House of Commons - Home Affairs

Select Committee on Home Affairs Written Evidence

44. Extracts from supplementary memorandum submitted by HM Prison Service, Home Office

1. Educational, Vocational and Offending Behaviour Programmes

Data Request

Statistics on numbers of educational, vocational and offending behaviour programmes provided (and completed) per person establishment (indicating category of prison) versus numbers of prisoners per prison establishment:

(a) breakdown of courses into

(i) educational;

(ii) vocational; and

(iii) OBPs, identifying each individual programme provided under (i) (ii) and (iii) and (where applicable) qualification obtained on completion.

(b) breakdown of numbers of course completions according to prisoner type, ie for these purposes, remand prisoners, short term prisoners (serving 12 months or less), prisoners serving determinate sentences between 2-10 years and long term prisoners.

Data Supplied

Table 1

EDUCATIONAL, VOCATIONAL, OFFENDING BEHAVIOUR AND SEX OFFENDER TREATMENT PROGRAMMES BY COURSE TYPE

		April 2003-February 2004
Educational and	Entry Level	12364
Vocational Completions	Level I	17,322
	Level II	12,662
	Key Work Skills	98,513
Offender Behavior Programme	Cognitive Booster	98
Completions	CALM	207
	CSCP	21
	Enhanced Thinking	4,613
	Healthy Relationships	8
	Problem Solving	45
	Reasoning and Rehabilitation	750
Sex Offender Treatment	Adapted	76
Programme Completions	Booster	84
	Core	317
	Extended	70
	Rolling	167

Points to Note

— The Prison Service records the number of educational/vocational awards achieved and offender behaviour programme completions. There are no statistics available on the number of courses started.

— Vocational awards comprise all Key Work Skills awards and a mixture of appropriate Entry Level, Level 1 and Level 2 awards.

— Chart 1.0 below details the achievements and completions YTD for each element of the Educational, Vocational, Offending Behaviour and Sex Offender Treatment programmes.

— The Prison Service does not record completions at prisoner level, we can only offer the number of completions achieved in the particular establishment, and cannot ascertain the sentence of the prisoner completing the course. As an alternative, the following graph illustrates the number of completions in establishments where the predominant population are serving, either long sentences (plus 4 years), medium sentences (1 to 4 years), short sentences (up to 1 year), on remand or are immigration detainees.

Appendix 1 (Tables 1.01, and 1.02) (not printed) includes all the requested data; educational and vocational awards, population, prison category, for each prison establishment.

Points to Note

— Those establishments where the large part of the prison population is serving long sentences (ie plus four years), have achieved the most completions.

— The graph also includes the number of prisoners in each group of establishments as a percentage of the estate population, and demonstrates, with the exception of those establishments with a prison population mainly serving short sentences, that as the population in each group has risen—so has the number of completions.

Offending Behaviour Programmes

Offender behaviour programmes can run over a considerably longer period than educational and vocational courses. A prisoner enrolling on an offender behaviour programme will need to complete a number of sessions, ranging from 24 to 38, depending on the programme. The programmes are even longer for sex offenders, whereby the prisoner must complete 70 sessions attending two to four sessions per week.

Points to Note

— Due to the length of offender behaviour programmes, the type of prisoners attending and completing programmes are in the main, serving long and medium sentences.

— There have been no completions in those establishments with a population that is predominantly serving short sentences.

— Prisons whose predominant population are serving long sentences have shown around a 50% improvement on last year's completions to date, compared to a 5% rise in population over the same period in time.

Data Request

Data Supplied


Function	April 2003—February 2004			April 2002—February 2003
	Educational/Vocational Completions	OBPs Completions	% of Population	Educational/Vocational Completions	OBPs Completions	% of Population

Category B	6,881	710	8.4%	5,047	490	8.3%
Category C	44,480	2,248	26.5%	41,753	1,572	26.0%
Dispersal	2,117	346	3.6%	2,820	339	3.7%
Female closed	2,895	170	1.7%	2,004	121	1.7%
Female local	4,554	169	3.0%	3,767	138	2.3%
Female open	1,074	0	0.3%	986	0	0.3%
Male closed young offender	26.545	729	8.7%	21,634	541	9.1%
Male juvenile	6,782	31	1.6%	1,463	24	1.5%
Male local	37,660	1,750	39.3%	31,387	1,526	39.7%
Male open	5,303	193	4.4%	4,280	137	4.4%
Male open young offender	956	72	0.3%	2583	125	0.5%
Semi open	1,614	38	2.1%	1,310	34	1.8%

Points to Note

— The majority of establishments fall into the function groups category C and Male local, accommodating 66% of the total prisoner population,

— Consequently, the majority of achievement for educational/vocational and offender behaviour programmes are found in category C and Male locals which account for over half of all completions for both types of programme based on current year to date figures:


Function	Education/Vocation Completions		OBPs


Category C	44,480	32%	2,248	34%
Male Local	37,660	27%	1,750	27%
Total	82,140	59%	3,998	62%

2. Purposeful Activity

Data Request

Statistics on numbers of hours of purposeful activity at each prison establishment and break down of time spent in eduction, vocational training, OBPs, leisure (eg gym) or other.

Table 2.0

PURPOSEFUL ACTIVITY (EDUCATION, VOCATIONAL TRAINING, OBPS, LEISURE AND OTHER) BY CATEGORY


	Classroom education	Vocational workshops	Production workshops	Exercise	OBP	Other	Purposeful Activity

Category B	3.6	2.6	3.2	1.8	0.8	12.8	24.8
Category C	3.9	1.7	4.4	2.5	0.3	12.5	25.4
Dispersal	3.2	2.3	2.3	2.1	0.7	8.1	18.8
Female closed	5.4	2.5	2.2	1.7	0.2	15.0	27.0
Female local	4.2	0.8	1.4	1.2	0.3	12.2	20.2
Female open	6.3	2.6	0.0	1.1	0.0	33.8	43.8
Male closed YOI	5.5	1.9	1.0	3.6	0.3	11.7	24.1
Male juvenile	7.3	2.6	0.0	4.8	0.5	13.5	28.7
Male local	2.7	1.1	2.2	1.7	0.2	11.0	18 9
Male open	3.8	1.5	2.9	3.7	0.1	27.4	39.4
Male open YOI	7.9	4.4	0.0	9.0	1.2	20.5	42.9
Semi open	3.8	3.7	2.0	2.3	0.0	26.8	38.7

Points to Note

— Approximately half of all purposeful hours, are based around classroom education, vocational workshops, production workshops, exercise and offender behaviour programmes (OBP). These activity groups include all classroom based education, vocational training and other skills training, prison service enterprise work schemes, physical education and recreational sporting activities, accredited and non accredited offender behaviour programmes.

— The remaining purposeful hours are spent on other activities, that include, sentence planning and other resettlement issues, drug programmes, family and social interactions, domestic duties, health education and religious activities.

A full breakdown of purposeful activity by prison can be found in Appendix I, Table 2.0 (not printed).

3. Statistics on provision of drug treatment programmes (by types and number of places) provided by prison establishment.

The intensive drug treatment programmes available in prison can be split into three main categories:

— the cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) approach to drugs-misuse is based on social learning theory, whereby behaviours such as drugs-misuse are seen largely as the product of prior experiences, thoughts and emotions. Treatment is, therefore, designed to teach substance-involved inmates how to perceive situations differently and, consequently, to modify their actions;

— the 12-Step approach was originally founded on the "twelve steps to recovery" approach and works on the assumption that addiction is a lifetime illness that can be controlled—but can never be completely cured. Each step in the programme addresses a specific problem in an individual's life;

— Therapeutic Communities (TCs) are hierarchic in nature and contain a mixture of formal and informal elements. These include incentives, structured activities and work hierarchy, as well as peer modelling, confrontation, support and friendship. The use of a senior inmate culture, where residents are part of the treatment process, is a vital component of a TC. TCs are designed to meet the needs of those with the most severe drugs-misuse problems and related offending behaviour.

Since 1996-97, the number of intensive drug treatment programmes available in prison has risen from nine to 62. The intensive drug rehabilitation programmes and TCs running across the prison estate during 2003-04 are shown in the tables below:

Establishment	Programme
Aylesbury	RAPt[31]
Coldingley	RAPt
Everthorpe	RAPt
Littlehey	RAPt
Mount	RAPt
Norwich	RAPt
Send	RAPt
Swaleside	RAPt
Wandsworth	RAPt
Frankland	FOCUS
Full Sutton	FOCUS
Long Lartin	FOCUS
Wakefield	FOCUS
Whitemoor	FOCUS
Bullingdon	Ley Community
Garth	NORTH WEST TC
Wymott	NORTH WEST TC
Dartmoor	P-ASRO[32]
Glen Parva	P-ASRO
Guys Marsh	P-ASRO
Haverigg	P-ASRO
Lindholme	P-ASRO
Low Newton	P-ASRO
Parc	P-ASRO
Risley	P-ASRO
Stafford	P-ASRO
Swinfen Hall	P-ASRO
Wayland	P-ASRO
Erlestoke	Prison 12 Step
Lancaster	Prison 12 Step
Swansea	Prison 12 Step
Verne	Prison 12 Step
Acklington	CBT—CONSORTIUM
Blundeston	CBT—CONSORTIUM
Bullwood Hall	CBT—CONSORTIUM
Deerbolt	CBT—CONSORTIUM
Drake Hall	CBT—CONSORTIUM
Edmunds Hill	CBT—CONSORTIUM
Highpoint	CBT—CONSORTIUM
Lowdham	CBT—CONSORTIUM
Pentonville	CBT—CONSORTIUM
Ranby	CBT—CONSORTIUM
Stocken	CBT—CONSORTIUM
Styal	CBT—CONSORTIUM
Wealstun	CBT—CONSORTIUM
W/Scrubs	CBT—CONSORTIUM
Brixton	KSS/CRI[33]
Chelmsford	KSS/CRI
Elmley	KSS/CRI
Maidstone	KSS/CRI
Rochester	KSS/CRI
Gartree	STOP[34]
Channings W	NORTH WEST TC
Holme House	NORTH WEST TC
Ashfield	LOCAL PROGRAMME
Birmingham	LOCAL PROGRAMME
Bristol	LOCAL PROGRAMME
Gloucester	LOCAL PROGRAMME
Leyhill	LOCAL PROGRAMME
Nottingham	LOCAL PROGRAMME
Reading	LOCAL PROGRAMME
Warren Hill	LOCAL PROGRAMME

Of the prisons listed above, the following are contracted-out ("Private" Prisons):

— Parc;

— Lowdham Grange;

— Ashfield.

The full-year drug rehabilitation programmes data for 2003-04 (as well as other programmes data) will not be available until at least the end of May—due to the need for data reconciliation at year-end. A review of drug rehabilitation programme capacity—that focusses in detail on each programme running across the estate—is currently underway. Completion of this exercise is expected to coincide with the central publication of Service-wide data around the end of May.

4. Remand and Short Term Prisoners

Remand and Short-Term Prisoners: numbers and types of programmes provided to short-term prisoners per establishment, with percentage completions. Percentage of prison population constituting remand prisoners and short term prisoners respectively.

The figures for the last six years (at end June) are given in table 4.1 below. These two groups of prisoners together account for around 30% of the prison population. The proportion has tended to reduce slightly in recent years. See also the attached statistical tables.

Table 4.1

PERCENTAGE OF PRISON POPULATION THAT ARE ON REMAND OR SERVING SENTENCES OF LESS THAN 12 MONTHS AT 30 JUNE


	1998	1999	2000	2001	2002	2003

% population on remand	19.6	19.4	17.5	16.7	18.4	17.7
% population serving sentences of lessthan 12 months	11.7	11.5	13.6	12.9	11.0	11.1
Total prison population	65,727	64,829	65,194	66,403	71,218	73,657

Through-put of remand prisoners and short term prisoners respectively across the prison estate per year

The figures on numbers received into prison in these two categories for the last six years are given in table 4.2 below. Short term prisoners who were previously received on remand are counted in both categories in the table below. The numbers received on remand have grown from around 81,600 in 1998 to 91,200 in 2003. The numbers received on short sentences have increased from 55,500 in 1998 to 60,800 in 2003.

Table 4.2

RECEPTIONS FOR REMAND AND SHORT TERM PRISONERS[35], [36]


	1998	1999	2000	2001	2002	2003[37]

Remand	81,585	84,105	81,336	82,668	91,525	91,189
Sentenced to less than 12 months	55,455	59,992	61,389	60,380	60,761	60,812

Prisons in which remand prisoners and short term prisoners are located: breakdown of numbers and % of total remand and short term prison population.

Table 4.3 lists the 57 prisons in which remand prisoners were located at end November 2003 and gives the numbers as a % of the total remand population (13,034) at that time. Pentonville, Birmingham and Wandsworth held the largest numbers of remand prisoners, each holding at least 500 such prisoners. Together these three prisons accounted for 13% of the total remand population.

Table 4.4 lists the 120 prisons which held prisoners on sentences of less than 12 months at end November 2003 and gives the numbers as a percentage of the total short-sentenced population (8,131) at that time. Birmingham, Liverpool, Doncaster and Forest Bank held the largest numbers of short-sentenced prisoners, each holding at least 200 such prisoners. Together these four prisons accounted for 11% of the total short-sentenced population.

Numbers and types of educational, vocational and offending behaviour programmes provided to short term prisoners per establishment, with percentage completions.

Monthly information at establishment level is collected on numbers of prisoners involved in learning, and on numbers and types of qualifications. At present systems do not provide for detail on qualifications beyond the number of basic skills qualifications per establishment and the number of work skills qualifications per month.

Learning programmes are being made more flexible to cater for short-term prisoners and to help minimise the disruption caused by the movement of longer term prisoners by:

— using the same approaches and materials across the estate as are used in community-based learning;

— offering basic skills tests on demand;

— increasing the number of modular courses; and

— extending of the computer-based programmes provided by Learndirect.

Offending behaviour programmes are not currently provided to short-term prisoners so no statistics are available. The Prison and Probation Services have, however, been working together in developing and piloting programmes for short-term prisoners.

Commentary on NOMS five year plan for intervention programme for short term prisoners and expectations of Home Office's proposals in response to Carter Report

The two Services have recently established a project to develop an intervention strategy for this group of prisoners that takes account of the broad range of interventions available to help short-term prisoners. This will look strategically at the overall balance of provision within prisons and between prison and the community to prepare the ground for the introduction of the new short sentence "custody plus" under the Criminal Justice Act 2003.

Drug treatment for remand and short term prisoners

Practicably speaking from a drug interventions perspective, short-term" prisoners may be considered to be those whose period in custody is insufficient to allow engagement with intensive drug rehabilitation programmes—and for whom CARATs[38] and/or clinical management of substance-misuse services (detoxification or maintenance prescribing programmes) necessarily constitute the main interventions. "Short-Termers, therefore, represent those held in custody for less than around 6-8 weeks (the shortest time in which a P-ASRO programme could be run).

Conscious of the need to do more for short-term prisoners, the Service has successfully bid for SR2002 funding to introduce a Short Duration Programme for drug-misusers. Pilots (eventually extending to eight sites) are scheduled to start later this month.

5. Private Prisons and Public Prisons

Data request

Statistics comparing performance of private and public prisons respectively, including numbers of educational, vocational and offending behaviour programmes provided (defined by programme type and numbers provided).

Table 3.0

PUBLIC AND CONTRACTED SECTOR PRISONS—KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS AGAINST TARGET AND YEAR ON YEAR IMPROVEMENT


KPIs	Public					Private
	Actual LYTD	Actual YTD	Target	Variance	Year on Year	Actual LYTD	Actual YTD	Target	Variance	Year on Year

Escapes	0.03%	0.02%	0.05%	60%	33%	0.00%	0.02%	0.05%	60%	-100%
MDT	11.8%	12.3%	10.0%	-23%	-4%	10.7%	13.8%	10.0%	-38%	-29%
Serious Assault	1.14%	1.51%	1.20%	-26%	-32%	1.02%	1.73%	1.20%	-44%	-70%
Doubling	20.7%	21.7%	18.0%	-21%	-5%	16.0%	27.8%	18.0%	-54%	-74%
Self Inflicted Death	146.7	137.2	112.8	-22%.	6%	164	32.4	112.8	71%	80%
Purposeful Activity	22.3	23.1	24	-4%	4%	25.0	26.5	28	-5%	6%
Entry level	7,105	11,459	7,174	60%	61%	538	905	615	47%	68%
Level1	14,542	16,411	13,660	20%	13%	917	911	773	18%	-1%
Level 2	13,040	11,900	13,648	-13%	-9%	916	762	772	-1%	-17%
KWS	79,637	93,128	52,672	77%	17%	2,352	5,385	2,526	113%	129%
Resettlement	17,449.52	26,447	29,044		52%	1,063.03	1,965	2,456		85%
OBPs	4,883	6,158	8,630		26%	164	298	456		82%
SOTPs	494	680	1,216		38%	14	34	72		143%
Population	64,714	66,773				6,652	6,737

KWS = Key Work skills

Points to note

— There are 128 public establishments and only nine privately run establishments, therefore it would be inaccurate to make a direct comparison between the number of respective educational/vocational awards and offender behaviour programme completions. Besides size, factors that may impact on performance comparison include, contractual arrangements within contracted prisons, different targets for the two sectors, the re-evaluation of performance following late data entry.

— The percentage variance for target and actual year to date for offending behaviour programmes (OBPs) and sex offender treatment programmes (SOTPs) has been omitted, due to the late surge of completions expected in March. Resettlement has been treated in the same manner, due to the increase expected from the Resettlement Survey due to be carried out in May 2004.

— Both public and private sectors have shown an overall improvement educational/vocational and offender behaviour programmes completions.

— The statistics also confirm that both the public and private sector are struggling to meet their respective Key Performance Indicator targets for Mandatory Drug Testing (MDT), serious assault, and doubling.

6. Private Employers

Numbers (and identification) of private employers involved in provision of vocational training and/or prison work schemes by reference to prison establishments in which work initiative located.

This table contains information that is known centrally. It does not include information about all initiatives involving private employers.

Prison	Employer	Activity	Qualifications	Post Release
Aylesbury	Toyota	Motor mechanics.	NVQ level 2&3. Part of a Modern Apprenticeship scheme.	Toyota have employed prisoners on release and assisted prisoners into work with other dealerships.
Drake Hall	Fitness First Leisure Centres	Provide work placements as part of training programme and to gain work experience.	National qualifications for gym instructors.	Fitness First have recruited prisoners who have achieved a qualification.
East Sutton Park	Arriva Bus Company	Training covers driving, collection of fares, customer services, breakdown training.	Must have a PSV licence. Other training provided in- house.	Prisoners are given paid work placements as part of their resettlement programme. Employment can be continued on release if job opportunities exist in home area.
Eastwood Park	REED	Mailing, packing and bulk storage.	Looking to develop a REED "Ready for Work" qualification with prisoners who serve at least six months in Eastwood Park.	Links with REED in Partnership.
Feltham	Ford	Training in motor mechanics.	NVQ levels 1, 2, 3	Possibility for prisoners to entry into the Ford Apprenticeship Programme.
Foston Hall	Toyota	Motor mechanics. Toyota provides all the equipment and learning materials.	NVQ levels 1, 2, 3	Industry standard training that can be linked to Modern Apprenticeships.
Forest Bank*	ACK Engineering	Assist in the provision of training in welding. (Two workshops)	NVQ	The company recruit most of their employees from the prison. Five prisoners employed over 18 months.
	Gresham's Office Furniture, Dams Office Furniture, Erlam Mckendric Furniture	Companies provide work making office furniture. (Five workshops)	Started the process for the validation of the training.	Three prisoners have secured employment. Four more have been identified as potential recruits when released.
	QX Motor Components	Reconditions starter motors and alternators.	Not at present.	Suitable prisoners have gone into employment.
	Whitecroft Lighting	Electrical work. Prisoners receive eight-week training in a classroom setting. They then work in the lighting workshop working on electrical looms and wiring.	Prisoners can gain a certificate in Portable Appliance Testing (PAT).	One prisoner into employment
	Interactive Ventilation	Powder coating training.	The company intend to introduce traingin for NVQs.	Early stages of the workshop, but company will consider employing suitable prisoners.
Guys Marsh	YMCA-Leisure Centres	YMCA. training delivered in the establishment.	National qualification for gym instructors.	YMCA clubs representatives visit Guys Marsh with a view to employing suitable prisoners on release. The Prison Service is looking to become an approved centre for YMCA training. Employment links will be developed on national basis.
Huntercombe	Sodexho	Sponsoring the kitchen by providing materials and providing work placements.	NVQs level 1&2	Sodexho will employ suitable prisoners as well as helping prisoners find employment with other companies in the catering industry.
Kirkham	Inter Europe Foods	Paid work relating to cold storage warehousing and distribution.	Not presently.	Not presently
	Inter Europe Foods, Wignall Poultry, Grampian Chickens, Midshire Meats	Paid work involving processing and packaging of fresh meats and frozen products.	Basic food hygiene and planning to introduce NVQ level 1&2 in butchery.	Links with employers on release
Liverpool	Kickstart, a private training provider working in partnership with several employers.	Provide training in plastering, joinery, fitting kitchens and bathrooms, bricklaying.	City and Guilds 6000 and the ICA.	Links with several employers also links with Liverpool City Council who are providing dilapidated housing that can be renovated for accommodation.
The Mount, Wormwood Scrubs, Blankenhurst	Beaufort Fabrications	Manufacturing aluminium windows and doors.	NVQ levels 1, 2, 3	Ex-prisoners are considered for vacancies.
Reading, Wymott, Rochester, Glen Parva	National Grid Transco	Training for employment in the industry as Gas Network Operative.	NVQ level 1	Those who complete the training are quaranteed a job in the industry.
Send	REED	Computerised data collection	Looking to develop a REED "Ready for Work" qualification.	Links with REED in partnership.
Thorn Cross	Anderton Concrete	Production of concrete items ie gate posts, paving stones, garden ornaments etc.	Not at present.	Will consider employing suitable ex-prisoners.
The Wolds	Summit Media	Web design, maintenance and management. All costs meet by Summit Media.	No formal qualifications.	Several prisoners have gained employment with Summit Media other within the industry.
	Vulcan Windows	Manufacturing UPVC double-glazing. All costs of manufacturing and training provided by Vulcan.	Currently working towards extablishing qualifications.	Between 20-25 prisoners involved at any one time.

*Forest Bank have an agreement with employers who provide work and training that, where appropriate, if a vacancy occurs in the company's organisation/factory, they will interview prisoners whose risk assessment indicate low/medium risk or have indicated through their sentence their desire to settle into secure employment and accommodation.

7. Transfers

Number of prisoners moving between prison establishments

— In 2003-04 there were just over 100,000 prisoner transfers between prison establishments.

Statistics on distance prisoners held from home

— On average prisoners were held 52 (54) miles from home area.

— On average male prisoners were held 51 (53) miles from home area.

— On average female prisoners were held 67 (68) miles from home area.

— 63% (63%) of male and 50% (51%) of female prisoners were held under 50 miles from home area.

— 15% (17%) of male and 24% (25%) of female prisoners were held between 50 and 100 miles from home area.

— 22% (20%) of male and 26% (24%) of female prisoners were held over 100 miles from home area.

Relocation of prisoners to establishment close to home

Statistics are not recorded on the number of prisoners relocated to establishments close to their home.

Background

In its management of the prison population, the Prison Service, on behalf of the National Offender Management Service, aims to hold prisoners in establishments that: provide the degree of security they require, are suitable to their gender, age and legal status, provide special facilities appropriate to prisoner needs and are near to their homes or the courts dealing with their cases.

High population levels throughout the prison estate can lead to prisoners being transferred from their home area to establishments with a greater number of vacancies.

Most inter-prison moves are part of normal sentence planning to allocate prisoners to training prisons, where they will be able to receive training courses. Every effort is made to avoid moving prisoners who are in the process of attending an educational course or accredited offending behaviour programmes.

Data on numbers of prisoners moving between establishments and impact on programme completions

Indicative data only are available to demonstrate the impact that inter-prison transfers have on prisoners' ability to complete drug rehabilitation programmes.

The following is derived from information submitted by 24 prisons (less than half of all prisons running drug rehabilitation programmes) that covers those drug-misusers entering drug rehabilitation between January and September 2003. The data should, however, be broadly representative of those who participated in intensive drug rehabilitation programmes during 2003-04.

Information was available on the completion rates of 521 participants. Almost half of all participants successfully graduated (n=255, 49%); two-fifths completed less than half their programme (n=203, 39%); and 12% completed over half of the programme (n=60).

Information about the reasons for leaving programmes prematurely were also completed for each participant. Of the 263 non-completers, around a quarter had left for their personal reasons—with just under a quarter being discharged for drug-related reasons. Only 11% of participants were transferred to another prison during the course of their programme.

The table below records the above findings in greater detail

Reasons for non-completion


Reason for leaving	Number of participants	% of participants

Left of their own accord	67	25%
Asked to leave because of their continued use of drugs (drug tests, self-report, suspicion)	59	22%
Unacceptable behaviour/breach of compact	35	13%
Transferred	29	11%
Released	17	6%
No progress	12	5%
Other course/education programme	9	3%
Not enough participants on programme	6	2%
Lacked motivation	5	2%
Mental/physical health problems	4	2%
Missed over two sessions	3	1%
Other reasons	16	2%

8. Community placements and work schemes

To help establish the number of prisoners on day release for community placements and work schemes by establishment, a snapshot survey was undertaken at the end of March 2004. The results of that survey are reflected in the table below, but should be treated with some caution. A more detailed and systematic survey of the Resettlement Estate is currently being undertaken.

ESTABLISHMENTS OPERATING RESETTLEMENT ESTATE REGIMES


Prison	Area	Stage One (No of prisoners on community placements or training)	Stage Two (No of prisoners undertaking paid work)

ASHWELL	E Mids S	40	0
ASKHAM GRANGE (F)	Y&H*	80	42
BLANTYRE HOUSE	Kent	52	70
DARTMOOR	SW	45	0
DOWNVIEW (F)	Surrey/Sussex	10	10
DRAKE HALL (F)	W Mids	15	15
EAST SUTTON PARK (F)	Kent	16	20
FORD	Surrey/Sussex	40	27
HEWELL GRANGE	W Mids	80	60
HOLLESLEY BAY	Eastern	40	40
KIRKHAM	NW	38	8
KIRKLEVINGTON GRANGE	NE	110	110
LATCHMERE HOUSE	London	36	160
LEYHILL	SW	67	24
MOORLAND	Y&H	25	25
MORTON HALL (F)	E Mids N	0	3
NORTH SEA CAMP	E Mids N	0	80
NORWICH	Eastern	0	20
ONLEY	E Mids S	20	0
PRESCOED	Wales	60	20
READING	Thames V*	20	20
SEND (F)	Surrey/Sussex	50	30
SPRING HILL	Thames V	65	50
STANDFORD HILL	Kent	19	25
SWINFEN HALL	W Mids	20	0
SUDBURY	E Mids N	0	182
THORN CROSS	NW	6	7
WEALSTUN	Y&H	0	75

TOTAL		954	1,123

Note: Y& H = Yorkshire and Humerside area.

Thames V = Thames Valley, Hampshire and the Isle of Man area.

9. Community Penalties

Statistics on numbers of community penalties currently imposed by the courts (with break down of type of crime and penalty imposed) and any available statistics on breach of penalty/failure to complete with resulting action taken.

Table 7.1 (taken from Criminal statistics, England and Wales, 2002 table 4.4B) gives the number of community sentences imposed by the courts in 2002 by gender, type of offence and type of community sentence. There were 186,500 community sentences imposed in 2002 of which 110,800 were for indictable offences.

Table 7.2 (taken from Criminal statistics, England and Wales, 2002 table 4.25) gives information on breaches dealt with by the courts and whether a custodial sentence resulted. Please note that where the breach relates to a further offence, some of those receiving a custodial sentence for the breach may have received a concurrent custodial sentence for the further offence.

Table 7.3 (taken from Probation statistics, England and Wales, 2002 table 4.4) gives further information on termination of court orders supervised by the Probation Service.

Any available statistics on comparison of re-offending rates between those given a community penalty and those given a custodial sentence

There is no information on re-offending rates and reconviction rates are used as a proxy for these. However this will underestimate the proportion reoffending as not all re-offenders will be caught or prosecuted. Those that are given pre-court disposals (eg cautions, reprimands, final warnings and fixed penalty notices) are also not included in the reconviction rates.

The following table gives the latest two-year reconviction rates for community penalties and custodial sentences; these relate to those commencing community penalties or discharged from custody in 1999 and only convictions for standard list offences count. However, reconviction rates should not be used to compare the effectiveness of prison sentences with community penalties as the characteristics of the offenders in each disposal group will differ and these characteristics are known to affect the chances of reconviction. Also, these reconviction rates are unadjusted, meaning they include convictions for offences committed prior to the date of discharge/date of commencement (for those receiving community penalties). These are termed "pseudo-reconvictions'. The impact of pseudo reconvictions differs between the two groups of disposals and becomes more important for shorter follow up periods.

Statistics on reconviction rates are included in Probation Statistics, England and Wales, 2002, section 9 and Prison Statistics, England and Wales, 2002, chapter 9.

Reconviction rates for those given community penalties and those given custodial sentences

Two year reconviction rates (from 1999)


	Community Penalty	Percentage reconvicted Custodial sentence

Males	57	59
Females	47	55
All persons	56	59

10. Post-release

Statistics on current re-offending rates of prisoners up to two years following release

Table 8.1 below gives the latest two year reconviction rates for custodial sentences; these relate to those discharged from custody in 1999 and only convictions for standard list offences count. These reconviction rates are unadjusted, meaning they include convictions for offences committed prior to the date of discharge. These are termed "pseudo-reconvictions'. The impact of pseudo reconvictions becomes more important for shorter follow up periods.

Statistics on reconviction rates are included in Prison Statistics, England and Wales, 2002, chapter 9.

Table 8.1 Reconviction rates for those given a custodial sentence

Two year reconviction rates (following discharge in 1999)


	Percentage reconvicted within two years

Males (all)	59
Young Males (a)	74
Adult Males	55
Females (all)	55
All prisoners	59

(a) Those aged Under 21 when sentenced originally.

Statistics on accommodation provision for prisoners immediately following release

The available information is from large-scale resettlement surveys of sentenced prisoners nearing release, conducted for the Prison Service by an external survey company. In a survey conducted in November-December 2001 24% of prisoners had a paid job arranged after release, and a further 6% had a training or education place arranged. In a survey conducted in March-April 2003 25% of prisoners had a paid job arranged after release, and a further 5% had a training or education place arranged.

Statistics on accommodation provision for prisoners immediately following release.

The available information is from large-scale resettlement surveys of sentenced prisoners nearing release, conducted for the Prison Service by an external survey company. In a survey conducted in November-December 2001 67% of prisoners had accommodation arranged on release. In a survey conducted in March-April 2003 71% of prisoners had accommodation arranged on release.

Statistics on numbers of prisoners on Home Detention Curfew Orders and electronic tagging and any available data on impact on re-offending rates.

Currently (26 March 2004) there are about 3,600 prisoners on Home Detention Curfew (HDC). This scheme only operates with electronic tagging. Statistics for 1999 (when the scheme began) to 2003 are give in table 8.2 below.

The HDC scheme was introduced with effect from 28 January 1999 when prisoners with sentences of between 3 months and under 4 years could be released up to 2 months early, subject to home detention curfew monitored by an electronic tag. In May 2002 the presumptive scheme was introduced whereby those with sentences of 3 months to under 12 months who do not have an offence of sex, violence or drugs, or a conviction for such an offence within 3 years of the date of sentence for the current offence were to be presumed suitable for release unless there were exceptional and compelling reasons why release should not be granted. In August 2002 those with previous convictions for possession of drugs were no longer excluded from the presumptive scheme.

From 16 December 2002 the maximum HDC period was increased from 2 to 3 months subject to at least a quarter of the sentence being served in custody). From 14 July 2003 the maximum HDC period was increased from 3 to 4.5 months. At the same time those with certain violent offences and any with sexual or previous sexual offences were to be presumed unsuitable for release. In addition juvenile offenders (who were previously not eligible for the scheme) became eligible for consideration.

Table 8.2

SUMMARY OF HOME DETENTION CURFEW AND RELEASE FIGURES BY GENDER

England and WalesNumber of Reviews/Percentage


	1999	2000	2001	2002	2003

Eligible	49,527	55,344	54,064	55,370	57,491
Males	46,248	51,533	50,303	51,413	53,267
Females	3,279	3,811	3,761	3,957	4,224
Released	14,844	15,533	13,676	20,525	21,282
Males	13,526	14,029	12,144	18,570	19,217
Females	1,318	1,504	1,532	1,955	2,065
Release rate	30.0%	28.1%	25.3%	37.1%	37.0%
Males	29.2%	27.2%	24.1%	36.1%	36.1%
Females	40.2%	39.5%	40.7%	49.4%	48.9%

There has been no research on reconviction rates for those on HDC since that reported in Electronic monitoring of released prisoners: an evaluation of the Home Detention Curfew Scheme (Home Office Research Study 222) which covered a sample of those released in 1999. The research indicated that those granted curfew had lower reconviction rates after the end of the curfew than those refused HDC. This will partly reflect the finding that the chance of being released on HDC falls as predicted risk of reoffending increases. 8.3% of those released on HDC in May or June 1999 were reconvicted within 4 months compared to 31.4% of those not released on HDC. Within 6 months 9.3% of those granted HDC had been reconvicted compared to 40.5% of those not granted HDC. These figures exclude offences committed during the HDC period.

NOMS Strategy

There is a significant and radical programme of joint work with prisons that has been expanding steadily since 1998. This includes:

— the development and introduction of a joint offender assessment and sentence/supervision planning tool (OASys)

— joint development and accreditation of programmes

— a common approach to drugs and alcohol problems

— a common approach to education training and employment

— the development of a common case management system

— legislative proposals contained in the Criminal Justice Bill to introduce new sentences (custody plus, custody minus, etc).

In my [Martin Narey's] memorandum of 22 January I updated the Committee on the creation of the National Offender Management Service (NOMS) and the major role the Service will play in the rehabilitation of offenders. The NOMS implementation team is currently working on the arrangements for the establishment of NOMS from 1 June this year. I will of course update the Committee on the NOMS structure and rehabilitation strategy.

April 2004

31 Rehabilitation for Addicted Prisoners Trust: 12-Step programme. Back

32 Prisons-Addressing Substance-Related Offending: cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) programme. Back

33 Kent, Surrey & Sussex Area/Crime Reduction Initiative-CBT programme. Back

34 Substance Treatment & Offending Programme-CBT. Back

35 Short term prisoners are those who have a sentence of less than 12 months. Back

36 Does not include fine defaulters. Back

37 2003 figures are provisional. Back

38 Counselling, Assessment, Referral, Advice and Through-care services. Back



© Parliamentary copyright 2005	Prepared 7 January 2005