7. Primary Services

Catering

7.1 Staffing in the kitchen comprised two Supervisors and nine Officers all of whom worked the normal shift patterns and a civilian driver who was responsible for delivering the meals to the Halls. In addition, there was a Catering Manager who had recently been appointed from outwith the SPS. Support was provided by a 55 strong prisoner party who worked a seven day week. We were advised, however, that it had been agreed to increase the size of that party by an additional 25 at which point a new seven day on and seven day off working pattern would be introduced. That new system would also allow time for proper health and hygiene training to be provided. It had also been agreed that Category ‘B’ prisoners could be included in the party and, therefore, grille gates were being installed at appropriate locations in the kitchen for security reasons.

7.2 Following her appointment, the Catering Manager was taking a long term view of what needed to be done to improve the catering service, more especially the issue of food temperature. A plated meal system with trays, which had been in use for a number of years, was in operation but was now showing signs of extreme wear and tear. It was, in fact, very difficult to find any tray where the lid provided an effective seal, with the result that the food very quickly cooled down. A new style of tray was, however, being piloted in Letham Hall and initial indications were that it was proving to be more successful in retaining heat. It was hoped that this new system might eventually be extended to the whole prison.

7.3 A four-weekly menu cycle was in operation with prisoners being offered two choices at each main meal. There was no advance menu as the view had been taken that there were more pressing issues which had to be attended to before consideration could be given to such a system.

7.4 Much of the kitchen equipment was old and obsolete and a forward plan was being prepared for the purchase of items of heavy equipment on a rolling programme. Since our last inspection, new premises had been provided for prisoners working in the kitchen including changing and dining areas with adjacent toilet and shower facilities. However, staffing issues dictated that the present use of those new premises was restricted to the changing facilities. The Catering Manager was considering ways of resolving the problem - see also paragraph 7.11.

7.5 One of the Medical Officers (MO) visited the kitchen every day and was available to both staff and prisoners to discuss any problems. Similarly, a member of the Management team visited daily to sample the meals.

7.6 The food distribution system in the Halls was disappointing; there did not appear to be any member of staff or any prisoner who had been trained in food handling techniques or in any aspects of basic health and hygiene. We also saw food distribution practices which were totally unacceptable - e.g. prisoners helping themselves to soup by dipping their cup into a container; food trays lying for long periods on the floor outside cell doors in one of the Halls and trays of cooled-down food being re-heated in hot plates. Those practices were going on in the presence of staff and though we were assured that staff had been instructed to stop them it would appear that this message had gone unheeded. That was particularly disappointing given that each Hall now had a Catering Liaison Officer and that members of the Catering staff had also been allocated individual Halls which they were supposed to visit on a regular basis to deal with problems.

Comment

7.7 We were impressed with the attitude of the new Catering Manager and were confident that in time, the ideas which she was working on would lead to improvement. The Catering Manager was consulting the local Environmental Health Officer as various initiatives were being introduced and getting his agreement before proceeding with each one; in our view, this was an eminently sensible approach.

7.8 We recommend, however, that the plans which have been laid for improvements should be given the appropriate financial and other support to ensure that they are implemented. At the earliest opportunity there should also be an immediate review to eliminate unhygienic practices.

Canteens

7.9 There was a canteen in each of the accommodation Halls with named Officers responsible for their operation. Convicted prisoners could visit the facility once a week from Thursday to Sunday whilst for ‘C’ Hall remand prisoners the canteen was open on Monday, Wednesday and Friday mornings. Remand prisoners located in ‘B’ Hall, the Hospital or the Segregation Unit had canteen on Tuesday and Thursday mornings.

7.10 Each of the canteens carried the same range of stock which was held in a central secure store from which stocks were replenished on a weekly basis. The operation of that store was the responsibility of a member of staff from the Accounts Section and we were satisfied that all ordering and invoicing procedures were in accordance with SPS instructions. There was a computerised stock control system and a reasonable range of goods on offer. There was no local sundry purchase scheme in operation.

Laundry

7.11 Staffing in the laundry consisted of a Supervisor, one Officer and 22 prisoners. However, there were no reliefs which meant that the Supervisor had to spend most of his day on prisoner supervision duties and had little time for any managerial function. Also, having only two members of staff meant that the laundry was not open at weekends with the result that prisoners could not have a kit change over that period. We suggest, therefore, that consideration should be given to the appointment of a relief Officer who could cover posts in both the laundry and the kitchen - see paragraph 7.4 - thereby enabling the laundry to improve its service.

7.12 Machinery was very old and there was no provision for routine maintenance which meant that machines often broke down, leading to expensive repair work. Additionally, the laundry building - which was off the main link corridor between two of the accommodation Halls - did not meet standard building specifications. For example, very few of the windows could open which led to an excessive temperature build-up particularly during the summer months; the roof was beginning to show signs of serious wear; and the drainage system could not cope with the outflow from the machines which resulted in regular blockages and foul smells. In an attempt to address these problems, the establishment had undertaken an option appraisal which had concluded that the prison’s needs would be best served by the construction of a new purpose-built facility.

7.13 The question of stock control was another issue of concern. All kit stocks were retained by the Halls who sent bundles of items for laundering which were then returned to the Halls on the same day. However, that system meant that there was no proper level of control over the various items or over which articles should be condemned. Though we were pleased to learn that the laundry was meeting the demands placed on it by the Halls, a better arrangement would be for the laundry to have its own kit store. Under such an arrangement, standard stock levels could be agreed with the Halls who would then be provided immediately with replacement items, enabling the laundering process to be carried out at a more suitable pace. Such a proposal would have staffing implications but a much greater control over kit items could produce significant budget savings.

Comment

7.14 Current laundry facilities are totally inadequate for the size of establishment and we recommend the construction of a new purpose-built laundry facility with proper kit store arrangements.

Estates

7.15 The Facilities Manager was responsible for catering, laundry, ground maintenance and vehicles, with his Estates duties accounting for between 65% and 70% of his time. He was assisted by two Estates Supervisors (Clerk of Works) with part time clerical support.

7.16 In addition to the two major capital projects already described (ie, the ‘D’ Hall refurbishment and the new Visits complex), there were plans to upgrade the Gate Office, though a start date had not yet been agreed.

7.17 There had been an improvement in overall maintenance since our last inspection though we were told that more recently the level of service had deteriorated. A new computerised system which monitored and recorded work, completion dates, etc., had been introduced in January 1997 and had shown that approximately 20% of all jobs were not meeting the agreed completion date. (The number of the contractor’s staff on site had been reduced from 30 to 20 and it is assumed that this had contributed to that shortfall.) That said, the standard of workmanship was satisfactory and we noted that the Estates team checked 10% of all work carried out.

7.18 The minor works programme for 1996-97 totalled £280,000, with all projects having been completed on time. For 1997-98, the establishment was due to receive only £65,000 for minor works, included in which would be fire and H & S measures.

Fire

7.19 Prior to our inspection, the duties of the Fire Precautions Officer (FPO) had had to be fitted around the main duties of the Officers concerned, with the result that fire precaution issues were frequently being neglected. It had been decided, therefore, to create two new full-time posts to deal specifically with C & R and Breathing Apparatus (BA) training and general fire precaution duties and those posts were introduced during the course of our inspection. The new system provided two Officers and two Reliefs to cover for any absences. In addition, arrangements were being made to appoint six Deputy FPOs, each of whom would be responsible for day-to-day fire precaution issues in their respective areas; the full-time Officers would have a co-ordinating and general oversight role.

7.20 One of the FPOs was a member of the local H & S Committee and once the new structure was fully in place it was planned that a Fire Sub-Committee would be established. The FPOs and their Deputies had all attended the appropriate training at the Scottish Fire Service School and the Deputies would have those duties as part of their secondary role.

7.21 Regular contact was maintained with the local Fire Brigade though surprisingly they did not make any familiarisation visits to the establishment. We were told that deliberate fire raising was a common problem within the establishment but fortunately the vast majority were only small fires - there had been six cell fires in recent months.

7.22 The new BA equipment was now in operation and only a small number of staff had still to be trained; the BA equipment and its operation had recently been the subject of a favourable audit by the SPS’s H & S Adviser. Fire emergency exit signs and fire evacuation notices had recently been updated and were on prominent display. Fire evacuation drills had not been taking place in recent times, but were now the remit of the new Deputy FPOs.

7.23 The maintenance of all items of fire fighting equipment was the responsibility of Estates staff and we were satisfied that these items were being maintained on schedule and that proper records were being kept. A complete set of new keys for opening the hose reel boxes had been ordered and every member of staff would be given one.

7.24 Apart from the BA training, no staff had been trained in fire precaution duties but one day per week was now being specifically allocated to such a task.

7.25 A formal inspection by HM Inspectorate of Fire Services had been carried out in 1995 and the issues which had been raised in their very comprehensive report had either been dealt with or had been included in the establishment’s longer term plans.

Comment

7.26 We were pleased to see that the importance of fire precautions in this large establishment had been recognised through the appointment of full-time FPOs and Deputy FPOs with specific responsibility for areas of the prison. From our tour of the establishment, it was clear that one of their first tasks would be to review the location and highlighting of fire extinguishers and hose reels. In overall terms, however, we were very pleased with the new arrangements which might be a model for other large establishments.

Health and Safety

7.27 The H & S Committee, which was chaired by the Facilities Manager, comprised representatives from all functional areas of the establishment. In February 1997, the establishment had published a comprehensive local H & S policy which had been copied to every member of staff. However, we were concerned to note that some three months after its launch, most of the structures proposed in that policy had still not been put in place. There was, therefore, no schedule of risk assessments (though a small number had been carried out on an ad hoc basis) and no framework for regular H & S audits. We were pleased to learn, however, that an external H & S professional was to be recruited on a short-term contract to help broaden the overall level of expertise.

7.28 Some staff training had taken place on H & S issues, particularly amongst members of the management team, and more training was planned for the future. There was, however, little evidence of any training for Hall passmen. Also, we noted that the facilities for washing dishes and utensils in the Halls were inadequate and we found instances of prisoners washing dishes in the ablutions areas, a practice which was totally unacceptable.

7.29 An inspection of the SPS’s H & S Advisor had been carried out shortly before our inspection and all the points raised in his subsequent report had either been attended to or were in the process of being addressed. A local audit had also been undertaken on the specific issue of the recording of accidents in the establishment and a number of shortcomings had been identified; appropriate remedial action had subsequently been taken by the H & S coordinator.

Comment

7.30 Whilst it was clear that management recognised the importance of H & S issues, it was equally clear that there was evidence of poor standards in a number of areas and though we welcome the production of a local policy, it was clear that the implementation of the measures in that policy now required immediate attention. Equally, the level of awareness of basic H & S standards needed to be addressed throughout the establishment.

Energy

7.31 Energy sources within the establishment comprised gas, oil, electricity and water but apart from some of the electricity usage, there was no monitoring of the use of those supplies. The energy budget for 1996-97 had been £460,000.

7.32 There was no local Energy Committee but preparations were in hand for the signing of an energy management contract in mid-1997. That contract would provide a complete service cover for the hot and cold water supplies as well as for the lighting, heating and all other energy sources. We understand that should it prove successful, it is likely that similar contracts would be introduced in other large establishments in the SPS.