6. REGIMES

Reception

6.1 The Reception was located beside the accommodation Halls and provided easy access for vehicles as well as ease of movement to and from the Halls. The physical layout of the facility had not changed since our last inspection and consisted of eight holding cubicles, a changing cubicle, two showers, a bath and toilet and a medical room for Nursing staff - see paragraph 8.20. The storage rooms had, however, been re-organised and despite the cramped conditions, managed effectively to store all clothing and personal property. There were also laundry facilities which were used to maintain admission kits and to provide a washing service for duvet covers for the entire prison.

6.2 Staffing in the Reception comprised one early shift, one back shift and one day shift Residential Officer post, with one day shift post at weekends. Staff were responsible for processing all liberations, courts and admissions and that meant checking property and cash and entering warrant details on to SPIN. They were also responsible for checking and listing all property transactions at visits. Two passmen provided assistance seven days a week from 0715 to 2115 hours, though we were assured that rest days were available to them. They were responsible for maintaining the prison kits, for operating the laundry and for undertaking the general cleaning of the area; access to the clothing store was only under the supervision of staff and the passmen had no access to prisoners’ warrants.

6.3 The systems and processes within the Reception were being undertaken to a high standard and staff are to be commended for the level of service they were providing, despite the cramped and inadequate physical conditions in which they were required to work. We were particularly impressed by the efforts which were made to interview prisoners in privacy, which meant using the staff office. We were also pleased to see that though prisoners were being processed as quickly as possible, they were still being given basic information, including their earliest date of liberation, before they moved through to the Halls where the Induction process took place - see paragraphs 6.6-9. Meals were provided from the kitchen when necessary and advances from wages or personal cash were also available.

Comment

6.4 The physical conditions within the Reception were cramped and inadequate for the needs of both Reception and Nursing staff to undertake their duties, an issue which was of particular concern given the imminent introduction of the new Suicide Prevention Strategy. Despite this, the Reception process operated well and was a credit to the staff who worked there. We suggest, however, that as funds become available work should be undertaken to improve the physical conditions in this area.

6.5 We have written to the Governor suggesting that he should re-examine the staffing situation and in particular, the number of times on which the day shift post had to be extended, resulting in the Officer in question having particularly high TOIL hours.

Induction/Labour Allocation

6.6 The Induction process began in Reception where a ‘risk of violence’ pro forma was completed on each prisoner, with the aim of ascertaining whether the individual was at risk and/or in need of protection. On arrival in the designated Hall, a second pro forma was completed by an Officer, the purpose of which was firstly to obtain further information about the prisoner and to identify any immediate needs or concerns and secondly as a check list for providing information about the prison routines and procedures. On the evening of admission, the Hall Supervisor also interviewed the prisoner, usually with the foregoing information to hand.

6.7 Convicted prisoners attended a half day session, held every Friday, where they were introduced to representatives of the other key aspects of the prison regime, including education, social work and the drugs and MDT co-ordinators; they were also shown an information video on HIV/AIDS. That session was not, however, currently provided for remand prisoners or for convicted prisoners on protection.

6.8 For convicted prisoners only, there was thereafter a twice weekly induction/labour allocation interview, conducted by the Regimes Supervisor, where work opportunities were described and work parties allocated, where possible in accordance with the prisoner’s preference. Subsequent changes of job could also be requested at any time.

Comment

6.9 The induction process appeared well structured and straightforward, dealing satisfactorily with all key issues. We suggest, however, that at least some of the additional material presented to the convicted prisoners on the Friday afternoon sessions should also be provided for protection and remand prisoners.

Sentence Planning

6.10 There was a Sentence Planning scheme for all prisoners serving 18 months or more, with a Residential Officer currently holding the role of Sentence Planning co-ordinator. At the time of the inspection there were 26 LTPs in the establishment, some of whom were awaiting onward transfer following sentencing (a process which could take several months); in addition, there was a similar number of prisoners serving 18 months or more.

6.11 An administration system for the scheme had been set up in an office adjacent to ‘A’ Hall but the area in question was in a poor state of decor and was lacking in both floor covering and adequate desk facilities. We were, however, advised that the office was shortly to be moved to another location in the same corridor. Folders were in place for a number of the eligible prisoners but an examination of them indicated that no use whatever had been made of the majority. We were in fact told that most of the Supervisors took little interest in Sentence Planning and consequently did not monitor progress or quality; similarly, no management or review system was in place.

6.12 A Personal Officer scheme was in existence but appeared to operate on an informal and ad hoc basis. Training had been carried out in the past but staff turnover meant that a number of the current staff in ‘A’ Hall, where the scheme operated, would not have had the benefit of that training.

Comment

6.13 Notwithstanding the current uncertain status of the national sentence planning scheme, we suggest that the stated intent at Aberdeen should be carried through with progress being monitored by Hall Supervisors and accountability being managed through the appraisal system. At the same time, the Personal Officer scheme should be placed on a more formal basis.

Offending Behaviour Programmes

6.14 Several programmes aimed at challenging offending behaviour were available with referral to those programmes occurring in various ways. To a large extent, however, access to a programme appeared to be initiated by the programme provider.

6.15 The Social Work Unit offered three programmes. Anger Management consisted of a once weekly two hour session over a ten week period whilst a programme for Schedule (1) offenders consisted of twice weekly two hour sessions also for ten weeks - at the time of our inspection, that latter course had only been run once. Finally, there was a one session per week programme for prisoners with a drugs problem - see paragraph 6.42 - though pending the introduction of an accredited programme from SPS HQ, there was no Prison Officer involvement. The national Cognitive Skills programme had also been run once in the current year with eight prisoners participating, though two more such courses were scheduled to be held before April 1998.

6.16 We were concerned to note that there was no connection between sentence planning and referral to programmes, nor was there any structured needs assessment in place. We were advised, however, that the establishment did intend to adopt the model currently under development at HMP Barlinnie.

Comment

6.17 Although some offending behaviour programmes were in evidence, they did not seem to be accessible in any systematic way nor did they appear to be centrally co-ordinated. The establishment was aware that SPS accredited programmes were in the offing and perhaps rightly, did not wish to develop a needs assessment model independently of, for example , Barlinnie. Whilst acknowledging this, we nevertheless suggest that an appropriate system of needs assessment should inform the development and prioritisation of offending behaviour programmes at Aberdeen, that there should be an appropriate system of referral of prisoners to those programmes and that there should be clear co-ordination of this area of activity at senior management level.

Employment

6.18 Prisoner employment consisted of several production workshops together with a variety of service jobs within the prison - ie, in reception, kitchen, laundry, and general cleaning duties in the Halls. We were pleased to note that all Industrial Officers were in the process of obtaining D32 assessor qualifications and the main work parties were as follows:-

6.18.1 Joiners - employing up to 15 prisoners in the manufacture of various timber products, the contract being for garden benches. Though working in relatively cramped conditions, the workshop appeared busy and purposeful.

6.18.2 Knitwear - employing up to 18 prisoners in the production of staff and prisoner sweaters. The work party had an air of purpose and activity.

6.18.3 Textiles - employing up to 10 prisoners producing elbow and shoulder patches for sweaters. This gave the impression of being the least active work party, partly reflecting the relatively sedentary and uninteresting nature of the work.

6.18.4 Laundry - employing up to six prisoners (though we were told it was intended to increase that number to 10). This party had only recently started and was providing a much needed service (see paragraphs 7.11-13).

6.18.5 Craft-shop - employing up to 10 prisoners in producing a range of wood and other products for the Prison Charity Shop and local charities as well as for use within the prison.

6.18.6 Industrial Cleaners - employing up to 16 prisoners and offering certificated training in cleaning as well as providing a cleaning service throughout the establishment, the impact of which could readily be seen.

6.19 In addition to the work parties described above, prisoners on protection worked in their cells, mainly fitting bristles to brushes. Female prisoners also carried out this work, as well as doing some laundry work and other tasks - see paragraphs 3.25-26.

Comment

6.20 We had two major concerns about industries. Firstly, as we have found in other overcrowded local prisons, the high number of escorts meant that Industrial staff were often called upon to undertake that duty which meant that worksheds sometimes had to close. So far, contractual obligations were being met despite this disruption though in the longer term, were this situation to continue then there is the possibility that contracts could suffer. Our second concern related to the poor physical condition of the worksheds themselves, an issue which was the subject of a recommendation in the report of our last formal inspection. We were disappointed to note that in the intervening period no significant improvements had been made and the worksheds can only be described as unacceptable. We therefore repeat the previous recommendation that Aberdeen should be provided with a new workshed complex.

6.21 Taken together, the work provision offered sufficient places for the establishment’s current convicted population, though any significant population increase would require additional facilities. Given the type of establishment, there was a reasonable variety of work for the majority of the population and the air of activity around the workshops was encouraging. However, we suggest that consideration be given to effecting some improvement in the quality of work available to prisoners on protection and female prisoners. Future planning may also look to develop options reflecting more closely employment opportunities outside the prison with a view to improving prisoners’ prospects on release.

APEX

6.22 The induction procedure for convicted prisoners included information about the services available through APEX, who provided a one day employment preparation course every month. However, we understand that the uptake for those courses was relatively poor. We were also told that due to recent staff redeployment, the staff group in ‘A’ Hall was likely to know little about the APEX services and it might well be that this is not unrelated to the reported low uptake.

Comment

6.23 If APEX services are to provide value, prisoners must be encouraged and directed towards them. Similarly, Residential staff knowledge and awareness are essential to support this aim.

Physical Education

6.24 A substantial gymnasium facility had recently been built, incorporating a sports hall and a well-equipped fitness suite, together with male and female changing rooms, showers and toilets and staff offices. The facility was staffed by two Officer instructors. PE kits were available though the majority of prisoners preferred to wear their own items.

6.25 A PE programme was in place which offered some provision to all prisoner groups, though female prisoners would only be accommodated if a female Officer was available to accompany them. At the time of our inspection, 65% of the prisoner population made use of the facilities. The main team activities were football and volleyball with the majority of the activities taking place in the mornings and evenings. On Monday-Thursday afternoons a weight training module, which was delivered over a three week period, was available for a maximum of six prisoners. However, plans were well advanced for the introduction of a further three modules covering a variety of activities.

6.26 The programme was, however, compromised somewhat by staff availability and it appeared that, for example, time was lost if both PEIs were off duty simultaneously, though both were often on duty together, covering a day shift/late shift roster. We understand that in an attempt to resolve that difficulty, the establishment was seeking a third PEI.

6.27 The gymnasium was also used by staff and as a staff training venue on Friday afternoons - see paragraph 9.7.

Comment

6.28 For a prison of Aberdeen’s size, the establishment was particularly well provided for in respect of PE facilities, in sharp contrast to the relative lack of investment noted in other areas. With regard to the issue of staffing, it may be that a creative approach to the use of the existing staff resource would enable a more consistent delivery of the PE programme than exists at present.

Education

6.29 The Education Unit was located in a purpose-built, free-standing building. The accommodation, which was of good quality, comprised one large classroom, two small classrooms, one small office and male and female toilets. The Unit was bright, attractive and well-appointed and there were plans to increase flexibility of usage by providing a divider for the large classroom.

6.30 The staffing complement was one full-time Co-ordinator and five part-time teachers, amounting to a total full-time equivalent of 1.7 and all staff were employed by Aberdeen College which held the education contract for the prison. The Education Co-ordinator liaised effectively with her line-manager in the College and with the Regimes Manager who had responsibility for education within the prison and the existence of such regular meetings, together with the experience of the teaching personnel, had ensured the smooth operation of the Contract.

6.31 The contract was for 1443 hours, extended over 50 weeks to meet priorities declared by prison management. The extension to a 50-week session was a new development introduced this year and though it might create some problems of staff availability over the summer period, it offered opportunities for some imaginative curriculum planning to include more creative and practical activities.

6.32 The curriculum comprised Basic English, Media Studies, Communication, Mathematics, Computing, Art, Food Safety and Hygiene and within each teaching group were students of a wide range of abilities. Most courses were modular and could lead to certification (SCOTVEC now SQA). However, there was a problem of discontinuity which was exaggerated by the short-term nature of most prisoners and highlighted the need for a system of accreditation to give students credit for work done. The National Record of Achievement - or a local variation of it - would therefore be appropriate and should be considered by local management.

6.33 The curriculum was reasonably balanced with the core items being communication, numeracy and computing skills. There were adequate resources to support the curriculum programme and these were mainly provided from within the prison budget, with additional support being provided by the contractor in the form of computer hardware. The main target population for the curriculum programme was male and female convicted prisoners and there was a waiting list for most courses, though the Education Unit had only 70% usage. This was no doubt related to the decision to extend the education session to 50 weeks.

Comment

6.34 The quality of education in the prison was of a high standard. Personal relationships were very good; staff were committed and flexible; and the curriculum was reasonably well-balanced and well-resourced. Also the extension of the education session to 50 weeks provided an opportunity for the imaginative introduction of creative and practical activities. Prison management might, however, wish to consider ways of increasing the accommodation usage from the existing level of 70%, especially as there were waiting lists for most courses. A system of recording achievement should also be introduced to recognise the work of students who are mainly short-term prisoners. These suggestions would, in our opinion, improve what is already a good provision of education.

Library

6.35 The prisoners’ library, which was managed by two Officers, was located in the Chapel/’A’ Hall recreation area. A selection of books, mainly fiction, had been collected on a voluntary basis and were stored in three lockable cabinets but there was no link with the public library service nor with the prison’s Education Unit. This very limited service had only been resumed shortly before our inspection. In overall terms, the quality of provision was very poor and we suggest, therefore, that a review to determine the most effective method of managing this service be carried out.

Lifer Liaison Officer

6.36 At the time of inspection, Aberdeen held five life sentence prisoners who were being held in the establishment for a variety of reasons. The Lifer Liaison Officer (LLO) was the Residential Unit Manager and had held that role for 18 months. His training had been limited to attendance at seminars at the SPS College, though he did maintain contact with LLOs elsewhere. Included in his responsibilities was the presentation of cases to Discretionary Lifer Tribunals, one of which had been held shortly before our inspection. There was no deputy in place, though the Unit Manager currently under training at the prison fulfilled that role on an informal basis. We were also informed that Residential staff had not received any training in lifer and parole issues.

Comment

6.37 Although the number of life sentence and other LTPs was relatively small, nevertheless they represented an important element of the establishment’s population. We have indicated elsewhere in this report that the Personal Officer role should be more fully developed. In addition, we considered that relevant training in parole and life sentence management should be provided as a matter of priority.

Social Work

6.38 The Social Work Unit was staffed by a Senior Social Worker, two Social Workers and a part-time clerical worker; the Unit was often also used as a placement for a social work student. The Senior had been in post for almost two years with the Social Workers having one year and six months in post respectively. There were no issues or concerns raised over staffing, other than the part-time clerical post which was deemed by the local authority to require a full-time commitment, particularly with the introduction of a new computerised information system - see paragraph 6.43.

6.39 The Unit was located in a building close to the Halls and comprised an open plan main office with a small interview room and kitchen and toilet facilities. The conditions were acceptable other than the fact that the Senior Social Worker had to share the open plan office, though everyone agreed that the new facilities were a significant improvement on the old ones which had been vacated in February 1997. Interview facilities in the Halls and those available for group work were, however, less than acceptable though there were plans to make use of the new divided classroom in the Education Unit (see paragraph 6.29) for that latter purpose. The interview facilities within the Halls were not planned for improvement and the intermittent availability of these meant that at times, clients were being interviewed on landings and in corridors, which is unacceptable. We suggest that consideration be given to this issue by local management to try to come to a more appropriate arrangement for social work interviews.

6.40 The referral system operating within the prison appeared to be effective and Unit staff were included in the Induction programme for convicted prisoners. This was not the case, however, in the Remand Hall but information given by Residential Officers to admissions was deemed to be appropriate in terms of highlighting the availability and role of the social work team. The only aspect that we were disappointed to note was the lack of an information leaflet for prisoners, though we were assured that this was an item that had been considered and would be introduced in the future.

6.41 The amount of work undertaken on welfare tasks was variable, as was the service provided by Residential Officers undertaking this role. However, more training had been delivered under the auspices of the Staff Training and Development Officer and the computerised information system was expected to provide more accurate information on time spent on and the type of welfare requests referred to the Social Work Unit.

6.42 Group work was being undertaken by Unit staff, targeting anger management, those who had committed Schedule (I) offences and those with addiction problems, with assistance for that latter group being supplemented by a community-based social worker. However, due to the resources available within the establishment, only one type of groupwork programme was undertaken at any one time which meant that when we inspected, only one programme of each type had been undertaken in the current year.

6.43 Relationships between the Unit and prison management team were described as excellent. There was an open door policy as well as regular formal meetings to agree the Annual Management Plan. In addition, an informal Service Level Agreement had been tried out and was proving to be a useful management tool. The new computerised information system, which had been developed for the prison social work unit by the local authority, had been running since April 1997 and was providing accurate information for monitoring the work of the Unit.

6.44 Priority groupings of prisoners had been agreed locally, in order to ensure effective targeting of services and this arrangement appeared to be clear and appropriate to the local prisoner population. Other targeted areas of work included representation on the SRMG, Health and Safety (H & S) Committee and attendance at the multi-functional operations meetings.

Comment

6.45 The work of the Social Work team appeared to be well-focused and integrated into the overall direction of the establishment. There were clear lines of communication and relationships at all levels appeared to be sound. Developments in services were appropriate to the population and in keeping with changes in SPS. The only areas of concern were the Hall-based interview facilities and the lack of an information sheet.

Psychology

6.46 A Psychologist from Grampian Healthcare Trust provided one session per week. She was based in the Surgery and referrals were made by the MO, the Social Work Unit or prisoners’ self-referrals. The main thrust of her work was short-term crisis intervention rather than continuing cases, which meant that the workload fluctuated somewhat on a weekly basis, though it still appeared to be manageable.

6.47 There was no involvement in central SPS initiatives, though the Psychologist was kept up to date with any developments. She was also part of the SRMG which was found to be both appropriate and useful in terms of developing ongoing policy as well as providing a forum for discussing individual cases.

Chaplains

6.48 The Chaplaincy team comprised two Church of Scotland Ministers who provided a total of 12 hours per week, one Roman Catholic Priest who attended for six hours per week and one Episcopalian who attended for one hour per week. There were good relationships between Chaplaincy team members and they also reported positive relationships with prisoners and staff. The main problem area for the team appeared to be the part-time provision which made consistency of service particularly difficult. Nevertheless, they did manage to have regular representation on the SRMG and the team met quarterly with the Regimes Manager.

6.49 Due to the limited cover for the establishment, the Chaplains took it in turns to conduct an Ecumenical service every Sunday. Attendance was variable but the numbers could be as high as 15. Female prisoners were not allowed to attend that service but the Chaplains were putting together proposals which they hoped would overcome any concerns and allow the women to attend. The Chaplains also spent much of their time in the Halls speaking to individuals and seeing anyone on request. They were in the process of setting up a Prison Visitors scheme through the Hope Group, which would provide a valuable service to prisoners.

6.50 The Chapel was adequate but the facility was also used as a recreation and a groupwork room, which meant that equipment held there could be damaged. The Chaplains also had an office which was shared with the Cognitive Skills trainer in the portable building in the sterile area. This was far from being a satisfactory arrangement but it was hoped that plans to partition off areas of the Chapel would provide dedicated office space and more secure storage room.

Voluntary Organisations

(i) Prison Fellowship

6.51 Prison Fellowship representatives attended the prison on a Sunday and offered spiritual support to any prisoners who wished to remain behind after the Church Service. In addition, they also supported the Chaplains when they were short staffed by covering the Services as required. Links with the prison were made through the Chaplains and any issues or problems that the Fellowship representatives faced were directed through the Chaplaincy Team. There had been a recent appointment to the Prison Fellowship by way of a full-time post and the individual concerned had some very interesting ideas about the types of support and services that the Fellowship should and could provide both in prison and in the community. It will be interesting to see how this develops through the links with the Chaplains.

(ii) Alcoholics Anonymous

6.52 At the time of our last formal inspection, Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) had been very active in the prison but since then, the service which they provided had fallen away. In recent weeks, representatives had started once again to visit the establishment but there did not appear to be any great effort to promote their meetings and in fact, they normally only saw one prisoner on each of their visits. We met with two representatives who confirmed that AA was willing to hold regular meetings and we have, therefore, suggested to the Governor that a member of the Management team should be appointed to act as a liaison between the prison and AA in order to discuss the level of service which might be provided and to ensure that the prisoners throughout the establishment are made fully aware of that service.

Butler Trust

6.53 The Butler Trust Scheme had a high profile in the establishment resulting in a number of successful nominations over the years. The local Committee was chaired by the Human Resource (HR) Manager and was made up of five members representing a variety of staff groups. At the time of our inspection, four nominations were outstanding - two for staff groups and two for individuals - and a formal response on those was expected by the end of 1997. We were satisfied that both the profile and the organisation of the scheme were appropriate to ensure continued success in future nominations.

Family Contact

(i) Visits

6.54 The visit facilities were adjacent to the Gate and formed part of the Administration Block. The visits room itself, which was used for visits to both male and female prisoners, was very small and contained eight tables each with four chairs for open visits and two closed visit booths; at the time of our inspection, 15 prisoners were under closed visit restrictions. The ceiling in the room was very low and when combined with the poor ventilation, it produced a very claustrophobic atmosphere. There was a soft drinks vending machine but we were told that it was regularly out of use.

6.55 Remand prisoners were entitled to a 30 minute visit on Monday to Friday between 1330 and 1600 hours and on Saturday and Sunday between 0900 and 1115 hours though at each of those sessions, two tables were set aside for convicted prisoners use - see also below. There was, however, no booking system in operation for those visits which meant that at peak times, visitors could have to wait some time for their visit to start. For security and identification purposes, remand prisoners who chose to wear their own clothing at a visit were required to wear a tabard. Convicted prisoners did have a booking system and could have a 30 minute visit once a week with those sessions being held Monday to Friday between 1845 and 2045; Saturday and Sunday sessions were between 1400 and 1600 hours and were reserved either for those visitors who had to travel 40 miles or more or for prisoners who made special requests to have a visit during that period. As with the remand sessions, two tables were reserved during the convicted prisoners’ sessions for remand visits.

6.56 A total of four staff manned the visits area and that level of supervision was backed up by CCTV surveillance which was monitored from the Gate. Every prisoner was strip searched at the end of their visit but as that process required the presence of two members of the visits staff, who were also responsible for uplifting and returning prisoners to and from the Halls, it meant that there were regularly only two Officers present in the actual visits room.

6.57 The visitors waiting area was also a very small room, again suffering from poor ventilation which meant that despite the no-smoking rule, the atmosphere could become unpleasant and uncomfortable. Those who were waiting for a visit to start had to sit in rather uncomfortable plastic chairs and though there was a television set and a notice board with a variety of leaflets, there were no facilities or toys for children. Also, there were no lockers for visitors’ handbags, etc though we were advised that some were on order and were due to be installed in the waiting area shortly after our inspection.

6.58 Within the waiting area, there were male and female toilets with the latter containing a table which acted as a baby changing facility. The decor in the toilets was of a reasonable standard but neither facility had soap or towels.

Comment

6.59 In the report of our last formal inspection, we made a number of suggestions aimed at resolving some of the problems associated with the visit arrangements. That report recognised, however, that the only real long-term solution was the provision of a new, larger facility and a recommendation was made to the effect that such a project should be undertaken as and when funds became available. Unfortunately, those funds had not become available and there was no noticeable difference from the situation which we had encountered on the occasion of our last inspection. The situation had in fact deteriorated markedly because the number of prisoners who could make use of the facility had risen from 147 at the time of the last inspection to the present population of 212, a figure which included female prisoners who previously had their own small visits area on the ground floor of the Female Unit. In our opinion, the need for a new visits facility has now reached a critical stage because the present facility is far too small for the needs of the prison and created increasing security difficulties for staff. It is for those reasons that we have recommended at paragraph 13.3 that there should be a new combined Operations Room/Visits area/staff facilities complex.

6.60 We also believe that as an interim measure, some steps could be taken to improve the existing facilities until such time as a new building is in place. We suggest, therefore, that the following measures should be introduced:-

6.60.1 Some toys and children’s books should be provided in the visitors’ waiting area;

6.60.2 The existing tables in the visits room should be replaced with smaller ones to create more of a feeling of space;

6.60.3 Soap and paper towels or an electronic hand-dryer should be provided in the visitors toilets; and

6.60.4 Improved baby changing facilities.

(ii) Agents Visits

6.61 Accommodation for Agents’ visits was located in the old Gate area and comprised four small interview rooms each of which was adequately furnished for their purpose. Though the area was fairly basic, the facilities were adequate and in addition to Agents, they were used by a number of different organisations who wished to interview prisoners - e.g. Police, Social Workers, etc. We did have one minor security concern about the arrangements for this area and we have written to the Governor regarding this.

(iii) Prisoners Visitors

6.62 As is our custom, we extended an invitation to meet with prisoners visitors but unfortunately no one was prepared formally to meet our request. We did, however, speak to a number of visitors on an informal basis who all confirmed their satisfaction at the way they were treated by staff in the establishment. They did, however, express some concerns about the overall standard of the visits accommodation, the length of time they often had to wait prior to starting their visit and the lack of any facilities for children.

(iv) Family Contact Development Officer

6.63 The role of the Family Contact Development Officer (FCDO) was being undertaken on a part-time basis by an Officer who worked in the Segregation Unit. He had been responsible for the FCDO function for some four years prior to our inspection but we were disappointed to learn that he had not received any training for those duties. Also, his primary function in the Segregation Unit meant that he had very little time available in which to carry out his FCDO role. As FCDO, he reported directly to the Deputy Governor and at one time, the plan had been to create a small team of FCDOs so that the workload of taking forward a number of initiatives might be spread about; however, when we inspected, there was not even a Deputy in place.

6.64 Despite those difficulties, the FCDO did have a number of ideas to try and improve the existing visit arrangements. These included the introduction of a visitors leaflet, a survey of visitors to identify their priorities and needs and the introduction of proper baby changing facilities and wheelchair access to the establishment. In addition, he would have liked to have introduced training for visits staff with the aim of giving them a better insight to visitors’ needs.

Comment

6.65 We were disappointed with the FCDO arrangements at Aberdeen. It was very clear to us that those arrangements needed to be reconsidered with the aim of providing the FCDO with a much higher profile together with the time, training and resources necessary in order properly to carry out these duties.