Report by HM Inspectorate of Prisons on HM Prison, Penninghame 19976. Regimes Induction 6.1 Admissions to the establishment were normally on the first and third Monday of each month and on arrival, each prisoner would be allocated a Personal Officer. 6.2 The induction programme lasted five days and involved the prisoners in meeting representatives from all the functions within the establishment, at which time the relevant House rules would also be explained. There was, however, no formal structure to that process in that it was the responsibility of the Personal Officers to make appointments on behalf of the prisoners for those meetings, which were on a one-to-one basis. Details of the programme were entered on a pro-forma which was then given to each prisoner on arrival and this acted as the time-table for the week. The only exception to the unstructured nature of the week was that each prisoner had to appear before the Sentence Planning Board (see paragraph 6.4) which met on a Thursday. At that meeting, the prisoner was allocated his first job (which was normally in the gardens party). 6.3 The programme seemed to meet the needs of the establishment and the prisoners though we were of the opinion that it appeared to be too long. We were, therefore, pleased to learn that shortly after our inspection the programme had been condensed to two days. Sentence Planning 6.4 The Deputy Governor chaired the Sentence Planning Board which included representatives from all departments including Social Work. At its weekly meeting, the Board adopted a relaxed, informal approach and having identified the prisoner's particular needs, one of its main functions was to agree a forward plan with the prisoner. 6.5 The plan aimed to identify those elements which had to be addressed in order to maximise the prisoner's resettlement prospects - for example, in cases where recommendations had been made by the Parole Board, it would be to ensure that the prisoner was being tested in less secure conditions. 6.6 Once a plan for an individual had been agreed, it was then the responsibility of the Personal Officer to facilitate its implementation by, for example, liaising with the social worker to ensure that the various elements were achieved. The Personal Officer was also expected to provide close support to the prisoner throughout his period at Penninghame and, at the same time, assess the individual's performance and response. 6.7 Following the initial assessment and plan, progress was reviewed quarterly by the Sentence Planning Board. Depending on the prisoner's progress, the plan could be adjusted; where the prisoner's efforts to fulfil the elements of his plan were not satisfactory or where there was an attitude or behavioural problem, the prisoner could be called before the Board and appropriate action taken. 6.8 A system of deputy Personal Officers had been introduced which ensured that prisoners always had someone with whom they could discuss or seek advice about any immediate problem. Comment 6.9 Although the Sentence Planning system at Penninghame was operating on a relaxed and informal basis, it was effective. Each element was purposeful and sought to address the needs of the individual prisoner; staff also seemed well committed to the process. Routines 6.10 The overall atmosphere of the establishment was commensurate with its open status. The regime was relaxed and prisoners to whom we spoke commented favourably on the positive relationships which they enjoyed with staff. Prisoners were allowed to wear their own personal clothing throughout the day which added to this relaxed approach. 6.11 The prison was unlocked at 0700 hours with breakfast being served between 0715 and 0730. The working day commenced at 0800 hours with prisoners either making their own way to their place of work or being taken by prison transport to their outplacement. Those prisoners attending education or group activities did so after reporting their movement to the Gate Officer who maintained the appropriate records. 6.12 The midday meal was served between 1145 and 1215 hours and work continued until 1630 hours with the evening meal being served between 1645 and 1715 hours. (This, however, does not comply with SPS Operating Standards which require the evening meal to be served between 1700 and 1900 hours.) 6.13 Recreation consisted of televisions in the dormitories, a weights/exercise room and a quiet room for reading and letter writing. Prisoners also had the use of the staff club on three nights per week for a variety of indoor games and activities. At the time of our inspection, work was ongoing to create a new recreation area in the old stables building adjacent to the main house. That would provide facilities such as snooker and pool from January 1997 when the work was due to be completed. Prisoners had complained of the lack of facilities, but the provision of this additional area should help to address that criticism. 6.14 Prisoners were split into two equal sized groups for Home Leaves which were taken on successive weekends each month. That meant that on two weekends each month, approximately 50% of the prisoners left the establishment on a Friday morning and did not return until Sunday afternoon. For those remaining in the establishment at weekends, a range of activities was available including mountain biking and hill/forest walking whilst during the week, prisoners had the opportunity to attend supervised sessions at the local swimming pool - see also paragraphs 6.34-40. Comment 6.15 The regime and routine were appropriate for an open establishment and there was a business-like tempo about the establishment, though that view was not always shared by prisoners who stated that there was not enough to do in their own time. Whilst we recognise that many outdoor activities are curtailed in winter, we were satisfied that there were some other opportunities available to prisoners; management and staff were also always willing to try new approaches and ideas. Employment 6.16 Those prisoners who were not on full-time education or who were going through the induction process, had some form of employment. 6.17 As noted at paragraph 6.2, part of the induction process involved attendance at the Sentence Planning Board where each prisoner was allocated his first work party. Thereafter, prisoners could apply for other work areas by responding to vacancy notices which were advertised on prisoners' notice boards. The per capita rate for prisoners' weekly earnings was £8.55. 6.18 The main source of employment in the establishment was the Farm/Gardens party which could employ up to thirty prisoners in the summer (twenty in the winter) and was staffed by a Supervisor and three Officers. The area covered by the party totalled 86 acres which was made up of 62 acres of woodland, a 16 acre farm (eight of which were let to a local farmer with the other eight being left fallow), seven acres of grass and flowers and a one acre walled garden. A large part of the work of the party was in growing vegetables and plants either for use in other prisons or for sale to staff and the general public through a small garden centre - see illustration overleaf. All proceeds from such sales went through Appropriations-in-Aid as part of the Government's accounting procedures. To assist in the production of those items, there were three glass houses and 14 poly tunnels. Staff and prisoners had adequate toilet facilities in addition to which there was good storage space and suitable office accommodation. 6.19 Other sources of employment included the laundry (see paragraphs 7.28-30), kitchen (paragraphs 7.1-6) or passman duties in addition to which, opportunities existed for prisoners to participate in outworker placements; these are discussed in more detail below. Outplacements 6.20 At the time of inspection, outplacements in the community provided employment opportunities for between 10 and 16 prisoners though that figure often increased in the summer. The majority involved day time work for at least five days of the week, with most being located nearby in Newton Stewart though some were as far afield as Glenluce and Stranraer. A variety of work was available, including helping the elderly and infirm at charitable institutions, homes or sheltered housing. Other examples included one individual helping to re - catalogue a school library, a group of prisoners clearing forestry logs from a hillside and an individual working in a manse. Ad hoc seasonal placements in the summer included stacking timber, grass cutting and gardening, painting and walkway repairs/maintenance. Some placements also assisted the local Tourist Board. 6.21 As part of the inspection, we visited most of the placements and found that prisoners appeared to be pleased and enthusiastic at having the opportunity for work of this kind, more especially as they were largely unsupervised by prison staff for much of the time. 6.22 Those employers to whom we spoke seemed equally satisfied, with a number acknowledging that they would not be able to maintain their activities without the assistance which the prisoners were providing. They stated that on the rare occasions when there were difficulties, these were always very quickly dealt with. Liaison with the prison was said to be excellent. Comment 6.23 In overall terms, we were satisfied that the current employment arrangements were providing opportunities for all prisoners but also were generally appropriate for prisoners at that stage in their sentence. We were pleased also to see that in anticipation of rising prisoner numbers, management had been looking at possible increased work party numbers, a copy of their matrix being shown at Annex 2. However, farm and garden work is subject to seasonal fluctuations and we have some concern as to whether, given the projected rise in population, it will be possible gainfully to employ increased numbers during the winter months. We therefore suggest that an additional source of employment, such as a craft shop, be considered by management to meet this potential difficulty. It may also be possible to increase the amount of project work undertaken, perhaps taking in a much wider geographical area. 6.24 As regards outplacements, we were satisfied with what we saw, with the exception of some of the aspects of the log clearing operation about which we have written separately to the Governor. Most appeared to meet the main requirement, which was to test prisoners in a local community setting, whilst at the same time instilling a sense of purpose in preparation for resettlement back into the community. Hopefully this might lead to an eventual reduction in repeat crime. 6.25 Outplacements also represented evidence of reparation to the community, a debt which was indeed being substantially repaid in a number of cases. An element of risk was involved but we were satisfied that sensible precautions were being taken, especially by the Officer involved in the daily management and administration of the scheme. That said, we were disappointed to find that few members of the Management team were finding the time to get round the placements which after all were a very key element of the prison regime. We also felt that one Officer was far too stretched to be able properly to monitor individuals' needs and progress - or properly oversee detailed security and administrative considerations, let alone find new tasks at the same time. As the prisoner population expands in the coming months, we believe that the supervision of placements may need a commensurate increase. We therefore suggest that there should be a review of this aspect. Education 6.26 The Education Unit consisted of a single room off the entrance hall of the main building but because it also had to provide storage as well as the administration space for the Education Officer, it was barely adequate for the needs of the Unit. The adjacent room was also available to the Unit for study purposes but only when it was not being otherwise used - eg, it served as the visits room. 6.27 Education was provided under contract with Motherwell College, an arrangement which had been in force since April 1995; previously, provision had been arranged with Dumfries and Galloway College. The Education Officer, who was part time and provided 21½ hours per week, confirmed that the transfer of the contract had gone smoothly and that she was receiving appropriate support. The distance between Penninghame and Motherwell meant that contact was normally by telephone but that was not causing any major difficulties. Assistance to the Education Officer was provided by additional part-time staff on an as required basis. 6.28 The programme provided access to two main areas - Core and Specific Course provision. The Core element consisted of computing, art and general studies (which included remedial English), handwriting and maths. Students could take Scotvec modules on those subjects but non-modular tuition was also on offer for those who felt they were not yet ready to seek certification. 6.29 Among the subjects available in the Specific Course provision was a 45 hour Scotvec course in communications and Scotvec modules were also available in counselling skills, problem solving, stressful situations and maths, for which an Elementary Certificate was also available. Other non-modular subjects included play art and calligraphy. 6.30 The Unit was well utilised by prisoners with 23 attending at the time of our inspection. Demand was such that a waiting list existed; even further demand was expected as the population increased. Opportunities were also available for prisoners to undertake open learning courses in addition to which attendance at a local school could be negotiated on an individual basis where appropriate. The absence of a College in the immediate area precluded prisoners attending on a full time basis but at the time of our inspection, one prisoner was undertaking a full time distance learning course with a College in Edinburgh. Evening classes run by Community Education were also available. Comment 6.31 Though the physical facilities for education were not impressive - indeed, they were barely adequate - the Unit was providing a well balanced and appropriate service. Prisoners who were preparing for release after having completed lengthy sentences, recognised the need to improve on their communication and other skills and the curriculum which was on offer was entirely appropriate for that purpose. However, the fact that there was a waiting list of prisoners who wished to avail themselves of education leads us to suggest that the Governor should review the education provision with a view to extending this valuable resource. Library 6.32 No formal library service existed within the establishment but twice weekly visits were arranged to the community library in Newton Stewart, where prisoners could make use of the full range of services available. Within the prison a range of books, purchased by the establishment, was available in a facility close to the dormitory areas, known as the 'Quiet Room'. 6.33 We were satisfied that the combination of both those facilities met the needs of the population. Physical Education 6.34 Because of the size of the prisoner population, the establishment did not have any PE staff though a local programme was organised by two trained Sports and Games Officers, both of whom were Residential Officers. 6.35 In the report of our last inspection, we had criticised the condition of the gymnasium and had recommended that a new facility should be provided; it was, therefore, pleasing to note that the former timber building had since been demolished. The main gymnasium facility was now a weights/fitness area which had been created out of a former shower area; a new shower/changing area had also been provided. Additionally, prisoners had access at certain times to the gymnasium area of the staff social club which was in the grounds of the estate; activities such as badminton could be accommodated there and work was being undertaken to make it suitable for indoor football. At the time of our inspection, PE was available during the day only at weekends; however, the weights room was available mid week from 1700 to 2115 hours. 6.36 On admission, every prisoner was briefed on the PE facilities and was given a basic introduction to health and safety (H & S) techniques, particularly in relation to the use of the weights/fitness equipment. Thereafter, they were allowed to use the equipment on an unsupervised basis. 6.37 Prisoners could also participate in a number of supervised activities outwith the establishment. Those included mountain biking, swimming, hill and beach walking and fishing trips. Notices advertising such activities were normally posted a week in advance with attempts being made to ensure that prisoners participated on a rota basis. Residential staff were encouraged to participate in their supervision. 6.38 A prisoner football team participated in a local amateur league on a home and away basis as well as playing friendly matches, including games against other prisons. There was a grass football pitch within the grounds of the estate whilst opportunities were also available for participation in a 6-a-side league at a local astro-turf facility. Bowling and putting greens were also available within the grounds. 6.39 Proposals were meanwhile being drawn up for a new programme of regime activities which would include an element of timetabling, the intention being that the Sports and Games Officers would be given time off other duties in order to supervise PE activities thus enabling the programme to be developed further. Comment 6.40 We were pleased to note the improvements in the facilities which had been made since our last inspection and we were satisfied that best use was being made of fairly limited space. The programme of activities seemed entirely suitable for prisoners in an open establishment. Visits 6.41 The isolated location of the prison inevitably makes travelling very lengthy for the vast majority of prisoners' families - indeed, a number of prisoners informed us that they did not ask their families to make such a journey, relying instead solely on the Home Leave Scheme. 6.42 Visits took place between 1300 and 1545 daily in a former recreation room which had recently been refurbished and now provided relaxed and comfortable surroundings. Prisoners and their visitors could also use the extensive grounds, an option which was particularly popular in good weather. Supervision was unobtrusive though we were satisfied that staff were alert and maintaining appropriate levels of supervision. Vending machines were available to dispense hot drinks and snacks. 6.43 On the day on which we inspected, only eight prisoners were receiving visits and we were advised that this comparatively low take-up rate was the norm. We spoke informally to one visitor who confirmed that travelling time was a major disincentive to regular visits. 6.44 In addition to their standard visits, each prisoner could qualify for a parole visit once a month. This entailed a 6-hour period during which prisoners and their families could leave the establishment but were required to remain within a 30 mile radius. Again, because of the distance involved the take up for this was lower than might have been expected. 6.45 Family contact for the majority of prisoners was maintained by the Short Home Leave Scheme, whereby prisoners could spend one weekend per month at their home address. The establishment provided supervised transport to Glasgow leaving at 0830 hours on Friday morning with prisoners then being uplifted for the return journey at 1400 hours on Sunday. There was a drop off and pick up point at Ayr and prisoners who lived elsewhere in Scotland were provided with appropriate travel warrants to continue their journey from Glasgow. 6.46 Under a local initiative, the bus which transported prisoners on their home leaves was available free of charge to prisoners' families who wished to travel to Penninghame on a Friday, take advantage of weekend visits and then return home on a Sunday. However, this also involved the expense of overnight accommodation in the local area which perhaps explained the low take-up rate - only one prisoner's family had taken advantage of the service in the 12 months since it had been introduced. 6.47 Three card telephones were available for prisoners' use and it was clear that prisoners were making good use of those facilities in the absence of normal visits. Comment 6.48 Family contact has an important part to play in the resettlement of LTPs and at Penninghame a range of appropriate options was available. The Short Home Leave Scheme provided the main family contact arrangement and was clearly appreciated by the participants. However, it was clear that normal and local parole visits had a lower take up rate than might have been expected due to the distance and travelling time involved. We were, however, satisfied that the opportunities for family contact were kept under review and that a flexible approach was being adopted. 6.49 We suggested to the Governor that consideration might be given to extending the weekend visiting times to allow visits to commence mid morning as that might encourage more families to attend (though we acknowledge that staffing issues may preclude such an extension). Family Contact Development Officer 6.50 The establishment's Family Contact Development Officer (FCDO) was the Catering Supervisor, a function for which he had been responsible for three years; there was also a Deputy FCDO. 6.51 Since assuming that function, the FCDO had instigated a number of initiatives aimed at improving visit arrangements - for example, the offer of the free return bus trip at weekends (see paragraph 6.46). He had also arranged to have a selection of toys for young children in the visits area and had introduced a general information leaflet. 6.52 The FCDO was not directly involved in the induction process though he did see all prisoners during that period in his role as Catering Supervisor and took the opportunity to give a brief outline of his FCDO responsibilities. That said, as part of a general review of the induction arrangements, consideration was being given to providing a specific FCDO slot in the programme. Comment 6.53 We were impressed with the commitment being shown by the FCDO but had some doubts as to whether a Catering Supervisor was the ideal choice for such an important post, particularly as his hours of attendance normally did not include weekend duty. He did make regular visits to the midweek sessions to make himself available to visitors but given that most visits took place at the weekend, his opportunities for contact were limited. We suggest, therefore, that consideration be given to nominating another Officer who could be available more at weekends. 6.54 Our suggestion that details of the Sacro sponsored bus for visitors should be included in the next review of the information leaflet was accepted. Lifer Liaison Officer 6.55 At the time of our inspection there were 27 prisoners serving life sentences. Though some of those individuals had received release programmes and were working towards a known liberation date, a number had not received such a programme and had been transferred to Penninghame on the recommendation of the Parole Board for testing in open conditions. 6.56 There had in fact been a considerable increase in recent times in the number of life sentence prisoners within the establishment. The fact that many had not received release dates meant that full reviews for the Parole Board had to be conducted which also represented a considerable increase in the workload of the Lifer Liaison Officer (LLO) - a function which was undertaken by the Deputy Governor. Though the position was manageable, we suggested that consideration be given to the appointment of a deputy LLO in order that the increased workload be more equitably divided. Some assistance was provided by a Residential Supervision and our suggestion was that this arrangement should be formalised. 6.57 Liaison between the LLO and the Parole Board was good and the LLO confirmed that help and assistance were generally forthcoming when required. The LLO attended national meetings of such post holders and reported that there were no specific difficulties in the management of this group of prisoners. Comment 6.58 The increasing number of life sentence prisoners at Penninghame without a release programme requires to be carefully monitored. Should a release programme not be approved by the Secretary of State, a prisoner might spend a number of years at Penninghame which we do not believe is in the best interests of either the prison or indeed the prisoners. Whilst acknowledging the pressure on prison places elsewhere, a growing number of 'disgruntled LTPs' without firm plans for release could have an adverse effect on this establishment in the longer term. We therefore suggest that this situation is monitored carefully in the future by SPS HQ.
|
