HMIP Inspections of HMP Northumberland

The prison was given an inspection in August/September 2022, the full report can be read at the Ministry of Justice web site, just follow the links below. In their latest report the inspectors said:

An amalgamation of the former Acklington and Castington prisons, HMP Northumberland is a large category C training and resettlement prison. Two years after the merger, in 2013, the prison’s operation was contracted out to the private company, Sodexo. An expansive site comprising a range of different accommodation types, the prison holds in excess of 1300 adult men, a significant proportion of whom have been convicted of sexual offences.

This was our first inspection of Northumberland since 2017. We found outcomes for prisoners in our healthy prison tests of safety and respect to be reasonably good, a recognition in part that the prison is now safer than it was five years ago. At this visit, we were more concerned about the prison’s ability to deliver its core purpose of providing men with training and resettlement services. Outcomes in purposeful activity were not sufficiently good, and in the provision of rehabilitation and resettlement they had deteriorated and were now assessed as poor.

Leaders had prioritised improvements in staff culture, and progress in this was reflected in our survey; most prisoners told us that they felt respected. However, improved supervision of prisoners and greater consistency in the approach staff adopted in their dealings with prisoners were also required to improve relationships between staff and prisoners. Furthermore, and in line with experience at many other establishments, staff shortages were posing significant problems for the prison, especially in the delivery of rehabilitation and release planning services. Formal consultation arrangements and systems for redress, such as the application and complaint procedures, were better managed than we often see. The promotion of equality had received little prioritisation, however, and consultation with prisoners from minority groups was limited, as was the use of data, meaning leaders were not well sighted on the support needs of these individuals.

The size and extent of the prison meant it was a challenge to supervise, yet the environment was well maintained, and fewer surveyed prisoners told us they felt unsafe compared to our last inspection. Violence had reduced significantly and most measures we consider when judging safety, such as use of force and segregation had also improved. An important exception was safeguarding. Over the past five years, six prisoners had taken their own lives, in itself a concerning figure and higher than at similar prisons. Yet despite this, the prisons approach to suicide and self-harm prevention was not robust. The complexity of the situation, however, is reflected in that over the same time period, incidents of self-harm had actually halved.

The quality of the daily regime did not meet the standards expected of a training prison. We found a quarter of prisoners locked up during the core working day with the shortfall of available activity places resulting in 19% of men being unemployed. Time out of cell varied greatly and could be as low as two hours a day for some. At weekends it was worse. Attendance at education and vocational training classes was also low and punctuality was poor. Added to this, classes were often cancelled. Ofsted judged the overall effectiveness of provision as ‘requires improvement’, their second lowest assessment.

The prison had similarly lost its way with respect to rehabilitation, which had stalled following the pandemic. Leaders knew what needed to be done, although progress was slow, and their plans might have been be better informed by the more effective use of data. Staff shortages were impacting delivery and many prisoners expressed frustration at, or a lack of confidence in, their ability to achieve their sentence plan targets. Public protection arrangements or access to offending behaviour intervention were similarly inadequate, although release planning for those at the end of sentence was better.

Overall, we found Northumberland to be a settled and reasonably decent prison. Leaders were capable and visible and had analysed the prisons strengths and weaknesses adequately. However, staff shortages, attrition and levels of absenteeism were a concern, and some staff suggested to us that they felt their well-being had been neglected. Defining and delivering the prison’s core rehabilitative mission and ensuring the entire staff complement were committed to this endeavour were the main messages of this inspection.

Charlie Taylor
HM Chief Inspector of Prisons
October 2022

 

The inspectors provide a brief note on what were they significant concerns regarding the prison

 

What needs to improve at HMP Northumberland

During this inspection we identified 12 key concerns, of which six should be treated as priorities. Priority concerns are those that are most important to improving outcomes for prisoners. They require immediate attention by leaders (see Glossary) and managers.

Leaders should make sure that all concerns identified here are addressed and that progress is tracked through a plan which sets out how and when the concerns will be resolved. The plan should be provided to HMI Prisons.

Priority concerns

  1. The prison was designated as a training and resettlement site, but leaders were not delivering a wide enough range or number of purposeful activities or rehabilitative interventions to meet prisoners’ needs.
  2. The rate of self-inflicted deaths remained high and was higher than at most comparable prisons.
  3. Leaders had not sufficiently prioritised equality and diversity and did not pay sufficient attention to the experiences of prisoners with protected and minority characteristics.
  4. Too many prisoners were locked in cell for most of the day.
  5. Serious shortcomings in offender management work undermined prisoners’ rehabilitation.
  6. There were significant weaknesses in public protection work, including poor oversight of some high-risk prisoners who were due to be released.

Key concerns

  1. Staff shortages, including amongst health care workers, officers and offender managers, were negatively affecting outcomes for prisoners.
  2. Governance of the use of force was weak. Officers rarely used body[1]worn video cameras during use of force incidents, which limited leaders’ oversight.
  3. Support for prisoners at risk of self-harm was not sufficiently proactive or robust.
  4. Not enough dental clinics were provided, which had led to excessive waiting times for routine appointments.
  5. Attendance and punctuality in education and vocational training were not good enough.
  6. here was no provision for the substantial number of prisoners who required support in English and mathematics or for those with a learning difficulty or disability.

 Return to Northumberland

To read the full reports, go to the Ministry of Justice site or follow the links below:

You don't always get what you are entitled to unless you ask properly!

We can introduce you to  experienced  lawyers can help you with parole,  probation,  immigration, adjudications, visits and any other complaints  and disputes you have with the Prison Service.

The solicitors are all experts on how the Prison Service/Criminal Law  system works and will be able to provide to you the necessary advice and support to ensure you or your loved ones are treated fairly. These lawyers are "small enough to care about you, but big enough to fight for you"

and remember the old saying:

" A Man Who Is His Own Lawyer Has A Fool for a Client"

Click here to go to the list of lawyers in your area