HMP/YOI Swinfen Hall

Report on an unannounced inspection of HMP/YOI Swinfen Hall by HM Chief Inspector of Prisons 6–7, 20–23 August 2018 This inspection was carried out with assistance from colleagues at the General Pharmaceutical Council and in partnership with the following bodies: Crown copyright 2019 This publication, excluding logos, is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: [email protected]. Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at the address below or: [email protected] This publication is available for download at: http://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprisons/ Printed and published by: Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons 3rd floor 10 South Colonnade Canary Wharf London E14 4PU England 2 HMP/YOI Swinfen Hall Contents Contents Introduction 5 Fact page 7 About this inspection and report 9 Summary 11 Section 1. Safety 19 Section 2. Respect 27 Section 3. Purposeful activity 39 Section 4. Rehabilitation and release planning 45 Section 5. Summary of recommendations and good practice 53 Section 6. Appendices 59 Appendix I: Inspection team 59 Appendix II: Progress on recommendations from the last report 61 Appendix III: Photographs 69 Appendix IV: Prison population profile 71 Appendix V: Prisoner survey methodology and results 73 HMP/YOI Swinfen Hall 3 Contents Glossary of terms We try to make our reports as clear as possible, but if you find terms that you do not know, please see the glossary in our ‘Guide for writing inspection reports’ on our website at: http://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmiprisons/about-our-inspections/ 4 HMP/YOI Swinfen Hall Introduction Introduction HMP/YOI Swinfen Hall is situated near Lichfield in Staffordshire, and at the time of the inspection held some 530 males aged between 18 and 28. Most were serving long sentences of over four years, including some 10% serving sentences of more than 10 years. The prison was last inspected in November 2016, when outcomes for prisoners were found to have deteriorated from the previous inspection in 2014 with assessments declining in three of our four healthy prison tests. This latest inspection found that while there had been noticeable improvements in some areas, none of them had been sufficient to raise any of our assessments. In particular, there had been improvements in the provision of education and skills, and some of the residential accommodation had benefitted from refurbishment. I recognise that the assessments we made on this occasion were a disappointment to the prison’s leadership and staff, but the simple fact was that, despite the improvements, too many fundamental issues still needed to be resolved. First and foremost among these was the poor regime, which had a negative impact on so much else in the prison. We found that it was disrupted about 60% of the time, limiting access to work and education. Thirty-nine per cent of prisoners told us they were locked in their cells for more than 22 hours each day during the week, a figure that rose to 65% at weekends. This meant that only 27% had daily access to telephones, limiting their ability to maintain family contact or to complete domestic tasks such as cleaning their cells. Only a quarter of prisoners were able to have a daily shower, which compared very poorly with the 89% who were able to do so in other similar prisons. The quality of relationships between staff and prisoners was also clearly adversely affected by the poor regime. It was disappointing to find that the regime had not improved since the last inspection. It was our clear view that if the regime could be improved, Swinfen Hall could become a quite different prison. One very obvious casualty of the regime was the lack of opportunity for many prisoners to consume their meals anywhere other than in their locked cells. As a result we found far too many were compelled to eat their meals while sitting either on or very near to the lavatory in their cell. This was, of course, a situation that was unfortunately by no means unique to Swinfen Hall but was exacerbated there by the very poor regime. It was pleasing to find that the health care provision was generally good, and prisoners held positive views about it. However, we did find that black and minority ethnic prisoners held more negative perceptions than their white counterparts about their experiences, and this was an issue that needed to be analysed and understood. The prison had a robust approach to dealing with violence, and the fairly new violence reduction strategy had much to commend it, although there needed to be a sharper focus on violence reduction. Despite the fact that there had been some reduction in violence over the previous 12 months, much remained to be done. Two-thirds of prisoners told us they had felt unsafe at Swinfen Hall at some point, and a third felt unsafe at the time of the inspection. The number who said they had been victimised by other prisoners or by staff was much higher than at similar prisons, and was another issue that needed to be addressed. We were particularly concerned by the very high levels of self-harm, and the fact that this was disproportionately high among younger prisoners. In the six months prior to the inspection there had been over 400 incidents, compared to less than 200 in a similar period before the last inspection. A significant amount of this total was attributable to a small number of prisoners, but this was nevertheless extremely worrying. HMP/YOI Swinfen Hall 5 Introduction We have made four main recommendations in this report, and it is clear that there is an extent to which the issues they are intended to address are interrelated. The poor regime undoubtedly affected many areas of prison life, but clearly had a particularly acute impact on younger prisoners and those who were vulnerable or prone to committing acts of self-harm. The poor regime also inhibited attendance at activities, the development of constructive relationships with staff, family contact and basic living conditions. All of this inevitably had a negative impact on feelings of well-being and the ability of the prison to fulfil its objectives as a training prison. There was much good work being carried out at Swinfen Hall by a committed and hard-working staff group, but the prison will not fulfil its potential to provide a consistently purposeful and caring environment for the young prisoners held there unless and until the poor regime is improved. Peter Clarke CVO OBE QPM November 2018 HM Chief Inspector of Prisons 6 HMP/YOI Swinfen Hall Fact page Fact page Task of the establishment Young adult male long-term training establishment and adult male category C prison. Certified normal accommodation and operational capacity1 Prisoners held at the time of inspection: 532 Baseline certified normal capacity: 604 In-use certified normal capacity: 604 Operational capacity: 592 Notable features from this inspection Half of prisoners were under 21 years old, and 118 had been identified as care leavers. Nearly all prisoners were serving more than four years and were eligible for multi-agency public protection arrangements (MAPPA). More than a third of prisoners were convicted of sexual offences. There had been 718 incidents of self-harm in the previous six months. Prison status (public or private) and key providers Public Physical health provider: Care UK Mental health provider: Midlands Partnership NHS Foundation Trust Substance misuse provider: Midlands Partnership NHS Foundation Trust Learning and skills provider: Milton Keynes College Escort contractor: GEOAmey Prison group Midlands Brief history It takes young men aged between 18 and 25 serving from 3.5 years up to and including life. Short description of residential units Prisoners are housed in nine wings: A - 64 places B - 60 places – closed for refurbishment C - 60 places – induction /first night D - 68 places – ‘Enabling environment’ E - 60 places – PIPE (psychologically informed planned environment) F - 90 places 1 Baseline CNA is the sum total of all certified accommodation in an establishment except cells in segregation units, health care cells or rooms that are not routinely used to accommodate long stay patients. In-use CNA is baseline CNA less those places not available for immediate use, such as damaged cells, cells affected by building works, and cells taken out of use due to staff shortages. Operational capacity is the total number of prisoners that an establishment can hold without serious risk to good order, security and the proper running of the planned regime. HMP/YOI Swinfen Hall 7 Fact page G - 90 places I - 82 places – enhanced J - 80 places (it held 75 prisoners at the time of the inspection due to the refurbishment programme) Care and separation unit - 17 places Name of governor and date in post Ian West – October 2016 Independent Monitoring Board chair Stella Bridle Date of last inspection 24 October–4 November 2016 8 HMP/YOI Swinfen Hall About this inspection and report About this inspection and report A1 Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons is an independent, statutory organisation which reports on the treatment and conditions of those detained in prisons, young offender institutions, secure training centres, immigration detention facilities, police and court custody and military detention. A2 All inspections carried out by HM Inspectorate of Prisons contribute to the UK’s response to its international obligations under the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (OPCAT).

Load more