3 Improving the delivery of education
15. Education can help offenders to find work on
release, which in turn may reduce re-offending. The Home Office
had recently published a Green Paper Reducing Re-offending
through Skills and Employment,[16]
in conjunction with the Department for Education and Skills
and the Department for Work and Pensions. Responsibility for education
was moving from the Prison Service to the Learning and Skills
Councils, and expenditure on education was increasing at the same
time. Funding had increased from £57 million in 2001/02 to
£151 million in 2005/06. The Service had a target to provide
all prisoners with 24 hours of "meaningful activity"
a week. This target could, however, discourage prisons from providing
education and instead provide semi-skilled work in workshops.
The "meaningful activity" target had therefore been
dropped and the Learning and Skills Councils had an aspirational
target to achieve 50% of prisoners involved in learning. Currently
around 30% of prisoners undertook some form of training course
during their sentence. In the prisons visited by the National
Audit Office the percentage of prisoners in education ranged from
10% at Wandsworth to 39% at Preston (Figure 3).[17]
Figure 3: The provision of education varies widely between prisons
Prison
| Prisoners available for work and education
| Number in education
| Total number in work and education
|
|
| | Number
| Percentage
| Number
| Percentage
|
| Preston |
463 |
| 180 |
39 | 373
| 81 |
| Birmingham
| 1044 |
| 360
| 35 |
580 | 56
|
| Leeds |
1042 |
| 312 |
30 | 804
| 77 |
| Altcourse
| 822 |
| 196
| 24 |
391 | 48
|
| Cardiff |
627 |
| 75 |
12 | 603
| 96 |
| Wandsworth
| 1136 |
| 113
| 10 |
941 | 83
|
Source: National Audit Office
16. To free places at some prisons to allow for the
intake of prisoners from the courts, the Service may transfer
prisoners between prisons on overcrowding drafts. Some 5,000 prisoners
had been transferred in 2003-04. Prisoners often received little
notice that they were to be moved, with less than a day's notice
being given in some cases. The Service did not aim to move prisoners
who were on educational courses, or those who were undertaking
key skills training. When the Service was operating at maximum
pressure, however, it might have to move such prisoners even though
disruptive to their education. The receiving prisons might not
run the same courses or the course might be at a different stage.[18]
17. Education records are not routinely transferred
with prisoners, also causing unnecessary reassessment of needs
and disruption to learning. A prisoner's security file was transferred
between prisons but any other records, including records of education
courses being undertaken, planned and completed, were not generally
transferred. The Service was looking at methods to improve record
transfer including electronic record transfer.[19]
18. The Service had piloted a new programme, the
Offender Learning Journey, to help prisoners obtain basic
skills qualifications. The programme would be rolled out across
the country in 2006. There was no evidence currently that prisoners
who had attended the programme had re-offended less frequently
than those not on the programme. Pilots had not been in place
long enough to make such an assessment, and the impact of any
one initiative on re-offending was difficult to determine. The
pilots had shown, however, that participating prisoners had gained
more basic skills that those not on the programme. The acquisition
of basic skills was considered important to offenders gaining
employment on release and hence reducing the likelihood of re-offending.[20]
19. The budget for education and training was limited,
and hence prisoners were primarily provided with basic skills
courses. There was less opportunity to be educated to a higher
standard, even though this could be beneficial. In spite of the
relatively low level of education provided to prisoners, the average
annual cost of a prison place in 2004-05 was around £37,000
which was high even compared with expensive public schools. The
Prison Service's policy was to prioritise resources towards courses
which assisted prisoners to gain employment on leaving prison,
which could preclude prisoners from progressing to intermediate
or advanced courses once they had completed basic skills training.[21]
20. The Service found it difficult to provide education
for prisoners on short sentences even though such prisoners were
more likely to be first-time or low level offenders who might
benefit most from basic skills education to reduce the likelihood
of re-offending and returning to prison for a longer period. Shorter,
better targeted courses could help short sentence prisoners. The
National Offender Management Service was intended to rehabilitate
offenders through prison and also in the community. It could facilitate
linking of training within and outside prison to enable released
prisoners to continue with courses started in prison as part of
their rehabilitation in the community.[22]
16 Cm 6702 Back
17
Qq 20-23, 101-125 Back
18
Q 7; C&AG's Report, para 3.12 Back
19
Qq 128-130; C&AG's Report, para 3.15 Back
20
Qq 14-19 Back
21
Qq 112-123 Back
22
Q 126 Back
| 
