Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: November 22, 2024 Fri
Time: 12:13 pm
Time: 12:13 pm
Results for prison conditions (northern ireland)
1 results foundAuthor: Northern Ireland. Criminal Justice Inspectorate Title: The Treatment of Vulnerable Prisoners by the Northern Ireland Prison Service: A follow-up review of inspection recommendations Summary: CJI published a report on the NIPS management of vulnerable prisoners in December 2009. Inspectors made only ten recommendations in order to avoid restating recommendations that had previously been made elsewhere. The NIPS published an action plan a fortnight later, accepting six of the recommendations in full and four in part. In April 2010 CJI reported again by letter to the Minister of Justice in respect of six specific concerns that were outstanding from the December 2009 inspection. These included staff double-jobbing, emergency access to cells at nights and heating levels in observation cells. This follow-up review was conducted in August 2011 by CJI and RQIA and was scheduled to allow opportunity for the 2009 recommendations to be implemented. Inspectors conclude that, of the ten recommendations made in December 2009: 2 have been achieved; have been partially achieved; and 2 have not been achieved. Within a context of an overall increase of some 350 prisoners the NIPS had made good progress in some areas: Opening the Donard Centre for vulnerable prisoners at Maghaberry Prison was a major achievement; There was less usage of observation cells and anti-ligature clothing and more individualised assessment of vulnerable prisoners; Managerial oversight had improved and there was more robust self-audit; and Practical steps had been implemented to provide emergency cell access at nights and lockable in-cell cupboards. Improvements in the wider prison environment enhanced the regime for everyone, including vulnerable prisoners: There was closer management of night custody staff; 140 prisoners had been granted “walker” status at Maghaberry Prison since May 2011. This meant they could move freely within the confines of the prison without staff escorts; and Collaboration with the South Eastern Health and Social Care Trust (SEHSCT) was helping to bolster safer custody provision by introducing new staff and ways of working. Despite these improvements, inadequate governance within the NIPS continued to provide a poor context for delivery of safer custody. This included underperforming staff not being held accountable; important policy areas such as security and safer custody not cross-referring; cumbersome planning – Maghaberry Prison’s business plan for 2011-12 was predicated (in August 2011) on corporate and business plans that were still only in draft form; there was very little dynamic security and no effective anti-violence strategy. At operational level the NIPS regimes entailed too much lock-up time, insufficient education and activity, and in the case of HydebankWood Young Offenders’ Centre andWomen’s Prison an underperforming healthcare department. As it is impossible to ever conclude that the SPAR process is always being properly implemented by all members of staff, the NIPS will have to continuously monitor and challenge quality of practice and recording in this area. Other areas for improvement include poor quality living environments for most vulnerable prisoners; and Inspectors again noted cynicism of some staff and distancing from prisoners, though it was encouraging that managers were more challenging of such attitudes than in the past. The consequences of all this for prisoners were both emotional and practical. They included regularly feeling that they were not being treated with respect, boredom, delays in mail delivery, shortened visits and limited phone access. Such frustrations were significant for someone who was locked up and added to existing vulnerabilities. These deficiencies have been widely-reported in the past. The NIPS has acknowledged them and initiated the SEE Programme in response. It was launched in June 2011 with the aim of professionally developing the role of all prison officers. Inspectors fully endorse the aims of the SEE programme, which are of necessity far-reaching. However it carries considerable risk as it is expected to significantly reduce staff numbers. The implications of this are concerning for vulnerable prisoners and we urge that their needs should be prioritised. Details: Belfast: Criminal Justice Inspection Northern Ireland, 2012. 30p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 20, 2012 at http://www.cjini.org/CJNI/files/73/73452cca-bbe1-493c-84ee-9cd16eb73d76.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.cjini.org/CJNI/files/73/73452cca-bbe1-493c-84ee-9cd16eb73d76.pdf Shelf Number: 124617 Keywords: Mentally Ill Inmates (Northern Ireland)Prison Conditions (Northern Ireland) |