HMP Latchmere House

Report on an unannounced short follow- up inspection of HMP Latchmere House

29 June – 1 July 2009 by HM Chief Inspector of Prisons

Printed and published by: Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons 1st Floor, Ashley House Monck Street London SW1P 2BQ England

HMP Latchmere House 2

Contents

Introduction 5 Fact page 7

1 Healthy prison assessment 9 2 Progress since the last report 15 3 Summary of recommendations 43

Appendices

I Inspection team 49 II Prison population profile 50

HMP Latchmere House 4 Introduction

Latchmere House is a small, semi-open resettlement prison in South West London. On our last visit, we found much to commend, but the establishment had just come under the management oversight of Wormwood Scrubs prison and we were concerned that staff were confused about their role and had lost their sense of direction. This unannounced short follow-up inspection found that there was still insufficient clarity of role, but that there remained much to applaud at the prison.

Latchmere remained a safe place. Early days were well managed, although risk assessments were sometimes hampered by delays in receiving previous prison and health files. There was little bullying and few incidents of self-harm. Security was efficiently managed and, generally, did not impede the regime. Despite many prisoners working out in the community, there was little substance misuse.

Accommodation remained of limited quality and the lack of in-cell electricity continued to be a major weakness. Staff-prisoner relations were good, but needed to be underpinned by a fully functioning personal officer scheme. Work on the wider diversity agenda was underdeveloped. Despite improvements in the management of race issues, the prison needed to explore further the reasons for the continued under-representation of black and minority ethnic prisoners in the best accommodation and on out-working. Chaplaincy and health services were good.

Prisoners generally had plenty of time out of cell, although evening lock-up was early for an establishment of this type. Education provision within the prison had generally improved and there was also good access for appropriate prisoners to opportunities to pursue learning and skills in the community.

The resettlement focus of the prison continued to be impeded by a lack of clarity over its role. Latchmere was supposed to be a resettlement facility for all London prisons, but the reducing reoffending plan remained merely a draft and was heavily weighted towards to Wormwood Scrubs. Nor was there sufficient focus on identified need, and work on the resettlement pathways required better management. However, offender management and planning had improved and public protection arrangements were good. There were some effective and practical reintegration services.

Latchmere House remained a commendably safe place, with good staff-prisoner relationships and plenty of purposeful activity both within the prison and in the community. It is therefore disappointing that we once again found that these strengths had not been reinforced by a clear statement and policy setting out the prison’s resettlement role for the London area. Without this clarity, Latchmere is likely to become a mere satellite of Wormwood Scrubs when it could be a beacon of good resettlement practice.

Anne Owers August 2009 HM Chief Inspector of Prisons

HMP Latchmere House 6 Fact page

Task of the establishment To receive male adult prisoners serving a sentence of four years or more, including indeterminate and life-sentenced prisoners, and assist them to prepare for release. Latchmere House offers help in renewing or strengthening family ties by giving earned visits of up to 12 hours each week in the community/at home. It also encourages prisoners to obtain paid external employment for up to 12 months before release.

Area organisation London Area. Since September 2006, the prison has come under the management oversight of Wormwood Scrubs.

Number held 193 on 29 June 2009

Certified normal accommodation 207

Operational capacity 207

Last inspection 15 - 19 January 2007

Brief history Latchmere House was acquired by the Prison Department in 1948 and has been used as a junior and senior detention centre, young offender institution and immigration centre for detainees before being designated a resettlement prison in 1991.

Description of residential units There are two residential units:

A wing:  90 places in 64 single rooms, 10 double rooms and two three-bed rooms. Some rooms have in-cell sanitation. Shower/toilet facilities can be accessed 24-hours a day.  There is one television room, one multi-faith room, one kitchen (to be converted to a second television room) and one laundry with two washing machines and two drying machines.  A wing contains a mix of prisoners on internal labour, education, community work and external employment.

B wing:  Most new receptions are located in B wing, a two-storey building that provides 117 places in 88 single rooms, nine double rooms, two three- and one four-bed room. Prisoners have their own room key and can access communal toilet/shower facilities 24 hours a day.  There are two television rooms. Laundry provision comprises two washing machines and two dryers. There is a pool table in a room on the ground floor. The toilet and shower facilities have recently been refurbished. A site survey has begun to install in-cell electricity, which has been delayed a number of times due to withdrawal of funding.

HMP Latchmere House 7 HMP Latchmere House 8 Section 1: Healthy prison assessment

Introduction

HP1 All inspection reports include a summary of an establishment’s performance against the model of a healthy prison. The four criteria of a healthy prison are:

Safety prisoners, even the most vulnerable, are held safely

Respect prisoners are treated with respect for their human dignity

Purposeful activity prisoners are able, and expected, to engage in activity that is likely to benefit them

Resettlement prisoners are prepared for their release into the community and helped to reduce the likelihood of reoffending.

HP2 Under each test, we make an assessment of outcomes for prisoners and therefore of the establishment’s overall performance against the test. In some cases, this performance will be affected by matters outside the establishment’s direct control, which need to be addressed by the National Offender Management Service.

…performing well against this healthy prison test. There is no evidence that outcomes for prisoners are being adversely affected in any significant areas.

…performing reasonably well against this healthy prison test. There is evidence of adverse outcomes for prisoners in only a small number of areas. For the majority, there are no significant concerns.

…not performing sufficiently well against this healthy prison test. There is evidence that outcomes for prisoners are being adversely affected in many areas or particularly in those areas of greatest importance to the well being of prisoners. Problems/concerns, if left unattended, are likely to become areas of serious concern.

…performing poorly against this healthy prison test. There is evidence that the outcomes for prisoners are seriously affected by current practice. There is a failure to ensure even adequate treatment of and/or conditions for prisoners. Immediate remedial action is required.

HP3 This Inspectorate conducts unannounced follow-up inspections to assess progress against recommendations made in the previous full inspection. Follow-up inspections are proportionate to risk. Short follow-up inspections are conducted where the previous full inspection and our intelligence systems suggest that there are comparatively fewer concerns. Sufficient inspector time is allocated to enable inspection of progress and, where necessary, to note additional areas of concern observed by inspectors. Inspectors draw up a brief healthy prison summary setting out the progress of the establishment in the areas inspected. From the evidence available they also concluded whether this progress confirmed or required

HMP Latchmere House 9 amendment of the healthy prison assessment held by the Inspectorate on all establishments but only published since early 2004.

Safety

HP4 At our previous inspection in 2007, we considered that the prison was performing well against this healthy prison test. Of 13 recommendations in this area, 11 had been achieved, one partially achieved and one not achieved. We have made four further recommendations.

HP5 Most prisoners came from open prisons and made their own way to Latchmere House. The reception area had been refurbished and prisoners said reception staff were respectful and friendly. There were occasions when prison and medical files did not arrive until after the prisoner, which could result in delays in completing the cell- sharing risk assessment, although high-risk prisoners were not accepted at the prison. There had been examples of prisoners arriving with significant health issues where these had not been communicated to Latchmere House by the sending prison, but a new protocol had been introduced to deal with this.

HP6 Prisoners were located depending on where there were spaces. This was usually to a shared dormitory-style room. Induction started the day after arrival and lasted two weeks. Prisoners were positive about induction, particularly the family session that facilitated a family visit.

HP7 Prisoners still regarded the prison as safe and said little bullying took place. They were confident that staff would take allegations of bullying seriously and take appropriate action. Incidents were investigated. The last assessment, care in custody and teamwork document had been opened in October 2008 and the last incident of self-harm some years previously, reflecting the cautious selection criteria for the prison. The suicide and self-harm policy had recently been updated. A prison investigation had been carried out following an apparently self-inflicted death of a man on resettlement leave and some lessons had been acted on.

HP8 The small security department was efficient and security information report (SIR) work up to date. Most SIRs were generated by security itself. The main issue of concern was mobile telephones and there had been a small number of finds. Most disciplinary charges appeared justified. There had been 52 adjudications in the year to date, similar to the previous year. Most were for returning late from work or home leave. The tariffs awarded were proportionate and regular tariff standardisation meetings took place.

HP9 Some targeted testing for alcohol took place. The selection criteria precluded prisoners with ongoing substance use issues, but the counselling, assessment, referral, advice and throughcare (CARAT) service was providing one-to-one and group work to prisoners with a history of substance use problems.

HP10 On the basis of this short follow-up inspection, we considered that the prison was still performing well against this healthy prison test.

HMP Latchmere House 10 Respect

HP11 At our previous inspection in 2007, we considered that the prison was performing reasonably well against this healthy prison test. Of 49 recommendations in this area, 17 had been achieved, eight partially achieved, 21 not achieved and three were no longer relevant. We have made 18 further recommendations.

HP12 The lack of in-cell electricity highlighted in our three previous inspection reports was still a concern. Some efforts had been made to brighten cells, but the internal fabric was poor. Dormitories were particularly poor. Communal areas were reasonably clean and the grounds pleasantly presented. Refurbishment of shower and toilet recesses had been completed in most, but not all, areas. Association rooms were stark and dreary. Prisoners were regularly consulted about living conditions.

HP13 Prisoners said most staff were helpful and respectful and we observed positive interactions. The application of the personal officer scheme was still poor. The scheme was again being revised and a new policy had been written. Despite this, and a few excellent personal officer entries in wing files, most files contained few, if any, entries and the quality was generally poor.

HP14 One member of staff was responsible for all areas of diversity work. The post holder was very proactive and additional time had been allocated, but was still insufficient. There was a disability policy, but little else for prisoners with disabilities. Nothing was done to address issues for gay, bisexual or transgender prisoners.

HP15 Sixty-five per cent of prisoners were from black and minority ethnic backgrounds, an increase from around half at the previous inspection. The race equality policy and action plan were up to date. Regular race equality meetings were run with prisoners attending. The governor and the race equality officer met regularly with black and minority ethnic prisoners, who spoke positively about being treated with respect by staff. As in 2007, ethnic monitoring showed that proportionately fewer black and minority ethnic prisoners worked out, but at 52% this had increased significantly and reflected some positive and proactive work to engage with them. Some other issues raised by monitoring had not been fully investigated or followed up.

HP16 The foreign national liaison officer had been on sick leave for some time and the foreign national policy was supplied by the prison some weeks after the inspection. There was little evidence that relevant issues were discussed at the race equality action team.

HP17 Faith needs were met by two chaplaincy staff. Services were held in the prison and prisoners could also attend services in the community. Prisoners were still required to remain in the prison for at least 24 hours each week, but a non-denominational service was run at the prison at weekends for those unable to attend worship in the community.

HP18 Prisoners welcomed the facility to make governor applications, which helped resolve many problems without recourse to the formal complaints process. Only 28 complaints had been received in the year to date, fewer than in the previous year. There were some delays in responding and no monitoring of trends and quality.

HMP Latchmere House 11 HP19 The incentives and earned privileges scheme was not relevant to the unique position of Latchmere House, but incentives were used creatively to reward prisoners on the enhanced level.

HP20 Prisoners were positive about the quality and variety of the food. They ate in association and appropriate arrangements had been made for those whose work commitments meant they missed breakfast or the evening meal. There was still no requirement for a prison shop as most items could be bought outside the prison, but these arrangements were under threat.

HP21 Health services were still good and prisoners were positive about them. A local GP provided a good level of cover. The overall cleanliness of the health centre was unsatisfactory. Clinical notes of prisoners transferring to Latchmere House did not always arrive. A range of over-the-counter medicines was now available. There was limited demand for mental health services, but these remained under-resourced.

HP22 On the basis of this short follow-up inspection, we considered that the prison was still performing reasonably well against this healthy prison test.

Purposeful activity

HP23 At our previous inspection in 2007, we considered that the prison was performing reasonably well against this healthy prison test. Of seven recommendations in this area, two had been achieved, two partially achieved, two not achieved and one was no longer relevant. We have made four further recommendations.

HP24 External gates, and therefore residential units, were routinely locked off as early as 8pm, limiting access to the fresh air even on summer evenings.

HP25 Allocation systems to education and work took place at well attended sentence planning boards and targets were now reflecting these issues. Education provision had improved, as had the accommodation in which it took place. A good range of basic skills programmes was offered, with evening and day courses available. Problems with punctuality and attendance at education had not been fully addressed. The learning resource centre had been shut leaving nothing to support learning and men needing help in finding employment. A small range of vocational training was available in-house, but this was usually accessed outside the prison.

HP26 Prisoners now had adequate opportunities to use the gym, but use was not analysed. There were adequate links with healthcare, and remedial physical education was offered. Accredited sports courses were available through an external college and a bid had been made for funding to provide coaching and accredited qualifications in house.

HP27 There was still no on-site library and access to community facilities was limited. This had been further restricted by the closure of the resource centre. Prisoners did not have access to email and the internet.

HP28 On the basis of this short follow-up inspection, we considered that the prison was still performing reasonably well against this healthy prison test.

HMP Latchmere House 12 Resettlement

HP29 At our previous inspection in 2007, we considered that the prison was not performing sufficiently well against this healthy prison test. Of 36 recommendations in this area, 15 had been achieved, seven partially achieved, 13 not achieved and one was no longer relevant. We have made 10 further recommendations.

HP30 There was still a lack of clarity about the role of Latchmere House as London’s resettlement prison and whether provision met the needs of the population. A draft reducing reoffending policy was heavily weighted towards HMP Wormwood Scrubs and had in any case not been finalised. The document did not outline how the regime at Latchmere House would anchor all work and activity at the prison to support the resettlement of prisoners. We continue to question the benefits of the clustering arrangement with Wormwood Scrubs.

HP31 A limited needs analysis of the population had been completed, but not acted on. Reducing reoffending pathway leads had been identified, but were not driving work in these areas. Local governance arrangements were weak.

HP32 A resettlement needs assessment was completed with all prisoners during induction. Sentence plans were completed during the fourth week. Most targets were individual and meaningful, but it was not always clear what action had been taken to address them. Personal officers did not contribute to sentence planning, but CARAT staff, education, labour allocation and probation were well integrated into this work.

HP33 All prisoners were allocated an offender supervisor regardless of whether or not they were in scope of offender management arrangements. Good relationships had been developed with external offender managers. Limited ongoing reviews of sentence plans took place for prisoners out of scope of offender management. The backlog of OASys assessments had largely been cleared. Public protection arrangements were good and some positive links with external organisations had been developed. Regular risk assessment boards were run with good input from the police. There was a comprehensive policy for prisoners serving life sentences and indeterminate sentences for public protection.

HP34 Few prisoners were released without accommodation, but the service was limited to one day a week and prisoners said accommodation was a pressing resettlement concern. There was little support for prisoners needing help with job search and no on-site job club. Some good links had been made with employers, but there were often delays in getting clearance for starting paid employment. These were the main sources of complaint from prisoners. The preparation for work course run during induction was accredited.

HP35 Few prisoners had serious mental health issues, but the primary care trust had commissioned a review to establish what more could be done. Most prisoners were registered with a GP, but assistance was available if this was not the case. CARAT staff had good links with community drug teams.

HP36 Citizens Advice provision was in the community and there was a good system for setting up bank accounts. An open learning money management pack was available,

HMP Latchmere House 13 but no individual debt counselling was provided on site. Needs identified in this area did not always result in sentence planning targets.

HP37 The frequent access to families and friends through weekly town visits meant there was no provision for visits. No relationship courses were offered, but a counsellor could support prisoners with family matters.

HP38 The senior probation officer provided a good lead in addressing sentence planning targets around offending behaviour programmes. The think first course had recently been introduced, but most needs were met in the community under day licence.

HP39 On the basis of this short follow-up inspection, we considered that the prison was still not performing sufficiently well against this healthy prison test.

HMP Latchmere House 14 Section 2: Progress since the last report

The paragraph reference number at the end of each recommendation below refers to its location in the previous inspection report.

Main recommendations To the governor

2.1 There should be a clear statement of purpose for Latchmere House as a resettlement prison that anchors its work and links all its policies and procedures to a common aim. (HP36) Not achieved. There was a draft reducing reoffending strategy, but this originated from HMP Wormwood Scrubs and was heavily weighted towards that prison. We repeat the recommendation.

2.2 The resettlement strategy should be updated to include the links with HMP Wormwood Scrubs, the London reducing reoffending strategy and the resettlement pathways for London, and to state clearly Latchmere House’s function as a resettlement prison. (HP37) Not achieved. The draft reducing reoffending strategy set out the links with Wormwood Scrubs, but had not been published. It was based on the London reducing reoffending strategy and included some detailed information about the resettlement pathways in the Wormwood Scrubs section, but little directly related to Latchmere House. (See section on resettlement strategy.) We repeat the recommendation.

2.3 An integrated sentence planning board should be held for all prisoners shortly after their arrival at Latchmere House that forms the foundation for effective multidisciplinary case management throughout their time at the prison. Regular checks conducted on progress by a named responsible person to ensure that resettlement needs are met. (HP38) Partially achieved. All prisoners attended a sentence planning board four weeks after arrival. These were chaired by their offender supervisor and attended by a variety of staff including education, activities and the counselling, assessment, referral, advice and throughcare (CARAT) service. The meeting involved the offender manager if the prisoner was in phase two (21 prisoners were considered very high risk of harm) or phase three (one prisoner was serving an indeterminate sentence for public protection). A record was kept of when offender managers did not attend and the reasons why. There was no involvement by personal officers or wing staff.

Further recommendation

2.4 Managers should ensure that personal officers are fully involved in the sentence planning process to support prisoners in achieving their targets.

2.5 Residential units should be refurbished to include the installation of in-cell electricity. (HP39) Not achieved. Despite being raised in the previous three inspection reports, the poor state of the residential units had not been addressed as external funding had repeatedly been withdrawn. Work to install in-cell electricity was now planned to begin in February 2010 and be

HMP Latchmere House 15 completed by the end of that year. We repeat the recommendation.

2.6 An effective personal officer scheme should be introduced in which one consistent personal officer is actively involved in a prisoner’s sentence planning and helps to identify and address resettlement needs throughout their time at Latchmere House. (HP40) Not achieved. Despite a new personal officer policy (see section on personal officers), personal officer work was still patchy. Many wing files contained no entries by personal officers and those that had been made were often poor. Prisoners knew who their personal officer was, but many said they would rather approach a wing officer they knew for assistance. Personal officers were not involved in resettlement work. We repeat the recommendation.

2.7 Action should be taken to deal with discrepancies highlighted by ethnic monitoring, particularly in relation to external employment opportunities for which more active support should be provided for black and minority ethnic men. (HP41) Partially achieved. The proportion of black and minority ethnic prisoners in external work had increased from 46% in November 2008 to 52% in June 2009, but was still not representative of the 65% black and minority ethnic prisoner population. Managers had taken action to address the discrepancy between white and black and minority ethnic prisoners getting external work. Job fairs had been organised and evening classes introduced to help prisoners who were finding it difficult to secure employment. The impact assessment for allocation to activities found that 75% of black and minority ethnic men had been identified with educational needs and 80% of prisoners involved with employment support agencies were black and minority ethnic men. (See section on race equality.) We repeat the recommendation.

2.8 Allocation to education and employment should be based on a prisoner’s identified learning and skills and resettlement needs as part of a holistic and coordinated approach to sentence planning. (HP42) Achieved. Allocation to education and employment had improved and took place at a well run weekly sentence planning board. The board was attended by a probation officer, representatives from education and information, advice and guidance staff who clearly informed the process. All prisoners on induction attended the board, where targets for education and work were set. However, there was insufficient regular monitoring of targets to ensure all prisoners got timely employment or training (see section on resettlement pathways).

Recommendation To the Director General

Faith and religious activity

2.9 The Prison Service should revise the requirement for prisoners to remain in the prison for 24 hours each week where this requires them to choose between contact with their family and attendance at a religious service in the community, where no appropriate religious services are provided in the prison. (5.39) Not achieved. The Prison Service had rejected this recommendation on the grounds that public confidence in the system of temporary release required prisoners to spend at least 24 hours a week in custody. An additional chaplain had been appointed at Latchmere House who coordinated non-denominational Christian prayers on Sunday mornings for those unable to attend worship in the community. Some multi-faith prayer rooms in the residential areas were also used. Between 10 and 20 Muslim prisoners attended Friday prayers, normally fitting this

HMP Latchmere House 16 around their work schedules, and the prison also granted licences for prisoners to attend a mosque near to their place of work. There was no evidence that prisoners were being disadvantaged by this rule.

Recommendations To the Governor

First days in custody

2.10 The reception area should be improved to provide a clean and welcoming environment that allows reception procedures to be carried out privately without interruptions. (1.13) Achieved. A new reception area had been developed adjacent to its previous location. This was bright and clean and included office space for private interviews and a new search area. The holding room was reasonable and appropriate information was displayed.

2.11 Prisoners should be offered the opportunity to make a free telephone call on arrival and this should be documented. Personal identification telephone numbers should be activated within an agreed and acceptable timescale. (1.14) Achieved. Prisoners arrived on Wednesdays and Thursdays. Many had been able to let family and friends know of their move or were accompanied by them. Prisoners in groups said they had been offered the opportunity to make a free telephone call on the day they arrived and this was recorded in a log in reception. Prisoners did not complain of any delays in personal identification numbers being activated and the clerk responsible said most were activated within hours of a prisoner’s arrival.

2.12 Prisoners should have individual interviews during the induction period and these should be documented in their wing file. (1.15) Partially achieved. All new arrivals were interviewed individually by a number of staff including probation and the CARAT service. On the first day of the induction programme, each new arrival was interviewed by a member of staff from the resettlement department who used a pathways assessment tool (PAT) that offered them opportunity to discuss personal circumstances and raise concerns. The fact that the interview had taken place was recorded in the wing history files, but the actual details of the interview were kept in the sentence planning file in the resettlement department and were not summarised in the wing history file.

2.13 Wing history files should include a copy of the pathways assessment.

Additional information

2.14 About four or five prisoners transferred to Latchmere House each week. Most made their own way independently, but sometimes their files did not arrive until days or weeks later. One file had still not arrived a month after the prisoner had transferred. This could result in delays in completing the cell-sharing risk assessment, although high-risk prisoners were not accepted at Latchmere House. There had been some problems with prisoners arriving with health needs that could not be met (see section on health services). The complaints procedures detailed one case where a prisoner had been required to pay the cost of his travel from HMP Sudbury to Latchmere House, which was not acceptable.

HMP Latchmere House 17 2.15 Prisoners said reception staff were respectful and friendly. New arrivals were given a comprehensive pack of relevant information and a specific hand-out focusing on good race relations. Induction lasted two weeks and prisoners in groups were positive about it, particularly the family session and period of release on temporary licence. A sentence planning form was completed with the family members, who fed into the sentence plan board.

2.16 Prisoners should not have to meet the cost of public transport when transferring to open prisons.

Residential units

2.17 There should be formal compatibility assessments for cell-sharing allocations. (2.13) Not achieved. Several prisoners working irregular hours in the community had been allocated rooms with prisoners who did not work and therefore disturbed them when leaving or returning. The lack of compatibility assessments risked creating unnecessary tensions. We repeat the recommendation.

2.18 Allocation of double cells on A wing should be made on a voluntary basis where possible, and where not possible should be based on work-related considerations. (2.14) No longer relevant. A wing was no longer used exclusively for prisoners working in the community and prisoners who found work could either apply voluntarily to move there or choose to remain on B wing. Compatibility assessments were not completed (see paragraph 2.17).

2.19 Residential units should be unlocked until later in the evening, particularly in the summer. (2.15) Not achieved. Residential units were still locked at 8pm, limiting the opportunity for outside exercise even on bright summer evenings. We repeat the recommendation.

2.20 An offensive displays policy should be introduced. (2.16) Not achieved. Although there was little in the way of offensive displays in residential areas, there was no policy for staff or prisoners to refer to. We repeat the recommendation.

2.21 Wings should be kept clean under the proper supervision of staff. (2.17) Achieved. Most rooms were clean and prisoners said they could get cleaning materials. There were enough cleaners on both wings who were allocated small areas to clean and completed their work quickly. There were cleaning schedules for communal areas. Cleaning was checked by an officer and the standard was reasonable. A wing was cleaner than B wing.

2.22 Wing facilities including showers, toilets and laundries should be kept in a good state of repair. (2.18) Partially achieved. Shower areas on A1 and B2 had been refurbished and work had started on the B1 shower area. A2 showers were in poor condition and some prisoners complained about low water pressure. Toilet areas and television rooms were stark. Some television rooms had no natural light and few chairs and were poorly decorated. The only washing machine in

HMP Latchmere House 18 the B1 laundry had been broken for several weeks, but the repair had been reported. Records showed few significant delays in repairs being completed.

2.23 Improvements should be made to wing facilities, particularly through the refurbishment of the A2 shower area and the decoration of television rooms.

2.24 Most new arrivals had to share a room, even though many would have had a single room at their previous establishment. Single rooms were allocated chronologically and prisoners could wait three months or more for one. A wing was still considered quieter and cleaner and was where more prisoners wanted to live. Monitoring figures showed that more white prisoners than black and minority ethnic prisoners were accommodated on A wing. Prisoners were regularly consulted about living conditions and the governor also met regularly with black and minority ethnic prisoner representatives.

2.25 Both wings had two three-bed dormitories and B wing also had a four-bed dormitory. These were dreary and some had makeshift curtains. There were plans to use prisoners to decorate areas of the prison. A ‘task team’ had recently been introduced and comprised a group of prisoners dedicated to cleaning specific areas of the prison. Some of these prisoners had received accredited British Institute of Cleaning Sciences training.

2.26 A wing had just two telephones for up to 90 prisoners, while B wing had five for 117 prisoners. However, prisoners could move between wings to use telephones when the units were unlocked and many prisoners had access to mobile telephones during day release. Microwaves and toasters were provided, but prisoners complained that there were not enough fridges. The grounds were pleasant and well maintained, with some attractive seating areas.

2.27 The reasons for the apparently disproportionate number of white prisoners on A wing should be formally investigated.

Housekeeping points

2.28 The dormitories should be redecorated.

2.29 More fridge space should be provided.

Staff-prisoner relationships

2.30 Managers should deal with concerns about staff through advice and guidance and performance management and ensure that such staff are closely supervised. (2.24) Achieved. Prisoners did not raise any concerns about staff during the inspection. They said most were helpful and respectful and we observed positive interactions. The governor in charge dealt with any concerns that were raised through advice and guidance or formal investigations as appropriate.

HMP Latchmere House 19 Personal officers

2.31 The personal officer policy should give role-specific guidance and detail the competencies required for the personal officer role and the training available. (2.31) Partially achieved. A new personal officer policy had been written and included clear guidance about what was expected from the role. Training for personal officers was planned, but had not taken place.

2.32 The planned training for personal officers should be implemented.

2.33 Good quality and regular entries should be made on all prisoners’ history sheets. (2.32) Not achieved. See paragraph 2.6. We repeat the recommendation.

2.34 The form issued to prisoners by personal officers should be withdrawn and replaced by face-to-face contact between staff and prisoner. (2.33) Not achieved. The revised personal officer arrangements outlined in the new policy still required them to complete a tick box form related to each of the reducing reoffending pathways. This potentially acted as a substitute for a meaningful monthly conversation. We repeat the recommendation.

2.35 Latchmere House was the designated resettlement prison for London and its main function was to help prisoners address their sentence planning targets and support their reintegration into the community. The personal officer role was central to this aim, but the scheme was still performing poorly. The governor was trying once again to re-launch the scheme to support prisoners in their resettlement.

Bullying and violence reduction

2.36 A formal record should be kept of all investigations into suspected incidents of bullying referred to the safer prisons officer. (3.9) Achieved. Details of bullying incidents and subsequent investigations were kept in tackling anti-social behaviour records (see additional information).

2.37 There should be periodic briefings to staff about the nature of bullying to help them maintain their levels of awareness and to provide an appropriate response when alerted to suspected incidents of bullying. (3.10) Achieved. Any bullying incidents were discussed at monthly staff meetings and, if relevant, at morning briefing meetings. The safer custody coordinator had prepared a detailed staff guide on how to manage incidents and set this as a regular development objective for his staff.

2.38 Incidents of bullying were very rare, but were tackled robustly by staff and managers. The prison had replaced the victim/perpetrator model with a tackling anti-social behaviour process.

HMP Latchmere House 20 Violence reduction was the responsibility of a residential senior officer who was also responsible for suicide prevention and self-harm. This work was underpinned by an up-to-date and comprehensive violence reduction strategy.

2.39 The last prisoner survey had been in 2006 and the response rate had been low. In groups and individually, prisoners said Latchmere House was exceptionally safe and that prisoners and staff were tolerant and respectful of each other. Most complaints were the result of low level tension associated with communal living, but there was no evidence that staff underestimated situations or left problems unresolved. Information was shared between security, healthcare and the safer custody coordinator, who also regularly checked accident reports, reports of unexplained injuries and wing observation books.

2.40 The prison should use an exit survey so that prisoners can raise any concerns about particular issues confidentially, and the results should inform the violence reduction strategy.

Self-harm and suicide

2.41 The suicide prevention policy should be re-written to reflect the specific context of Latchmere House. (3.18) Achieved. The policy had last been reviewed in May 2009 and more accurately reflected current practice, although it made no reference to the counselling support available.

2.42 Emergency response boxes in offices should be sealed and their contents audited regularly. (3.19) Not achieved. The emergency response box on A wing had been opened and was poorly stocked with a mask and some dressings. B wing did not have an emergency response box. Staff said new emergency response boxes were on order. Both offices had sealed first aid boxes. We repeat the recommendation.

2.43 There had been no known acts of self-harm in recent years and the last assessment, care in custody and teamwork (ACCT) document had been opened in October 2008. The one document available to review had been completed to a reasonable standard. Eighty per cent of staff in contact with prisoners had been trained in ACCT procedures and there were enough ACCT assessors.

2.44 A monthly safer custody meeting was attended by a representative from the Samaritans, but Listeners found it difficult to attend as many worked out. The content and depth of discussion at the meetings was appropriate to the low level of risk for most prisoners. There was little demand for a formal Listener scheme.

2.45 There had been one apparent self-inflicted death of a prisoner on resettlement leave in August 2007. There had been no investigation by the Prisons and Probation Ombudsman, but the prison had completed a local investigation and some lessons had been acted on. The inquest had not yet taken place.

HMP Latchmere House 21 Diversity

2.46 A diversity policy to meet the requirements of anti-discrimination legislation and outlining how the needs of minority groups will be identified and met should be introduced. (3.27) Not achieved. There was no overarching policy to describe how the needs of minority groups, such as older, gay or transgender prisoners, would be met. We repeat the recommendation.

2.47 The number of prisoners with disabilities, older prisoners and other minority groups should be monitored and regularly analysed to ensure that their needs are appropriately addressed and that they are not being victimised or excluded from any activity. (3.28) Not achieved. Apart from for race equality, there was no formal monitoring or analysis of the population to ensure that needs were appropriately addressed. Equal opportunities meetings included disability issues as an agenda item and minutes indicated some discussion of these, but the meeting focused mainly on staff issues and did not include prisoner representatives. The minutes of the race equality action team (REAT) meeting of February 2009 recorded that ‘issues regarding elderly prisoners need to be addressed’ and those of the meeting in April 2009 recorded that ‘the prison would be working toward’ a new policy for older prisoners. We repeat the recommendation.

2.48 The disability policy should be developed to include the methods for assessing the impact of policies and practices, and prisoners should be involved in its development. (3.29) Partially achieved. The disability policy 2008/09 included an action plan with timescales to complete identified targets, but was not based on a needs analysis of the population. Prisoners did not attend the equal opportunities meeting and could not comment on disability issues (see paragraph 2.47).

2.49 A needs analysis of the population should be undertaken to inform a disability policy action plan.

2.50 Prisoners with disabilities and older prisoners should be consulted about their individual needs and care and this should be recorded. (3.30) Partially achieved. The disability liaison officer (DLO) saw each prisoner who disclosed a disability and kept a record of identified need and any action taken, but this was not recorded in wing files. There were no care or support plans and no individual evacuation plans. No meetings were held to discuss prisoners’ individual needs with their personal officer or other staff, such as healthcare. The DLO was also responsible for older prisoners and introduced herself to every prisoner over 60, noting this in the wing file. There were eight prisoners aged between 60 and 71. There was little comment in wing files to show that wing staff were aware of the needs of older prisoners or prisoners with disabilities.

2.51 Prisoners with disabilities and older prisoners should be involved in producing a care plan and this should be included in their wing files along with an individual evacuation plan.

HMP Latchmere House 22 2.52 All staff should undertake regular diversity training. (3.31) Not achieved. Only 11 staff had undertaken diversity training. The minutes of the REAT meeting of January 2009 recorded that ‘staff training needed to be reviewed as only five members of staff have been trained in diversity over the last two years’. We repeat the recommendation.

2.53 Only six prisoners were identified as having a disability, but this was unlikely to reflect the full extent of need and, with no analysis of the population, the actual number was unknown. There were no adapted rooms or facilities for prisoners with disabilities, although prisoners with identified needs were prioritised for ground floor rooms or rooms with electricity if required to run medical equipment. One shower on A wing was described as a ‘disabled shower’, but was simply larger than the others and had no adaptations such as grab rails, a fold-down seat or a non-slip mat. A health and safety adviser had undertaken an assessment in September 2008 to identify areas of non-compliance with the Disability Discrimination Act and had made numerous recommendations.

2.54 Suitable accommodation for prisoners with disabilities should be provided on wings.

Race equality

2.55 External community representatives should attend race equality action team meetings and be involved in the work of the prison. (3.43) Partially achieved. A member of Kingston Race Equality Council had attended meetings until funding for the project had been reduced. An Imam from the local community attended meetings and managers continued to strengthen links with external agencies to increase community involvement in the REAT.

2.56 Managers should continue their efforts to encourage external community representation on the race equality action team.

2.57 The updated race equality action plan should be published and promoted to staff and prisoners. (3.44) Not achieved. None of the prisoners and staff we spoke to knew what the race equality action plan was or where it could be found. We repeat the recommendation.

2.58 The race equality officer should have sufficient time and support to manage race equality effectively. (3.45) Not achieved. The race equality officer (REO) was proactive in her work and now received 20 rather than five hours a week, but this was still not enough. She had general duties as a wing officer and was also the DLO, the older prisoners’ manager, the equal opportunities officer and was covering for the foreign national liaison officer. There was no cover for when the REO was on leave. We repeat the recommendation.

HMP Latchmere House 23 2.59 There should be regular and effective consultation and communication with black and minority ethnic prisoners. (3.46) Achieved. The REO met regularly with the three prisoner race equality representatives, who were also part of the REAT. Regular black and minority ethnic forums were held and minuted. Feedback from the meetings was a standing agenda item at REAT meetings.

2.60 Regular events should be held to celebrate and promote cultural diversity and displays in the prison should reflect the diverse population. (3.47) Achieved. Celebrations to mark black history month in 2008 had been well received. An Anne Frank exhibition, St George’s day celebration and Gypsy Roma exhibition had taken place in the previous 12 months.

2.61 The names and photographs of the race equality team and the three prisoner race equality representatives were displayed in all areas. Each prisoner representative had a job description and additional individual responsibility, one for diversity, one for race equality and one for foreign national issues. They met regularly with the governor and the REO.

2.62 The membership of the REAT was published and included staff from across Latchmere House and prisoner representatives. Attendance at some meetings was poor, with only four members attending in November 2008 and six in April 2009. No representatives from the Independent Monitoring Board or education had attended any meetings between September 2008 and the end of June 2009.

2.63 Black and minority ethnic prisoners did not raise any complaints about inequality of treatment and said race relations were very good. The proportion of black and minority ethnic prisoners in external work was still not representative of the prison population (see paragraph 2.7) and more white prisoners than black and minority ethnic prisoners were accommodated on A wing, which prisoners considered the better wing (see paragraph 2.24). Black and minority ethnic prisoners were also over-represented as workers in the kitchen. This had been raised at the black and minority ethnic prisoner meeting in November 2008, as had the fact that most prisoners working in the gardens were white, but the minutes did not indicate any further discussion or action taken.

2.64 Not all REAT minutes indicated discussion or action taken in response to some monitoring statistics. The minutes of September 2008 recorded that black and minority ethnic prisoners were over-represented on adjudications and transfers out, but with no recorded discussion or action points, while the minutes of January 2009 recorded that the high number of black and minority ethnic men working in the kitchen needed to be addressed, but with no further comment or proposed action. Minutes of subsequent meetings did not record any further discussion of this issue.

2.65 Details of how to make a racist incident complaint were displayed, but there were no racist incident report forms (RIRFs) or confidential envelopes by the complaints box on A wing on one day of the inspection and no confidential envelopes on B wing. Six RIRFs had been submitted to date in 2009 compared to 23 in 2008 and 17 in 2007. RIRFs were generally of good quality and indicated detailed enquiry, but only around half were responded to within the expected timescale. The incidents reported by staff suggested that issues were challenged appropriately, but not all were signed off by the governor as head of the REAT. Some RIRFs had been submitted by staff to make personal grievance complaints.

HMP Latchmere House 24 Further recommendations

2.66 All members of the race equality action team should attend meetings or send a designated deputy.

2.67 Minutes of race equality action team meetings should fully record discussion and action taken in response to monitoring statistics.

2.68 Investigations into racist incidents should be completed within the expected timescale and signed off by the governor.

2.69 Racist incident report forms and envelopes should be freely available to prisoners.

2.70 Staff should not use the racist incident reporting system to raise personal grievances and should use the existing Prison Service grievance procedures for staff.

Foreign national prisoners

2.71 A coherent foreign national policy and strategy, related specifically to Latchmere House, should be introduced and published to prisoners and staff. (3.55) Partially achieved. We were told there was no foreign national policy document, but a copy of one was forwarded to us some weeks after the inspection. This was not based on a needs analysis and did not include an action plan.

2.72 The foreign national policy should be based on a needs analysis and contain an action plan.

2.73 The foreign national liaison officer should receive sufficient time to develop and carry out the necessary work. (3.56) Not achieved. The foreign national liaison officer role was being covered by the REO, who had numerous other responsibilities (see paragraph 2.58).

2.74 Additional time for foreign national liaison duties should be allocated to an additional member of staff.

2.75 There should be routine consultation of foreign national prisoners and they should be informed about their entitlements. (3.57) Not achieved. There were only six identified foreign national prisoners and one of these was recorded as a British citizen on the local inmate database. There were no foreign national forums, but some foreign national prisoners attended the black and minority ethnic prisoners meetings. There was no recorded discussion of the needs of foreign national prisoners and the minutes of the April 2009 REAT meeting recorded that ‘foreign national prisoners need to be an agenda item’. Induction staff said the REO saw all newly arrived foreign national prisoners, but wing files contained no record of this or any indication that wing staff were aware of any distinct needs of foreign national prisoners. We repeat the recommendation.

HMP Latchmere House 25 Applications and complaints

2.76 The nature, timeliness and quality of replies to prisoners’ complaints should be monitored by a senior manager. (3.72) Not achieved. A manager had been identified to carry out this task, but was not doing so. Some replies were late and none were monitored for quality. We repeat the recommendation.

2.77 A sample of the responses to applications should be regularly monitored by a senior manager. (3.73) Not achieved. See paragraph 2.76.

2.78 Prisoners welcomed the facility to make governor applications and there was a daily time when they could see the duty governor. This was resolving many problems without recourse to the formal complaints process. Only 28 complaints had been received to date in 2009 compared to 110 in the whole of 2008.

Substance use

2.79 The health services team should agree joint working protocols with the CARAT service and be involved in the prison’s drug and alcohol strategy. (3.84) Achieved. The practice manager said joint working protocols had been agreed between the CARAT and health services and there was effective joint working between the two organisations. While we did not see documentary evidence, this appeared to be the case. The CARAT team met regularly with the health provider at the prison partnership board where issues of mutual concern were discussed. Health services did not regularly attend the security and drug strategy meetings, but there was an understanding that health support would be provided as necessary.

2.80 The prison, in partnership with the primary care trust, should assess the need for clinical treatment to aid resettlement and prepare for the implementation of the integrated drug treatment system. (3.85) No longer relevant. The prison’s policy was that prisoners had to have been drug free for at least six months before arrival, but it did accept prisoners who had gone through an integrated drug treatment system (IDTS) programme at previous prisons and the CARAT and health services provided support where necessary. The health centre accommodation and staffing levels were wholly unsuitable for the management of IDTS prisoners and there were no plans to introduce IDTS in Latchmere House for the foreseeable future.

2.81 The drug strategy team should monitor the level of alcohol testing and the results. (3.86) Not achieved. Information on alcohol misuse was discussed at monthly joint security and drug strategy meetings. How to deal with alcohol and use of breathalyser equipment was regularly discussed, but alcohol tests were recorded at the gate and not included in the monthly security reports. We repeat the recommendation.

HMP Latchmere House 26 Health services

2.82 The health needs assessment should be used to plan and provide services at the establishment. (4.31) Achieved. The health needs assessment was informing the development of health services, but no action plan was available. However, discussions with the primary care trust were positive and the assessment was reviewed regularly at the prison partnership board. Developments including the formation of a health promotion action group and the review of counselling services had been identified and were reviewed by the partnership board.

2.83 The decoration and cleanliness of the health centre should be consistent with the promotion of health and meet infection control protocols. (4.32) Not achieved. The overall cleanliness of the health centre was unsatisfactory and there was no regular cleaning programme to ensure infection control requirements were met. Health staff swept the floor, but it had not been thoroughly cleaned for some time. The matter had regularly been brought to the attention of the prison partnership board, but no permanent solution had been found. The health centre was also cluttered with old and unused equipment, such as metal surgical instruments. Prison rules required staff to check the items daily, which was a waste of their time. There were some prescription and administration charts dating back to 2003 relating to prisoners no longer at the prison. We repeat the recommendation.

2.84 The establishment should, through the partnership board, ensure that the health provider makes regular checks on the physical condition of the health centre and ensure that all equipment held there is appropriate and in good working order. All unnecessary equipment and paperwork should be removed.

2.85 There should be a prison-specific policy for the outbreak of any communicable diseases. (4.33) Achieved. A policy for the management of an outbreak of any communicable disease had been developed and was held at the main surgery practice. The practice manager was aware of what measures should be implemented in such circumstances. Links with the local health protection agency were well established.

2.86 The emergency equipment held in the health centre should be appropriate to the environment. (4.34) Not achieved. Only oxygen was held in the health centre, but there was no emergency equipment. Even though the health centre was open only for a limited time each week, it still required the necessary equipment to deal with an emergency. We repeat the recommendation.

2.87 There should be an automated external defibrillator on site and accessible to all, and there should be people trained to use it at all times. (4.35) Not achieved. Prison staff were trained in first aid, but not in cardiopulmonary resuscitation and there were no defibrillators. We repeat the recommendation.

HMP Latchmere House 27 Further recommendation

2.88 The establishment, through the partnership board, should agree, as a matter of urgency, a joint approach to ensure that procedures are in place to make sure that prisoners receive the best possible care and treatment in an emergency.

2.89 The health services provider should have information-sharing protocols with appropriate agencies (such as the CARAT service) to ensure sufficient sharing of relevant health and social care information. (4.36) Achieved. The GP surgery held information-sharing protocols to link with relevant agencies in the prison and the community. Professional relationships between the health provider and the prison were good and there was no evidence that they were failing to engage with each other.

2.90 The out-of-hours GP service should be sufficiently responsive to meet the needs of prisoners. (4.37) Achieved. The out-of-hours service was managed through the local primary care trust. Prison staff knew how to use the service and there were no reported concerns about out-of-hours cover. Prison staff said response times for the local ambulance service were very good.

2.91 An anaphylaxis kit should be available for use by health professionals at all times. (4.38) Achieved. An anaphylaxis pack was held in the drug refrigerator in the health centre. The drugs in use were appropriate and well within their expiry dates.

2.92 Barrier protection should be freely available to prisoners. (4.39) Achieved. Barrier protection was available from the pharmacist, who visited three times a week. Health promotion advice was offered at the time of administration.

2.93 The possibility of using NHS prescriptions instead of private prescriptions should be pursued. (4.40) Partially achieved. The provider practice had been identified as a pilot site for the use of NHS prescriptions, but the pilot had not started. The practice was ready and keen to take this forward once the necessary strategies had been put in place. We repeat the recommendation.

2.94 The homely remedies available for purchase should be reviewed to include cold and ‘flu remedies, and prisoners should be made aware of the need to purchase a small supply of simple analgesics and other items. (4.41) Achieved. Over-the-counter medicines were readily available during the pharmacist’s visits. Mild pain relief and simple cold remedies were available to buy and many prisoners worked outside the prison so could buy these from local pharmacies.

2.95 All pre-packs should be dual-labelled so that when the pre-pack is dispensed against a prescription, one label is removed from the pack and attached to the prescription, which should then be faxed to the pharmacy provider so that the pharmacist can satisfy him/herself that the prescription was appropriate and that the correct item has been supplied. (4.42) No longer relevant. The pharmacist was responsible for the management of all prescriptions in terms of collection, dispensing and administering. They made regular checks to ensure prescriptions were appropriate and that the correct item had been supplied to the prisoner. The pharmacist held three pharmacy clinics a week, two of which were in the evening to allow prisoners at work access to pharmaceutical advice. Prisoners said that pharmacy services were good and there were no complaints about delays in accessing prescribed medication.

HMP Latchmere House 28 2.96 Mental health services should include access to tertiary services so that a prisoner does not have to be moved from Latchmere House simply for referral to such services. (4.43) Achieved. We found no evidence that prisoners had been returned to closed conditions due to lack of tertiary services.

2.97 Mental health services remained under-resourced and there was some evidence of inappropriate transfers into Latchmere House. Despite Latchmere House sending out a health status pro forma to sending prisons, there appeared to be some instances when they did not provide all important information and there had been examples of prisoners arriving with significant health issues where these had not been communicated to Latchmere House by the sending prison. A protocol had been introduced to deal with these incidents.

2.98 One of the visiting GPs had a special interest in mental health and prisoners needing such support could speak directly to him. Specialist counselling services were available, but there was no regular input from a specialist mental health professional. The primary care trust had commissioned an independent review of psychological therapies. This was shortly due to be presented to the partnership board and would help the primary care trust to determine mental health support requirements. Our discussion with the lead GP indicated that there had been no significant increase in the number of prisoners arriving with severe mental health problems and that the number needing mental health support was manageable through the GP and counselling services. However, the situation was closely monitored by the health provider and it was recognised that there needed to be a formal service level agreement with a nominated community forensic service to ensure that prisoners should not have to be transferred from Latchmere House unless their mental health has deteriorated to a point where they have become unmanageable at the prison.

2.99 Prisoners were very complimentary about health services. In groups, all said they were happy with the service provided by the visiting GP practice. Access to the GP service was very good and appointments to see the GP were made within 24 hours of requesting. GPs held three clinics a week and a registered nurse and a NVQ level 3 healthcare assistant covered three sessions a week. A GP, nurse or healthcare assistant was in the prison every weekday. Clear notices on the health centre door described the service offered and indicated which GPs had a special interest in a particular field of medicine, including mental health, diabetes and heart disease. Prisoners eligible for release on temporary licence could also attend the main surgery if they so wished. Access to other health services such as dentistry, optometry and podiatry was through local providers and there were no lengthy delays in accessing these. Pharmacy services remained good, although the temperatures of drug refrigerators were not taken regularly.

2.100 An area of great concern for health professionals was that the clinical notes of prisoners transferred to Latchmere House did not always arrive. We were shown evidence of three prisoners arriving from the Sheppey cluster in late May and mid-June 2009 without clinical records and these had still not arrived despite repeated requests.

Further recommendations

2.101 Maximum/minimum temperatures should be recorded daily for drug refrigerators to ensure that thermolabile items are stored within the 2- 8°C range. Corrective action should be taken where necessary and monitored by pharmacy staff.

HMP Latchmere House 29 2.102 Prisoners arriving at Latchmere House should be transferred with their clinical records.

Learning and skills and work activities

2.103 Learning and skills and its integral role in resettlement should be better promoted across the prison. (5.19) Achieved. The role of learning and skills was better promoted through the new activity allocation process. All prisoners were assessed for needs and suitability through the sentence planning process at induction. Individual learning plans were produced, with clear targets that were matched to sentence plans. This had raised the profile and importance of learning and skills among prisoners. The London Advice Partnership (LAP) worker and the newly appointed training and employment support manager worked closely together to ensure prisoners were given clear advice and guidance.

2.104 Efforts should be made to improve the punctuality and attendance at education, training and work. (5.20) Partially achieved. Staff were now regularly reminded of the importance of improving punctuality and attendance at education, training and work in staff meetings and through morning operational meetings. Registers were kept for all education and training classes and for work activities. Those not reporting for work were not paid. However, there was no indication of what action would be taken for poor attendance in education or poor punctuality. Prisoners continued to arrive late for many activities and education class sizes remained small, with between 50% and 60% attendance in some cases. We repeat the recommendation.

2.105 Access to learning resources to support prisoners’ education and work should be improved. (5.21) Not achieved. Although the prison had plans to set up a library facility providing controlled access to the internet, this had not been achieved. A library funding bid, to include supervision, was being drafted. Part of the bid included a trained librarian to monitor the issue of materials. Access to additional learning resources in the prison had deteriorated following the closure two months previously of the learning resource centre due to vandalism. This had provided open access to a range of materials, including Prison Service Orders (PSOs), but there were no immediate plans to reopen it. Many prisoners were unaware that PSOs were now available in the resettlement centre. We repeat the recommendation.

2.106 Prisoners using the local community library should be able to use all resources including the internet without identifying themselves to the librarian as prisoners. (5.22) Partially achieved. Prisoners continued to be able to use the local community library, but this was restricted to four prisoners each morning and two in the afternoon. Access to the library and the internet was only through an application signed by a governor, but prisoners no longer had to show this to library staff. Library regulations required all community users to have a library card, which was scanned on entry and showed that they were residents of the prison. Admission was only permitted through the use of these cards.

2.107 Prisoners should have more access to the local library and its internet services.

HMP Latchmere House 30 Additional information

2.108 The education contract was still managed by Kensington and Chelsea College. Education staff were enthusiastic and experienced. The education accommodation had improved and was now comfortable and inviting. Good use was made of interactive whiteboards and other learning resources. A reasonable range of education programmes was on offer, including courses in information communication technology (ICT), literacy, numeracy, health and safety, food safety and fire marshalling. ICT courses were now offered two evenings a week and were well attended. One of these evenings was devoted to writing and editing the newly introduced prison newsletter, two editions of which had been issued since December 2008. However, most classes were still poorly attended and there was an inadequate range of social and life skills courses (see section on resettlement pathways).

2.109 Fifty-three prisoners were engaged in a wide range of part-time education and vocational training programmes outside the prison, including barbering, plumbing, bricklaying, electrical installation, teacher training and business studies. The proportion of prisoners with literacy and numeracy difficulties had decreased and they were now adequately catered for. There was reasonable access to English for speakers of other languages (ESOL) courses and dyslexia support outside the prison for the very small number of prisoners who needed it.

2.110 The education and training provision had been well informed by a learning needs analysis and the training and employment support manager had developed good links with a range of employers and training providers. However, there was inadequate provision for open access job search. There were no boards displaying available work opportunities and materials were limited to a few local college prospectuses and one local newspaper. Prisoners had no access to trade magazines, local telephone directories or Jobcentre Plus and other external agency materials. There was a Prison Service operated computerised job search facility, but the computers were in an education classroom. This allowed limited access and the jobs displayed were often gone by the time prisoners were able to contact the employers and gain security clearance. Laptops and mobile telephones were not allowed in the prison and prisoners often had to wait until weekend visits to chase up job applications. There was limited access to computers for private study and prisoners complained that this made it difficult to contact employers, who were often available only on weekdays.

2.111 Good access to a well resourced job search provision should be provided for all prisoners.

2.112 The availability of computers for private study should be increased.

Physical education and health promotion

2.113 Funding should be identified to plan accredited sports provision for prisoners. (5.28) Not achieved. Accredited sports courses were available through an external college. Five prisoners were on courses outside the prison, including fitness instructing level 2 and personal training level 3. The head of learning and skills was applying for funds to provide accredited courses in the prison, but this was not yet available. We repeat the recommendation.

HMP Latchmere House 31 2.114 Prisoners should be allowed to use the gym at lunchtime. (5.29) No longer relevant. A comprehensive timetable now provided adequate opportunities for prisoner use. The gym was open five days a week and for 2.5 hours a day at weekends. Circuit training was offered two afternoons a week and for an hour on Sundays. Staff could use the gym for 1.5 hours every lunch time. This was supported as part of the prison’s occupational health programme and did not restrict prisoners’ access.

2.115 The gym appeared well used. The number and identity of prisoners attending regularly were monitored but had not been analysed.

2.116 There were adequate links with healthcare and remedial physical education (PE) was offered. Promotion of healthy eating was satisfactory, but was mainly covered at induction. Unsupervised recreational PE was available outside on three short tarmac tennis courts and prisoners could also jog around the perimeter.

2.117 Gym usage should be better analysed and used to inform PE promotion and management decisions.

Security and rules

2.118 The establishment should develop a strategy specifically to deal with alcohol use that includes advice and guidance to residential and gate staff. (6.9) Achieved. There was a strategy and related guidance to staff about alcohol. This was available to all staff and a copy was kept in the gate area for ease of access alongside detailed notes on how to deal with suspected alcohol misuse. Alcohol misuse was not considered a particular concern and security staff believed that the current population did not have the same history of alcohol misuse as previously.

2.119 Breathalyzer training for staff should be carried out as soon as possible. (6.10) Achieved. Detailed step-by-step guidance on administering a breathalyser test was kept in the gate area for staff to follow. Key staff had been trained by internal trainers. The prison was about to move to a new system of breathalyser that was more straightforward to use. Prisoners coming back from work or home leave were tested only if staff believed they had been drinking and most tests returned as negative.

2.120 The prisoner compact should include specific advice about the likely outcomes of a breach of temporary licence. (6.11) Achieved. The prisoner compact included a section about release on temporary licence and a list of possible disciplinary outcomes if the licence was breached.

2.121 Security was managed by a small group of staff. There had been just 330 security information reports in the first six months of 2009 and most of these originated from security staff. This was partly because security staff were also responsible for liaising with outside agencies in managing public protection concerns and carrying out security checks of work placements.

HMP Latchmere House 32 2.122 The main security concern continued to be mobile telephones in the prison. Twenty-one had been found in 2008, a fall from the previous year. The prison had recently been provided with a body orifice security scanner (BOSS) chair, but had not yet determined where this could be used to best effect and, in the absence of a segregation unit, questioned how prisoners believed to be secreting items could be managed.

2.123 Only 16 prisoners had been returned to closed conditions in 2009, most for breaching licence conditions. There had been no absconds during this period and most prisoners complied with their licence conditions.

2.124 There should be a drive to encourage more security information reports from different areas of the prison.

Discipline

2.125 A trained member of staff should check the wording of charges to ensure they are correct before they are issued. (6.18) Achieved. Two members of staff had received formal training as adjudication liaison officers and were responsible for ensuring that charges were appropriately laid.

2.126 Adjudicators should fully investigate all charges and consider possible defences even when a guilty plea has been entered. (6.19) Achieved. There had been 52 adjudications in the year to date, similar to the previous year. Most were for issues such as returning late from home leave. The adjudications we observed were thorough and records indicated that adjudicators carried out detailed enquiries even when the prisoner had pleaded guilty.

2.127 The adjudication review meeting should take place regularly and analyse data on trends in adjudications to inform guidance on punishment levels and to help identify any problem areas in the prison. (6.20) Achieved. Two adjudication liaison meetings had taken place in the previous 12 months. Adjudication results were available on a spreadsheet and were reviewed at these meetings. Trends were analysed and used to inform areas such as race equality.

Incentives and earned privileges

2.128 The incentives and earned privileges policy should be replaced by a published procedure that reflects current practice. (6.25) Not achieved. The prison had retained the incentives and earned privileges (IEP) scheme, which had been introduced the week before our previous inspection and had not since been reviewed. The policy described the three incentive levels and procedures for issuing warnings and ‘strikes’ where there were further infringements of the rules. Three strikes could lead to demotion. Warnings and strikes were issued, but no prisoner had been demoted in the previous six months. All prisoners were on the enhanced level, and the basic level had not been used. The scheme was not relevant to the unique position of Latchmere House, where having access to the resettlement regime was the greatest influence on prisoners behaviour. The scheme was still used to recognise good work and prisoners were rewarded with financial bonuses. We repeat the recommendation.

HMP Latchmere House 33 2.129 Details of behavioural sanctions should be recorded in wing history sheets. (6.26) Achieved. Warnings or strikes were recorded in prisoners’ wing history sheets.

Catering

2.130 Breakfast and evening meals should be provided for prisoners who leave early and/or return late to the establishment. (7.9) Achieved. Prisoners going out to work before breakfast was served could order a packed meal and collect it the night before. Those returning to the prison after the evening meal could claim a £4.25 meal allowance and bring back a range of food items to eat at the prison.

2.131 Catering equipment should be provided to allow prisoners to prepare full meals for themselves. (7.10) Achieved. Two microwaves and toasters had been provided on both A and B wings, but there were still no facilities to prepare a full meal. Prisoners we talked to said the current arrangements were adequate.

2.132 Prisoners were positive about the quality and variety of food, which was freshly cooked and portions were good. Hot options were offered three times a day and fresh fruit was readily available. There were two sittings at lunchtime and in the evening, and meals were eaten in the large and pleasant dining room.

Prison shop

2.133 Prisoners and staff should be clear about what goods can and cannot be brought in to the establishment. (7.15) Achieved. A series of governor notices had been issued outlining to staff and prisoners what goods could and could not be brought into the prison. The permitted list was reasonable and allowed prisoners access to an adequate range of goods at market prices. Prisoners could keep up to £100 in possession for this purpose, which also encouraged independence and self-sufficiency. These arrangements were popular, but were under threat due to Prison Services regulations that precluded prisoners having cash while in custody.

Strategic management of resettlement

2.134 A resettlement needs analysis of the prison’s population should be undertaken. (8.7) Not achieved. There was a draft resettlement strategy, which had used some data from the local pathway assessment tool, but this had not been published or resulted in any action plan. We repeat the recommendation.

2.135 The establishment should include prisoners as part of the resettlement policy group when discussing issues that impact on resettlement outcomes in order to assess issues from the prisoners’ perspective. Prisoner consultation should include exit surveys specific to resettlement. (8.8) Not achieved. Prisoners were not included as part of the resettlement policy committee and there were no exit surveys. (See also additional information.) We repeat the recommendation.

HMP Latchmere House 34 2.136 A database of resettlement interventions that have been completed both in the prison and externally should be maintained and used to assess prisoners’ needs. (8.9) Achieved. Probation staff maintained a detailed database of interventions that was used to inform prisoner targets. (See also additional information.)

2.137 A forum should be established that enables the providers of resettlement services to meet together to discuss practical issues. Not achieved. Although each resettlement pathway had a designated lead on paper, there were no forums for those involved in providing resettlement services. We repeat the recommendation.

2.138 The resettlement strategy was underdeveloped. A head of reducing reoffending from HMP Wormwood Scrubs was nominally the resettlement strategy lead, but staffing issues meant that work in this area had not progressed. The reducing reoffending strategy, which was supposed to cover both prisons, was heavily weighted towards Wormwood Scrubs and there were significant gaps in the strategy for Latchmere House. Some needs had been identified, including some poor educational achievements of prisoners, but these had not resulted in a firm strategy.

2.139 Pathway leads had been designated only two months previously and this had not yet resulted in any strategic development of individual pathways.

2.140 A senior manager from Wormwood Scrubs had coordinated a resettlement forum 12 months previously attended by four prisoners from Latchmere House. Areas such as population turnover, the needs of short-term prisoners and other resettlement needs had been discussed, but this had not yet been used to inform the resettlement strategy. Local governance arrangements for resettlement were largely absent and there was no manager on site able to direct services.

2.141 We continued to question the benefits to Latchmere House of the clustering arrangement with Wormwood Scrubs. The main point of the arrangement was clearly the rationalisation and savings of management functions such as personnel and finance. There were, as yet, few tangible resettlement benefits for prisoners. Of the most recent 50 new arrivals at Latchmere House, only two prisoners had come from Wormwood Scrubs, mainly because Latchmere House had no visits facility and was wholly dependent on taking prisoners towards the end of their sentences who were eligible for release on temporary licence. There were some practical benefits in certain aspects of healthcare, such as using Wormwood Scrubs healthcare facilities to carry out mental health assessments and using Wormwood Scrubs as a venue to return unsuitable prisoners to closed conditions.

2.142 Resettlement meetings were held every month, but the minutes were not accessible to staff. The previous month’s meeting had been reasonably well attended and included some discussion of pathways, but there was no action plan attached to this.

2.143 A manager should be tasked with the responsibility of coordinating a resettlement strategy specific to Latchmere House.

HMP Latchmere House 35 2.144 An updated resettlement strategy should include an action plan that is updated at regular resettlement meetings.

Offender management and planning

2.145 The OASys backlog should be reduced. (8.23) Achieved. There was a backlog of only three OASys reviews, none of which was over 28 days late.

2.146 Wherever possible, families of prisoners should be included in the sentence planning process. Particular efforts should be made to do this in the case of longer-term prisoners. (8.24) Achieved. Prisoners’ families were invited to a family information day during induction. They had presentations from the governor, offender management unit and CARAT staff and prisoner presentations. They also had a one-to-one meeting with a psychologist to talk about the effects of imprisonment on relationships. Families were asked their opinion on the sentence planning needs of the prisoner and completed a form that was included alongside other reports at the prisoner’s sentence planning board.

2.147 The police intelligence officer should routinely attend public protection meetings. (8.25) No longer relevant. A police officer from London Jigsaw (public protection) team attended meetings. Public protection arrangements remained good, with regular risk management boards and links to multi-agency public protection arrangement meetings.

2.148 Offender management was largely well managed. The senior probation officer acted as the head of offender management and prisoners were allocated an offender supervisor, regardless of whether or not they were in scope. The equivalent of three full-time offender supervisors conducted initial assessments. There were good relationships with external offender managers who regularly attended sentencing planning boards.

2.149 Sentence planning was the responsibility of a small group of probation and prison staff and sentence plans continued to be generally high quality with specific targets. In groups, most prisoners said they had a sentence plan. Each prisoner had a pathway needs assessment, and completed a pathway assessment tool (PAT) in their first week of arrival (see paragraph 2.12). This was referred to during their sentence planning meetings and was available to all staff on the prison’s intranet, but there was no evidence in wing files to show that wing staff were aware of sentence plan targets, or engaged with prisoners about their resettlement plans (see paragraph 2.3). A copy was sent to senior probation officers in prisoners’ home areas before their release. This assessment showed that the greatest need was education, training and employment (138 prisoners) followed by accommodation (72 prisoners).

2.150 There were five life-sentenced prisoners and one prisoner serving an indeterminate sentence for public protection (IPP). Each of these prisoners was allocated a lifer officer. One wing file contained some regular and informative comment about resettlement plans, but minutes of lifer meetings indicated that this was not always the case. A comprehensive policy for life- sentenced and IPP prisoners had been published.

2.151 The progress of high-risk prisoners was reviewed monthly, but other prisoners were reviewed only two to three months before release. Some prisoners were also reviewed if it emerged that

HMP Latchmere House 36 they were not meeting their targets, such as to attend education. The head of offender management was hoping shortly to introduce regular reviews of sentence plans for all prisoners, with increased staffing resources.

2.152 Sentence plan reviews should be conducted regularly for all prisoners.

Resettlement pathways

2.153 The work of the housing advice service should be advertised more widely within the prison. (8.31) Achieved. Posters advertised the availability of housing advice on the wings.

2.154 The prisoner employed as the housing worker should have the facilities to provide an effective drop-in advice service to supplement the work of St Mungo’s, including access to a telephone. (8.32) Not achieved. Advice and support across a range of housing issues was still provided only every Thursday by a worker from St Mungo’s who also worked in HMP Wormwood Scrubs. A prisoner housing worker booked appointments to see the worker and completed a written assessment of need to pass on. The housing worker could see up to 16 prisoners at each session. Few prisoners were released without accommodation to go to. There was no drop-in service to supplement the work of St Mungo’s. We repeat the recommendation.

2.155 The offender management system should be extended and improved so that earlier planning for resettlement is acted on and that progress monitoring is in place to ensure that all plans are on target to meet resettlement needs. (8.41) Partially achieved. Every prisoner was sentenced planned during his fourth week (see paragraph 2.3) and each was assessed using the PAT (see paragraph 2.12). Only the sentence plans of high-risk prisoners were reviewed regularly. Some of the need identified in the PAT was not evidenced in some of the sentence plans we looked at. (See section on offender management and planning.)

2.156 All needs identified using the pathway assessment tool should be reflected in sentence plans.

2.157 The learning and skills agenda should be fully incorporated into the resettlement pathways. (8.42) Achieved. Learning and skills were now better incorporated in the resettlement pathways. The primary focus was on getting prisoners into employment or on education courses and most of this took place outside the prison. Good links had been established with a range of employers and job agencies, although no links had been established with the local Jobcentre Plus (see also section on learning and skills and work activities). Most prisoners worked outside or attended part-time or full-time training. However, the range of social and life skills courses was inadequate.

2.158 A wider range of social and life skills courses should be introduced to improve the opportunities for entry to employment.

2.159 There should be increased advice and support to help those who are unsuccessful in finding work. (8.43) Partially achieved. Information, advice and guidance (IAG) were good and all prisoners received clear targets at induction through the sentence planning process. IAG was well delivered through the London Advice Partnership (LAP). However, there were insufficient checks to ensure targets were monitored regularly. Advice and support were also available through the training and employment support manager, but there was inadequate provision for open access job search (see also section on learning and skills and work activities).

2.160 Targets on learning plans should be reviewed and updated regularly.

2.161 The prison should establish better relationships with key employers and job agencies in the area to increase job opportunities for prisoners. (8.44) Achieved. The head of learning and skills and the training and employment support manager had established good links with a range of employers and job agencies. Several large local and national employers had run courses specifically aimed at prisoners from Latchmere House and some prisoners had been employed as a result. (See also paragraph 2.157.)

2.162 The information, advice and guidance service should be further developed. (8.45) Achieved. The IAG service had been improved and was now better linked to the activity allocation process. IAG was available at induction and throughout a prisoner’s sentence at Latchmere House.

2.163 A pre-release course should be introduced to review and recognise prisoners’ skills development since induction through internal and external activities and effectively prepare prisoners for transition into the community. (8.46) Not achieved. No pre-release course was offered. A preparation for work course had been developed and introduced by Kensington and Chelsea College. This was accredited to level 1 and included help with CV writing and preparing for interviews. All prisoners undertook the four-day course at induction and success rates were particularly high. We repeat the recommendation.

2.164 Money management should be considered as part of a resettlement needs analysis and a money management course provided if necessary. (8.51) Partially achieved. Prisoners were asked about finance, benefits and debt as part of the initial pathways assessment (see paragraph 2.12). Those identified as needing assistance or interventions were entered on a borough pathway spreadsheet, which was sent monthly to the probation areas covering the relevant London boroughs. Twenty-eight prisoners had been identified as needing help with this pathway. The pathways assessments and sentence plans of some of these prisoners did not always make clear what action had been taken to address the identified need. Although Open Learning money management packs were available through the education provider, these were not included as part of the sentence planning process. A course in budgeting and money management had been introduced following the last inspection, but the last course had been run over six months previously. There was no

HMP Latchmere House 38 one-to-one on-site debt counselling, but prisoners had access to Citizens Advice on release on temporary licence. There were well established procedures to help prisoners set up bank accounts, which were required by the prison for all prisoners in employment.

2.165 The budgeting and money management course should be made available to all prisoners identified as requiring it.

2.166 The availability of financial services should be effectively promoted. (8.52) Not achieved. The availability of the Open Learning money management packs was not widely known throughout the prison or considered as part of the sentence planning process. We repeat the recommendation.

2.167 Health services staff should work with other areas of the prison regime and health, social service and voluntary agencies as appropriate to ensure the integration of prisoner-focused care on release. (8.55) Achieved. Working relationships between resettlement and healthcare were good. The resettlement team had taken on responsibility of making external appointments for health professionals, including the dentist and optician. Any prisoner stating he had no fixed abode on release was referred to the resettlement department for appropriate assistance in finding accommodation.

2.168 Prisoners should be given information, assistance and support to access health and social services on release. (8.56) Achieved. All prisoners were seen by nursing staff before release and given a summary of their health record and medication if appropriate. Many prisoners had been registered before admission and returned to the same GP. Those without a GP were told how to register with one in their local community.

2.169 The drug strategy should incorporate the alcohol policy, and contain detailed action plans, targets and performance measures. It should be informed by a comprehensive needs assessment. (8.64) Not achieved. The drug strategy was dated January 2008 and, although reasonably comprehensive, did not include the alcohol policy, which was contained under separate guidance. Alcohol misuse was largely managed as a disciplinary issue (see section on security and rules). We repeat the recommendation.

2.170 The drug strategy coordinator should be given sufficient time for strategy development and implementation. (8.65) Achieved. The drug strategy coordinator was also the security senior officer and carried out a range of other tasks, but had enough time within his profiled hours to carry out the task.

2.171 Sufficient rooms should be provided for the CARAT team’s client work. (8.66) Partially achieved. The CARAT team had been relocated to a larger room, with a small interview room attached. The main room was only adequate, but contained no emergency alarms so CARAT staff had to rely on their radios. The department was isolated from the main prison so the requirement for emergency alarms was urgent.

2.172 Alarms should be installed in all rooms used by CARAT staff to increase their security.

2.173 The CARAT service should introduce a relapse prevention group work module. (8.67) Achieved. Following assessment of individual prisoners, a relapse prevention group work module was available weekly as well as one-to-one work.

2.174 Inappropriate referrals of dealers/suppliers to CARAT groups should stop and, if required, alternative interventions offered to address offending behaviour. (8.68) Achieved. Following assessment by the CARAT manager, dealers/suppliers were seen individually.

2.175 The role of the drug/alcohol counsellor should be clarified. (8.69) Partially achieved. Due to the long-term absence of the head of activities, we could not establish whether the role had been clarified, but we understood a review had taken place. We repeat the recommendation.

2.176 Latchmere House had an admissions policy that precluded prisoners who had not been drug free for at least six months. Alcoholics Anonymous and Narcotics Anonymous visited regularly. There was little evidence of substance misuse. The CARAT manager believed some prisoners were unwilling to disclose their previous addictions for fear of losing their place. There were about 25 prisoners on the CARAT caseload, with up to 50 clients suspended. The CARAT manager was supported by one full-time and one part-time worker, all employed by RAPt. The CARAT manager attended the primary care trust prison partnership boards and the drug strategy meetings. The team supported prisoners who had completed detoxification treatment elsewhere and provided them with psychosocial support if necessary. It was managing one prisoner who had gone through the complete IDTS programme. The CARAT team maintained good links with community drug services and, where necessary, established contacts with community drug intervention programmes to ensure continuity of care for prisoners released into the community. The team worked closely with resettlement and probation and attended multi-agency public protection arrangement meetings where appropriate.

2.177 The resettlement policy should set out how the establishment plans to deliver against the children and families of offenders pathway and the timescales involved. (8.76) Not achieved. There was no current resettlement policy and the draft policy did not yet include plans to deliver against the pathway. We repeat the recommendation.

2.178 Prisoners should be actively encouraged to maintain contact with their children, partners and families. (8.77) Partially achieved. All prisoners were given the opportunity to invite family members to a family day during induction (see paragraph 2.146) and received release on temporary licence to maintain contact with their families. However, there was still little evidence in wing files that wing staff knew anything about the partners or families of prisoners or encouraged prisoners to maintain family ties.

2.179 Personal officers should encourage prisoners to maintain family ties and this should be evidenced in wing files.

2.180 Families and friends should have easy access to accurate information about the resettlement services provided by the prison. (8.78) Achieved. All families were invited to a family day where they received information about the prison and had the opportunity to ask questions. (See paragraph 2.146.)

2.181 Prisoners should have access to programmes and interventions to improve parenting skills and relationships. (8.79) Not achieved. A counsellor was available, but there were still no programmes or interventions to improve parenting skills and relationships. We repeat the recommendation.

2.182 Provision should be made for prisoners to receive incoming calls from children or to deal with arrangements for them. (8.80) Not achieved. There was no provision for incoming calls from children or to deal with arrangements for them. We repeat the recommendation.

2.183 Offending behaviour needs should be considered as part of a resettlement needs analysis. (8.84) Achieved. Offending behaviour needs were identified through the PAT (see paragraph 2.12), which also recorded offending behaviour courses already completed. The names of those with further needs were entered on to the borough pathway spreadsheet, which contributed to the resettlement needs analysis, and included in the sentence planning process. In the previous 12 months, 23 prisoners had completed offending behaviour courses run by the London Probation Service, mainly the ‘think first’ course. One had completed the aggression replacement training and one was participating in a course about domestic violence.

2.184 Psychological services should be available to complete offence-related work that is not available through London Probation Centres. (8.85) Achieved. During our previous inspection, we met a prisoner who had a sentence plan target that included the completion of a domestic violence course for same sex partners. An appropriate course was not provided through London Probation Centres. There were no in- house psychological services and in similar circumstances the prison would rely on the services provided through the London Area Office to enable prisoners to complete offence- related work. We found no evidence of similar unmet needs during this inspection.

HMP Latchmere House 41 HMP Latchmere House 42 Section 3: Summary of recommendations

The following is a list of both repeated and further recommendations included in this report. The reference numbers in brackets refer to the paragraph location in the main report.

Main recommendations

3.1 There should be a clear statement of purpose for Latchmere House as a resettlement prison that anchors its work and links all its policies and procedures to a common aim. (2.1)

3.2 The resettlement strategy should be updated to include the links with HMP Wormwood Scrubs, the London reducing reoffending strategy and the resettlement pathways for London, and to state clearly Latchmere House’s function as a resettlement prison. (2.2)

3.3 Managers should ensure that personal officers are fully involved in the sentence planning process to support prisoners in achieving their targets. (2.4)

3.4 Residential units should be refurbished to include the installation of in-cell electricity. (2.5)

3.5 An effective personal officer scheme should be introduced in which one consistent personal officer is actively involved in a prisoner’s sentence planning and helps to identify and address resettlement needs throughout their time at Latchmere House. (2.6)

3.6 Action should be taken to deal with discrepancies highlighted by ethnic monitoring, particularly in relation to external employment opportunities for which more active support should be provided for black and minority ethnic men. (2.7)

Recommendations To the Chief Executive Officer, NOMS

3.7 Prisoners should not have to meet the cost of public transport when transferring to open prisons. (2.16)

3.8 Prisoners arriving at Latchmere House should be transferred with their clinical records. (2.102)

Recommendations To the Governor

First days in custody

3.9 Wing history files should include a copy of the pathways assessment. (2.13)

Residential units

3.10 There should be formal compatibility assessments for cell-sharing allocations. (2.17)

3.11 Residential units should be unlocked until later in the evening, particularly in the summer. (2.19)

HMP Latchmere House 43 3.12 An offensive displays policy should be introduced. (2.20)

3.13 Improvements should be made to wing facilities, particularly through the refurbishment of the A2 shower area and the decoration of television rooms. (2.23)

3.14 The reasons for the apparently disproportionate number of white prisoners on A wing should be formally investigated. (2.27)

Personal officers

3.15 The planned training for personal officers should be implemented. (2.32)

3.16 Good quality and regular entries should be made on all prisoners’ history sheets. (2.33)

3.17 The form issued to prisoners by personal officers should be withdrawn and replaced by face- to-face contact between staff and prisoner. (2.34)

Bullying and violence reduction

3.18 The prison should use an exit survey so that prisoners can raise any concerns about particular issues confidentially, and the results should inform the violence reduction strategy. (2.40)

Self-harm and suicide

3.19 Emergency response boxes in offices should be sealed and their contents audited regularly. (2.42)

Diversity

3.20 A diversity policy to meet the requirements of anti-discrimination legislation and outlining how the needs of minority groups will be identified and met should be introduced. (2.46)

3.21 The number of prisoners with disabilities, older prisoners and other minority groups should be monitored and regularly analysed to ensure that their needs are appropriately addressed and that they are not being victimised or excluded from any activity. (2.47)

3.22 A needs analysis of the population should be undertaken to inform a disability policy action plan. (2.49)

3.23 Prisoners with disabilities and older prisoners should be involved in producing a care plan and this should be included in their wing files along with an individual evacuation plan. (2.51)

3.24 All staff should undertake regular diversity training. (2.52)

3.25 Suitable accommodation for prisoners with disabilities should be provided on wings. (2.54)

HMP Latchmere House 44 Race equality

3.26 Managers should continue their efforts to encourage external community representation on the race equality action team. (2.56)

3.27 The updated race equality action plan should be published and promoted to staff and prisoners. (2.57)

3.28 The race equality officer should have sufficient time and support to manage race equality effectively. (2.58)

3.29 All members of the race equality action team should attend meetings or send a designated deputy. (2.66)

3.30 Minutes of race equality action team meetings should fully record discussion and action taken in response to monitoring statistics. (2.67)

3.31 Investigations into racist incidents should be completed within the expected timescale and signed off by the governor. (2.68)

3.32 Racist incident report forms and envelopes should be freely available to prisoners. (2.69)

3.33 Staff should not use the racist incident reporting system to raise personal grievances and should use the existing Prison Service grievance procedures for staff. (2.70)

Foreign national prisoners

3.34 The foreign national policy should be based on a needs analysis and contain an action plan. (2.72)

3.35 Additional time for foreign national liaison duties should be allocated to an additional member of staff. (2.74)

3.36 There should be routine consultation of foreign national prisoners and they should be informed about their entitlements. (2.75)

Applications and complaints

3.37 The nature, timeliness and quality of replies to prisoners’ complaints should be monitored by a senior manager. (2.76)

Substance use

3.38 The drug strategy team should monitor the level of alcohol testing and the results. (2.81)

Health services

3.39 The decoration and cleanliness of the health centre should be consistent with the promotion of health and meet infection control protocols. (2.83)

HMP Latchmere House 45 3.40 The establishment should, through the partnership board, ensure that the health provider makes regular checks on the physical condition of the health centre and ensure that all equipment held there is appropriate and in good working order. All unnecessary equipment and paperwork should be removed. (2.84)

3.41 The emergency equipment held in the health centre should be appropriate to the environment. (2.86)

3.42 There should be an automated external defibrillator on site and accessible to all, and there should be people trained to use it at all times. (2.87)

3.43 The establishment, through the partnership board, should agree, as a matter of urgency, a joint approach to ensure that procedures are in place to make sure that prisoners receive the best possible care and treatment in an emergency. (2.88)

3.44 The possibility of using NHS prescriptions instead of private prescriptions should be pursued. (2.93)

3.45 Maximum/minimum temperatures should be recorded daily for drug refrigerators to ensure that thermolabile items are stored within the 2- 8°C range. Corrective action should be taken where necessary and monitored by pharmacy staff. (2.101)

Learning and skills and work activities

3.46 Efforts should be made to improve the punctuality and attendance at education, training and work. (2.104)

3.47 Access to learning resources to support prisoners’ education and work should be improved. (2.105)

3.48 Prisoners should have more access to the local library and its internet services. (2.107)

3.49 Good access to a well resourced job search provision should be provided for all prisoners. (2.111)

3.50 The availability of computers for private study should be increased. (2.112)

Physical education and health promotion

3.51 Funding should be identified to plan accredited sports provision for prisoners. (2.113)

3.52 Gym usage should be better analysed and used to inform PE promotion and management decisions. (2.117)

Security and rules

3.53 There should be a drive to encourage more security information reports from different areas of the prison. (2.124)

HMP Latchmere House 46 Incentives and earned privileges

3.54 The incentives and earned privileges policy should be replaced by a published procedure that reflects current practice. (2.128)

Strategic management of resettlement

3.55 A resettlement needs analysis of the prison’s population should be undertaken. (2.134)

3.56 The establishment should include prisoners as part of the resettlement policy group when discussing issues that impact on resettlement outcomes in order to assess issues from the prisoners’ perspective. Prisoner consultation should include exit surveys specific to resettlement. (2.135)

3.57 A forum should be established that enables the providers of resettlement services to meet together to discuss practical issue. (2.137)

3.58 A manager should be tasked with the responsibility of coordinating a resettlement strategy specific to Latchmere House. (2.143)

3.59 An updated resettlement strategy should include an action plan that is updated at regular resettlement meetings. (2.144)

Offender management and planning

3.60 Sentence plan reviews should be conducted regularly for all prisoners. (2.152)

Resettlement pathways

3.61 The prisoner employed as the housing worker should have the facilities to provide an effective drop-in advice service to supplement the work of St Mungo’s, including access to a telephone. (2.154)

3.62 All needs identified using the pathway assessment tool should be reflected in sentence plans. (2.156)

3.63 A wider range of social and life skills courses should be introduced to improve the opportunities for entry to employment. (2.158)

3.64 Targets on learning plans should be reviewed and updated regularly. (2.160)

3.65 A pre-release course should be introduced to review and recognise prisoners’ skills development since induction through internal and external activities and effectively prepare prisoners for transition into the community. (2.163)

3.66 The budgeting and money management course should be made available to all prisoners identified as requiring it. (2.165)

3.67 The availability of financial services should be effectively promoted. (2.166)

HMP Latchmere House 47 3.68 The drug strategy should incorporate the alcohol policy, and contain detailed action plans, targets and performance measures. It should be informed by a comprehensive needs assessment. (2.169)

3.69 Alarms should be installed in all rooms used by CARAT staff to increase their security. (2.172)

3.70 The role of the drug/alcohol counsellor should be clarified. (2.175)

3.71 The resettlement policy should set out how the establishment plans to deliver against the children and families of offenders pathway and the timescales involved. (2.177)

3.72 Personal officers should encourage prisoners to maintain family ties and this should be evidenced in wing files. (2.179)

3.73 Prisoners should have access to programmes and interventions to improve parenting skills and relationships. (2.181)

3.74 Provision should be made for prisoners to receive incoming calls from children or to deal with arrangements for them. (2.182)

Housekeeping points

Residential units

3.75 The dormitories should be redecorated. (2.28)

3.76 More fridge space should be provided. (2.29)

HMP Latchmere House 48 Appendix 1: Inspection team

Sean Sullivan Team leader Joss Crosbie Inspector Paul Fenning Inspector Hayley Folland Inspector Bridget McEvilly Healthcare Inspector Neil Edwards Ofsted

HMP Latchmere House 49 Appendix II: Population profile

Please note: the following figures were supplied by the establishment and any errors are the establishment’s own.

Population breakdown by: Status Number of % prisoners Sentenced 193 100 Recall Convicted unsentenced Remand Civil prisoners Detainees Total 193 100

Sentence Number of % prisoners Unsentenced Less than 6 months 6 months to less than 12 months 12 months to less than 2 years 2 years to less than 4 years 6 3.1 4 years to less than 10 years 125 64.7 10 years and over (not life) 55 28 ISPP 1 0.5 Life 6 3.1 Total 193

Age Number of % prisoners Minimum age 21 Under 21 years 21 years to 29 years 41 21.2 30 years to 39 years 62 32.1 40 years to 49 years 55 28.5 50 years to 59 years 27 13.9 60 years to 69 years 6 3.1 70 plus years 2 1 Maximum age 69 Total 193

Nationality Number of % prisoners British 187 96.85 Foreign nationals 6 3.15 Total 193 100

Security category Number of % prisoners Uncategorised unsentenced Uncategorised sentenced Cat A Cat B Cat C Cat D 193 100 Other Total 193 100

Ethnicity Number of % prisoners White British 69 35.7 Irish 0 Other White 17 8.8

Mixed White and Black Caribbean 7 3.6 White and Black African 1 0.5 White and Asian 2 1 Other Mixed 3 1.5

Asian or Asian British Indian 8 4.1 Pakistani 4 2 Bangladeshi 2 1 Other Asian 10 5.2

Black or Black British Caribbean 54 28 African 6 3.1 Other Black 7 3.6

Chinese or other ethnic group Chinese 1 0.5 Other ethnic group 2 1

Not stated

Total 193

Religion Number of % prisoners Baptist Church of England 47 24.3 Roman Catholic 31 16.1 Other Christian denominations 7 3.6 Muslim 40 20.7

HMP Latchmere House 51 Sikh 3 1.5 Hindu 2 1.0 Buddhist 10 5.1 Jewish 4 2 Other 22 11.4 No religion 27 13.9 Total 193

Length of stay 21 and over Number % Less than 1 month 17 8.8 1 month to 3 months 35 18.1 3 months to 6 months 45 23.3 6 months to 1 year 68 35.2 1 year to 2 years 25 129 2 years to 4 years 2 1 4 years or more Total 193

Main offence 21 and over % Violence against the person 34 17.6 Sexual offences Burglary 8 4.1 Robbery 25 13 Theft and handling 5 2.6 Fraud and forgery 9 4.6 Drugs offences 105 54.4 Other offences 7 3.6 Civil offences Not recorded/holding warrant Total 193