towards new recruits and maintaining statutory competence in the areas specified in the contract. We were encouraged to see that a training strategy for the year 2000 had been devised and had identified the need for development training, as this was consistently highlighted in a number of areas during our inspection. We were, however, unclear as to the role of line managers in identifying the training needs of their staff and producing individual training plans. Supervisors told us that they had not yet received any training specific to their role and there needed, therefore, to be greater clarity as to how line managers could inform the establishment's training requirements.
9.39 The six-week recruitment-training package appeared comprehensive and consistent with recruit training elsewhere in the SPS. There was, however, no authentic definition of competence other than an arbitrary level set by the STO. There were no systems in place that would measure to what extent the training delivered was transferred into the operational setting, nor was there any evidence that Supervisors were competent to carry out the necessary assessments. Such a system has been developed elsewhere in the SPS through the SVQ system and as it helps to ensure a consistency in competence throughout the service, we suggest that it should be adopted at Kilmarnock.
9.40 There was no evidence of any evaluation of the resources required for the proposed training strategy and given the range and volume of training required, it would be difficult to see how this could be accomplished by one STO. Developing training in the prison will, therefore, be a significant challenge over the coming year and will present management with the opportunity to build upon what has already been achieved.
9.41 We were disappointed that a Learning Resource Centre had not been incorporated initially into the staff training unit and suggest that such a facility should be developed as a matter of priority. Similarly, we were of the opinion that the STO's office was too small for its purpose and questioned whether it would be suitable to meet any increase in training and development in the future. Finally, whilst we were encouraged by the dedication and commitment of the STO, we suggest that the arrangements for administrative support should be improved rather than being dependent on the availability of the mail clerk.
9.42 The main locker and staff changing areas were located within the Gate complex and both the male and female areas contained toilets, a shower and individual lockers. The male room was, however, particularly small with some lockers crammed into an area where access was limited to two persons. Also, the size of the lockers in both areas was only appropriate for small items, with no facilities for hanging jackets or storing a holdall. There was one shower in each of the changing areas but neither had a shower curtain and when the door to the female room was open, the shower area was clearly visible to anyone in the area. It was not surprising, therefore, that there was little evidence of either of these two facilities being extensively used.
9.43 A staff bistro was located next to the main kitchen but the actual facility was small and was only able to seat a maximum of eight people at any one time. However, a takeaway service was available and this appeared to be the alternative used by most staff. We were impressed with the standard and variety of food prepared in the bistro by prisoners under training, though we were disappointed to note that this service was only available on week days. Meals were provided for staff who worked through their meal break but facilities for staff who wished to cook a meal were limited and were located at some distance from the Wings. The establishment's drinks vending machine was also located in this area. Also, there were no staff recreational facilities or areas to relax and although the gymnasium was in theory available to staff, those on shift work had difficulty in accessing and it was not available at weekends.
9.44 The whole issue of the need to improve staff facilities was consistently raised in all our discussions with staff and having witnessed the poor locker arrangements, the inadequate toilet and shower facilities, the absence of proper rest rooms and the inadequate food preparation areas, we fully endorse staff's concerns. We did note that during the course of our inspection, a room in the staff training area was being converted into a staff rest room. Notwithstanding that improvement, we recommend that as a matter of priority, there should be a radical upgrading of staff facilities throughout the establishment.
9.45 During the course of our inspection, we met formally with a range of staff covering all grades, specialisms and levels of experience. A wide range of issues was raised with some areas of duplication.
9.46 We have recorded the views of staff as they were put to us but that should not be taken to imply that the Inspectorate is in full agreement with every point raised. We do feel, however, that it is important that the views and perceptions of staff on aspects of the establishment be recorded. Where issues raised relate to aspects on which we have commented elsewhere in the report, we have cross-referenced the relevant paragraphs. The following is a summary of the main points raised and staff's comments on them.
9.47 Relationships with Management. The PCOs to whom we spoke were generally of the view that they had a very good relationship with their Supervisors but that they saw very little of the ADs. They told us also that Managers kept changing the rules - e.g. about where prisoners could display posters - which only led to confusion and made staff feel that the overall approach was reactive rather than pro-active. It was claimed also that staff were constantly being put under pressure to meet deadlines and targets in order to satisfy the terms of the contract.
9.48 Communications were said to have improved in recent times, with staff particularly appreciating the daily bulletin and the monthly Director's Hour. However, it was claimed that there were still too many rumours circulating and it was alleged that communication between the ADs and the Supervisors could be better - paragraphs 9.21-26.
9.49 Inter-staff relationships were excellent and there was a unanimous view that there was a good working atmosphere throughout the prison. Staff were proud of what they had achieved in such a short space of time and were firmly of the view that they were pioneering a new approach to prisoner management.
9.50 Staffing levels on the Wings were regarded by staff of all grades as being too low, particularly as there could be occasions when staff were left on their own and this led to fears about personal safety. Staff were also unhappy about the shift pattern, though this was about to be changed - to the fourth system since the prison became operational. Concern was also expressed about the length of the shifts without any breaks and only a few minutes to eat the lunch that was provided by the prison. We were told that all of these issues were contributing to low staff morale.
9.51 TOIL. Most staff claimed that TOIL levels were high and that it was difficult to get time off. However, most of the Supervisors to whom we spoke claimed that TOIL was not a problem.
9.52 Staff training was the subject of much criticism. Some staff felt that their initial training was good but the majority were of the view that it was too short, that it did not cover issues in sufficient depth and that they had to find their feet by being 'on the job'. We were told also that there was no job specific training for Supervisors and that there were no training plans for staff. On the positive side, staff were very happy with the amount of training provided in SDBA and C & R - paragraphs 9.35-41.
9.53 The lack of adequate staff facilities was an issue that was greatly criticised. Staff were unhappy about the lack of a rest room, the inadequate locker space and the lack of personal lockers, the poor toilet/shower facilities for female staff, the limited facilities for staff meals, the number of soft drinks machines and the difficulties for staff on shifts to make use of the gymnasium facilities - paragraphs 9.42-44.
9.54 Industrial relations within the establishment were generally regarded as being good and staff were of the view that the Works Council was doing a good job, though it was not considered to be as powerful as a recognised Trade Union - paragraphs 9.28-34.
9.55 Relationships between staff and prisoners were described by all as excellent with good mutual respect. Staff were also of the opinion that prisoners were supportive of them in what they were trying to achieve. There was a general acknowledgement that now that staff had gained more experience, they were much more in control of prisoner management issues, compared to the early days of operation when the prisoners, who had vastly more experience of prisons, had been able to exert a greater degree of influence - paragraphs 4.8 and 10.3.
9.56 We saw evidence of a close working relationship between PCOs and their Supervisors and we have suggested in this report that there should be clear rules about posters in cells. Also, whilst we have acknowledged the advantages of working to a contract, it was clear that staff were under pressure to deliver within the terms of that contract.
9.57 We have commented in this report about the good communications within the prison and we agree with the view that all staff were working well as a team and that industrial relations were generally good. We did, however, also share the concerns about staffing levels in the Wings and some of the shift patterns that staff were expected to work. We did not identify TOIL as being a problem area within the prison but we do express some concerns about certain aspects of staff training. Similarly, we were disappointed with the facilities that had been provided for staff.
9.58 Finally, we have commented at several parts in this report about the excellent staff/prisoner relationships and whilst we have sounded a note of caution about the possibility of staff conditioning, we were generally encouraged by what we saw.
< Previous | Contents | Next >
The information contained on this WWW site is Crown Copyright but may be reproduced without formal permission or charge for personal or in-house use. Privacy and Content Disclaimer.
For general enquiries about this web site email ceu@scotland.gov.uk or fill out our online questionnaire.
