Report on an unannounced inspection of. HMYOI Werrington September 2014

Transcription

1 Report on an unannounced inspection of HMYOI Werrington 1 12 September 2014

2

3 Report on an unannounced inspection of HMYOI Werrington by HM Chief Inspector of Prisons 1 12 September 2014

4 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: Crown copyright 2015 You may re-use this information (excluding logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit or Where we have identified any third party copyright material 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: This publication is available for download at: Printed and published by: Her Majesty s Inspectorate of Prisons Victory House 6th floor Kingsway London WC2B 6EX England 2 HMYOI Werrington

5 Contents Contents Introduction 5 Fact page 7 About this inspection and report 9 Summary 11 Section 1. Safety 19 Section 2. Respect 33 Section 3. Purposeful activity 45 Section 4. Resettlement 51 Section 5. Recommendations and housekeeping points 59 Section 6. Appendices 65 Appendix I: Inspection team 65 Appendix II: Progress on recommendations from the last report 67 Appendix III: Establishment population profile 73 Appendix IV: Summary of children and young people questionnaires and interviews 77 HMYOI Werrington 3

6 Contents 4 HMYOI Werrington

7 Introduction Introduction HMYOI Werrington, located near Stoke-on-Trent in the West Midlands, can hold up to160 boys under the age of 18. At the time of this inspection the population was just over 100, which was slightly lower than when we last inspected in September At the previous inspection we found an establishment where improvements had taken place but where significant shortcomings still remained. On this occasion we found that improvements had continued, with progress particularly evident in the areas of respect and purposeful activity, and this was reflected in our improved judgements in these areas. Boys were treated well during the early days at the establishment. The modern reception facilities were extremely good and, in contrast to our previous findings, the first night accommodation was clean and well prepared. The practice of locating newly admitted boys alongside those on the highest level of the rewards and sanctions scheme was having a motivating effect. Improvements had also been made to the induction process so that it was streamlined and more relevant. The number of fights and assaults had reduced slightly, but it was concerning that the overall level of violence remained high and many children reported feeling unsafe. While most incidents were relatively low level, some resulted in serious injuries. Although the number of boys held at Werrington was relatively small, the space available to separate individuals who were in conflict with each other was limited. Sometimes mediation was used to resolve this, but there was too much reliance on formal measures of discipline. Children did not regard the rewards and sanctions scheme positively but there were plans to try to make it work more effectively. The overall approach towards security was proportionate, staff used de-escalation techniques well and force was used sparingly. The level of self-harm had reduced and there had been no recent serious incidents. The close working relationship between the local authority and the prison helped to maintain effective safeguarding and child protection arrangements, and lessons had been learned from previous incidents. Although much of the prison remained austere and institutional, the standard of the residential accommodation had improved significantly since the previous inspection. Cells were clean and concerted and successful efforts had been made to reduce the spread of graffiti throughout the establishment. Relationships between staff and children were consistently good and staff were interested in and had good knowledge of the boys they were responsible for. Work on diversity was weak and a more strategic approach, along with better consultation, was required to ensure outcomes were consistently good. Boys had good access to a wide range of health care provision, although the absence of on-site speech and language services was a deficit. Most children were unlocked for approximately eight hours a day and, as with other similar establishments, this was significantly lower than our expectations. Too many were locked up during the core day and although the amount of time boys could spend in the fresh air had increased, it was still less than in other establishments. Considerable effort had been made by the education provider, along with the prison, to address the weaknesses previously identified in provision. As a consequence, classes were no longer frequently cancelled, levels of attendance had improved and punctuality was good. The quality of teaching was now significantly better and the level of achievement by children had increased dramatically and was now very high. The range of classroom and vocational provision had also been extended. Work to support children with resettlement at Werrington continued to be good. The assessment and planning arrangements worked well and public protection and looked after children arrangements were effective. Obtaining suitable accommodation for boys who were hard to place remained difficult, but we were encouraged to see the professional and assertive approach being HMYOI Werrington 5

8 Introduction adopted by staff to address this. Use of release on temporary licence was promoted well and the support provided by the family engagement coordinator to assist boys to maintain contact with members of their family was useful. The follow up work to track the progress of children after they had been released was a promising initiative. Werrington is a well run establishment and we were mostly encouraged by what we found. Notably, changes since the last inspection have resulted in significant improvements in living conditions and the opportunities boys are offered in education and training. These are important advances and it is essential that this progress is consolidated and sustained. Nevertheless, levels of violence are still too high and many boys told us they felt unsafe. Werrington benefits overall from being a small institution where the quality of relationships is good. It is important that this is capitalised on and that staff work with the children to find better ways of maintaining a safe environment. Nick Hardwick January 2015 HM Chief Inspector of Prisons 6 HMYOI Werrington

9 Fact page Fact page Task of the establishment Werrington is a centre for juveniles aged between 15 and 18, both sentenced and remands. Establishment status (public or private, with name of contractor if private) Public Region/Department West Midlands Number held 104 Certified normal accommodation 160 Operational capacity 160 Date of last full inspection 23 September to 4 October 2013 Brief history The establishment opened in 1895 as an industrial school and was subsequently purchased by the Prison Commissioners in Two years later it opened as a senior detention centre. Following the implementation of the Criminal Justice Act 1982 it converted to a youth custody centre in 1985 and in 1988 became a dedicated juvenile centre (15 18 year olds) with secure accommodation for those serving a Detention and Training Order sentence 4, 6, 8, 12, 18, or 24 months. Young people serving extended sentences under Section 91 of the Criminal Justice Act and remanded young people are also held at Werrington. Short description of residential units Two accommodation units: Doulton unit (A and B wings) is the main accommodation unit. Denby unit (C wing) is the first night and induction wing, and an eight-cell reintegration and support Unit is located on the ground floor. Name of governor Babafemi Dada Escort contractor GeoAmey Health service commissioner and providers Staffordshire and Stoke on Trent Partnership Trust Learning and skills providers The Manchester College Independent Monitoring Board chair Pam Pritchard HMYOI Werrington 7

10 About this inspection and report 8 HMYOI Werrington

11 About this inspection and report About this inspection and report 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, immigration detention facilities and police custody. 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). OPCAT requires that all places of detention are visited regularly by independent bodies known as the National Preventive Mechanism (NPM) which monitor the treatment of and conditions for detainees. HM Inspectorate of Prisons is one of several bodies making up the NPM in the UK. All Inspectorate of Prisons reports include a summary of an establishment s performance against the model of a healthy prison. The four tests of a healthy prison are: Safety Respect Purposeful activity Resettlement children and young people, particularly the most vulnerable, are held safely children and young people are treated with respect for their human dignity children and young people are able, and expected, to engage in activity that is likely to benefit them children and young people are prepared for their release into the community and helped to reduce the likelihood of reoffending. Under each test, we make an assessment of outcomes for children and young people and therefore of the establishment's overall performance against the test. In some cases, this performance will be affected by matters outside the establishment's direct control, which need to be addressed nationally. - outcomes for children and young people are good against this healthy prison test. There is no evidence that outcomes for children and young people are being adversely affected in any significant areas. - outcomes for children and young people are reasonably good against this healthy prison test. There is evidence of adverse outcomes for children and young people in only a small number of areas. For the majority, there are no significant concerns. Procedures to safeguard outcomes are in place. - outcomes for children and young people are not sufficiently good against this healthy prison test. There is evidence that outcomes for children and young people are being adversely affected in many areas or particularly in those areas of greatest importance to their well-being. Problems/concerns, if left unattended, are likely to become areas of serious concern. - outcomes for children and young people are poor against this healthy prison test. There is evidence that the outcomes for children and young people are seriously affected by current practice. There is a failure to ensure even adequate treatment of and/or conditions for children and young people. Immediate remedial action is required. HMYOI Werrington 9

12 About this inspection and report Our assessments might result in one of the following: - recommendations: will require significant change and/or new or redirected resources, so are not immediately achievable, and will be reviewed for implementation at future inspections - housekeeping points: achievable within a matter of days, or at most weeks, through the issue of instructions or changing routines - examples of good practice: impressive practice that not only meets or exceeds our expectations, but could be followed by other similar establishments to achieve positive outcomes for children and young people. Five key sources of evidence are used by inspectors: observation; children and young people surveys; discussions with children and young people; discussions with staff and relevant third parties; and documentation. During inspections we use a mixed-method approach to data gathering and analysis, applying both qualitative and quantitative methodologies. Evidence from different sources is triangulated to strengthen the validity of our assessments. Since April 2013, the majority of our inspections have been full follow-ups of previous inspections, with most unannounced. Previously, inspections were either full (a new inspection of the establishment), full follow-ups (a new inspection of the establishment with an assessment of whether recommendations at the previous inspection had been achieved and investigation of any areas of serious concern previously identified) or short follow-ups (where there were comparatively fewer concerns and establishments were assessed as making either sufficient or insufficient progress against the previous recommendations). This report This explanation of our approach is followed by a summary of our inspection findings against the four healthy prison tests. There then follow four sections each containing a detailed account of our findings against our Expectations. Criteria for assessing the treatment of children and young people and conditions in prisons. The reference numbers at the end of some recommendations indicate that they are repeated, and provide the paragraph location of the previous recommendation in the last report. Section 5 collates all recommendations, housekeeping points and examples of good practice arising from the inspection. Appendix II lists the recommendations from the previous inspection, and our assessment of whether they have been achieved. Details of the inspection team and the establishment population profile can be found in Appendices I and III respectively. Findings from the survey of children and young people and a detailed description of the survey methodology can be found in Appendix IV of this report. Please note that we only refer to comparisons with other comparable establishments or previous inspections when these are statistically significant. 1 1 The significance level is set at 0.05, which means that there is only a 5% chance that the difference in results is due to chance. 10 HMYOI Werrington

13 Summary Summary Safety S1 S2 Boys were treated well during their early days at the establishment. Significant improvements had been made to the first night accommodation. Safeguarding and child protection arrangements worked well and vulnerable children were identified and adequately cared for. The number of fights and assaults remained high and a large proportion of boys reported feeling unsafe. Despite this, the number of serious injuries sustained was small. The level of self-harm incidents had reduced. Use of force and separation were used proportionately. The rewards and sanctions scheme was not used effectively and there was a heavy reliance on formal disciplinary procedures. Support for boys with substance misuse problems was comprehensive and of a good standard. Outcomes for children and young people were reasonably good against this healthy prison test. At the last inspection in October 2013, we found that outcomes for children and young people in Werrington were reasonably good against this healthy prison test. We made 15 recommendations about safety. At this follow-up inspection we found that five of the recommendations had been achieved, four had been partially achieved, and six had not been achieved. S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 In our survey, most boys were positive about feeling safe during their journey to the prison and about being offered food and drink. Escort vehicles that we saw during the inspection were not clean and one did not have a first aid box. Not all boys arrived with up-to-date background information. Reception facilities were very good and boys reported positively on their experience in reception. Staff were friendly and knowledgeable, and the processes were thorough. First night cells were much improved since the previous inspection and were now clean and properly prepared. Locating newly admitted boys alongside boys on enhanced level of the rewards and sanctions scheme had had a motivating effect. The induction programme had been improved by reducing its length and reorganising it. The end of induction feedback was used constructively to make the experience as positive as possible for new arrivals. There was an overarching and comprehensive safeguarding policy. The regular and frequent safeguarding meetings ensured that information about vulnerable children was shared effectively. There were strong links between the safeguarding team and the security department and good working relationships between the establishment and the local authority children s services. Child protection procedures worked well and working relationships with the local authority were open and transparent. Some use was made of mediation to resolve differences between boys and they were given the opportunity to undertake reparation. The behaviour management policy listed a wide range of options for managing behaviour, but there had been an over-reliance on formal measures, mainly adjudications, to address poor behaviour. HMYOI Werrington 11

14 Summary S11 S12 S13 S14 S15 S16 S17 S18 S19 S20 In our survey, 43% of boys against the comparator of 27% said that they had felt unsafe at Werrington at some time and 21% said they felt unsafe at the time of the survey conducted just before the inspection. The establishment s own survey indicated that 37% said that they had been hit or kicked by another boy. These concerning findings needed to be explored closely in consultation with boys. Information about violence was shared weekly with other departments at the bullying and violence reduction meeting and care plans were in place to support more vulnerable boys through the weekly multi-agency safeguarding and health (MASH) meeting. There had been 115 violent incidents in the previous six months, slightly less than at the last inspection. Most of these incidents were low level but in three instances boys had sustained serious injuries. There had been 53 incidents of self-harm in the previous six months compared with 73 at the previous inspection: a small number of boys accounted for multiple incidents. Over the previous12 months, there had been no serious acts of self-harm and two constant watches. The quality of assessment, care in custody and teamwork (ACCT) case management documents for boys at risk of suicide and self-harm varied and although specialist staff sometimes attended, personal officers and caseworkers were rarely involved in ACCT reviews. In our discussion groups, boys told us that they did not find the rewards and sanctions scheme motivational. There was scope to make more effective use of the scheme to manage behaviour and we supported the plans that had been drawn up to try and achieve this. The security team was well organised and had good links with other departments in the establishment and with the police. Security procedures remained proportionate. Few stripsearches were carried out and these were authorised appropriately. Security information was managed efficiently but follow-up actions were not always taken promptly enough. The number of adjudications remained too high. The level of recorded use of force was similar to the previous inspection. Less than half the incidents had involved the use of full control and restraint. The evidence that we examined showed that force was used as a last resort when boys failed to respond to de-escalation. Governance of the use of force remained very good. Pain compliance had been used once since the previous inspection, which was not appropriate for this age group. The reintegration support unit remained a clean and well managed facility. The regime was adequate and delivered consistently. Records indicated less use of the unit than at the previous inspection for boys awaiting adjudications, but more boys were separated for reasons of good order and discipline. A few boys remained on the unit for extended periods, the longest being 66 days. Reintegration planning started promptly with some success. Drug and alcohol services were monitored, coordinated and developed by a designated drug strategy committee. The drug and alcohol support team actively engaged with 80 young people, interventions were appropriate and more were being developed in response to emerging trends. There had not been any positive mandatory drug testing results in the previous six months, but intelligence-led searching and testing were not always conducted promptly enough. 12 HMYOI Werrington

15 Summary Respect S21 S22 Living conditions had improved and cells were now in reasonable condition. Relationships between staff and boys were consistently good, although the personal officer scheme was not operating well. Boys spiritual needs were well catered for but work on diversity was weak and a more strategic approach and better consultation were required. The complaints system worked efficiently and young people received the support they required in relation to legal rights. Health care services were good. The food was unpopular with the boys but we found it to be adequate. Outcomes for children and young people were reasonably good against this healthy prison test. At the last inspection in October 2013, we found that outcomes for children and young people in Werrington were not sufficiently good against this healthy prison test. We made 18 recommendations about respect. 2 At this follow-up inspection we found that five of the recommendations had been achieved, seven had been partially achieved and six had not been achieved. S23 S24 S25 S26 S27 S28 S29 There had been considerable improvement in the accommodation since the previous inspection and most cells were clean and free of graffiti. The environment in wing association areas was institutional and needed softening with pictures and murals. Exercise areas were austere and required considerable improvement. Maintaining supervision by locking boys in showers was not appropriate. The interactions between staff and boys that we observed were consistently positive. Members of staff we spoke to were knowledgeable about the boys they were responsible for. In our survey, fewer boys than in comparator prisons said that they had a member of staff to turn to if they had a problem and this needed to be explored. The personal officer scheme did not work effectively and entries on wing files consisted mainly of negative comments. The management of equality and diversity was weak. Equality policies, processes and work practices all required review and the commissioning of independent advice was a constructive development. Equality meetings were well attended but not purposeful enough, and tabled reports did not contain sufficient information to generate meaningful discussion. There were no forums to support minority groups and there was no contact with any community support groups for boys in protected groups. Dedicated forums might have helped the establishment identify and address some of the concerns raised in our survey, for example, by black and minority ethnic children about whether staff respected them, and by children with disabilities about feeling unsafe. There had been some good work by Barnardo s to help foreign national boys obtain local authority funded legal advice, but this needed to be embedded so that resettlement caseworkers were routinely aware of this option. We saw evidence of staff appropriately referring Vietnamese boys who may have been trafficked for specialist support, which was encouraging. Faith provision was sound and 65% of boys in our survey said it was easy or very easy to attend religious services. Pastoral care was good. 2 This included recommendations about the incentives and earned privileges scheme which, in our updated Expectations (Version 4, 2012), now appear under the healthy prison area of safety. HMYOI Werrington 13

16 Summary S30 S31 S32 S33 S34 S35 In our survey, fewer young people than the comparator said they felt complaints were dealt with fairly. However, most responses that we examined were satisfactory and 19% had been upheld. The quality assurance of responses to complaints was good. Boys continued to have easy access to high quality and appropriate health services, which were delivered in an excellent environment. The comprehensive health assessment tool had been fully implemented since our last inspection and was being used well to develop appropriate support for boys. Generally, health care staff had good access to training. The take up of clinical supervision was too low and more access to training focused on the health needs of adolescents was still required. Pharmacy services were generally very good, but regular medicines management committee meetings needed to be reinstated. Mental health services remained very good. The lack of on-site speech and language services to support boys with speech and behaviour problems remained a deficit. Although boys were negative about the quality of food, we found it to be adequate, with a reasonable range of nutritious meals. Most boys could eat together, but it was not appropriate to deny some children this opportunity as a sanction. Boys arriving late in the week had to wait too long to receive their first canteen order. Purposeful activity S36 S37 Young people received a similar amount of time unlocked as at the previous inspection, and this still fell short of our expectations. Time in the fresh air had increased but was still poor. Classes were no longer cancelled and punctuality was good. The quality of teaching was significantly better and the level of achievement had increased dramatically and was now very high. The range of classroom and vocational provision was now wider. Access to both the library and the gym were good. Outcomes for children and young people were reasonably good against this healthy prison test. At the last inspection in October 2013, we found that outcomes for children and young people in Werrington were not sufficiently good against this healthy prison test. We made12 recommendations about purposeful activity. At this follow-up inspection we found that eight of the recommendations had been achieved, two had been partially achieved and two had not been achieved. S38 S39 S40 The average time out of cell was less than our expectations. We estimated that most boys received about eight hours out of their cell each day. Over the previous two months, association had been cancelled regularly. During checks which we carried out, just over a quarter of boys were locked up during core activity time. In some cases there were no good reasons for this. During the inspection, two boys, who presented a risk to themselves or others, were locked up for most of the day. Although these boys were discussed regularly at MASH meetings, outcomes were not satisfactory and alternative arrangements should have been made for them. Survey results indicated that boys were given more opportunities to take exercise than at the previous inspection, but this was still significantly worse than the comparator. 14 HMYOI Werrington

17 Summary S41 S42 S43 S44 S45 S46 S47 The Manchester College and the establishment provided clear strategic direction for education, learning and skills and had worked together effectively to resolve most of the weaknesses identified at the previous inspection. Cancellation of classes was no longer a problem and attendance had improved significantly. Observation of teaching and learning helped to raise the quality of taught sessions. However, some observation reports were not completed thoroughly. Success and retention rates on education and vocational courses had improved steadily for the last three years, and were now very high. Most courses were of a suitably short duration and allocation to places reflected the boy s length of sentence. The significant disparities that previously existed between boys from different ethnic groups had largely been eradicated and there were few differences in performance among different groups of boys. Despite the numbers found locked up during the core day, there were sufficient activity places provided and procedures for allocating boys to activities were fair and well managed. The range of provision in education had improved since the previous inspection to include sport science and personal and social development courses. The range of vocational training had also improved and included an exceptionally well planned barista training programme, a multi-skills workshop and independent living skills. The standard of teaching was mostly good, and some of it was outstanding. Teachers and vocational trainers engaged boys interests well and provided challenging learning activities. The special educational needs coordinator supported learning very effectively and additional support was very good. Learning technology was not always used consistently well to support learning. Management of the behaviour of less motivated boys in the workshops was good. In classrooms boys supported each other well. Boys developed good trade and work-related skills in vocational training workshops. The recording and development of English and mathematics in workshops was inconsistent. The library provided a good range of fiction, non-fiction and easy-read books and boys had adequate access to it. Facilities to support the development of boys health and wellbeing were very good but not enough use was made of the outdoor facilities. Access to PE facilities was good, with a high proportion of boys making regular use of the gymnasium. There were good links with the community through the prison football club which participated in a local league. Arrangements for access to the gym for boys who lacked confidence and self-esteem were particularly sensitive. Resettlement S48 The resettlement committee operated effectively and the planning arrangements for all children continued to function efficiently. The resettlement policy required some improvements. Release on temporary licence was promoted well. Work relating to public protection and looked-after children remained good. Obtaining suitable accommodation on release was difficult but we found clear evidence of prison staff adopting an assertive approach in pursuing this. Provision under the other resettlement pathways was good, particularly work carried out by the family engagement coordinator. The follow-up work on boys progress post release was very promising. Outcomes for children and young people were good against this healthy prison test. HMYOI Werrington 15

18 Summary S49 At the last inspection in October 2013, we found that outcomes for children and young people in Werrington were good against this healthy prison test. We made 11 recommendations about resettlement. At this follow-up inspection we found that five of the recommendations had been achieved, four had been partially achieved and two had not been achieved. S50 S51 S52 S53 S54 S55 S56 S57 S58 The reducing reoffending policy included the work of the casework team, resettlement pathways and release on temporary licence (ROTL), identifying key priorities. It did not describe how the establishment would meet the needs of specific groups of boys. A needs analysis dated March 2013 was used to develop service provision and a new analysis was under way. All pathways and relevant casework issues were discussed at well-attended monthly resettlement meetings. Minutes indicated that these discussions informed service development. It was encouraging to see boys receiving constructive ROTL opportunities and we saw evidence of this being used to motivate others to participate in the scheme. Young people were allocated to a caseworker promptly after arrival and the initial training planning and remand management meetings were conducted within the required timescales. Reviews were timely but too many of the objectives set were generic and did not relate directly to the boy s need. Caseworkers knew the boys well and caseloads were not excessive, but there was no routine contact between caseworkers and boys outside review meetings. We observed well managed and effective review boards which fully engaged the boys involved. It was disappointing that personal officers did not actively contribute to this process. Public protection cases were properly identified and managed by the risk management team. There were effective systems to identify and support looked-after children. The prison social workers were actively involved in a wide range of welfare activities, including reviewing the use of force. Reintegration planning was well organised, and there was a full discussion of all the pathways at each planning meeting. Transition work to adult or young adult establishments was focused and started in good time. Casework staff followed up the progress of boys three months after they had left the establishment. This information was shared at a strategic level with community colleagues to inform service development. Children s accommodation needs were identified and discussed at an early stage in the planning process. Not all boys obtained sustainable accommodation on release but no boys had left without some form of accommodation during the year. We saw evidence of good work by caseworkers and the establishment social worker in pursuing accommodation for a boy, which was ultimately successful. Partnership working between the careers adviser, ROTL tutor and youth offending teams was strong. All boys received an initial interview which included a clear action plan. Parents and caseworkers were provided with detailed information about boys progress with their action plan. The recent initiative to collect data on boys destination on release had revealed that, after three months, only half were in education, training or employment. 16 HMYOI Werrington

19 Summary S59 S60 S61 Pre-release arrangements for health and substance misuse remained effective with excellent community links. If boys had problems with finance, benefit and debt, this was identified at initial reviews and new initiatives were being implemented to address need. Although children complained about delays in visiting start times, the visits we observed were managed efficiently and started promptly when visitors arrived on time. Support provided by the family engagement coordinator was very good and there was good provision for family relationship and parenting courses. Over the previous eight months, 146 boys had attended a range of courses which were being validated by NOMS. Boys were assessed for courses within two weeks based on need, allocated a programme worker and prioritised according to risk and release date. Staff awareness of programmes was promoted and there had been a recent initiative to follow up boys who had completed courses to reinforce their learning. Main concerns and recommendations S62 Concern: Survey results produced both by HM Inspectorate of Prisons and the establishment indicated that a large proportion of the boys felt unsafe and this was a worrying finding. There was no opportunity for boys to discuss what this meant to them. As a consequence it was not possible to understand the scale and nature of the problem or for the prison to take informed action to address it. Recommendation: Boys should have a regular opportunity to discuss with staff they trust their perceptions of safety and how they think safety could be improved. S63 Concern: Survey results indicated that boys from minority groups reported less favourably in a number of areas. The lack of attention given to diversity and the absence of effective consultation meant that it was not possible to determine if young people from minority groups were experiencing discrimination. Recommendation: The review of equality work should be sufficiently resourced to achieve improved outcomes for children. Support groups should be established for boys who belong to minority groups. HMYOI Werrington 17

20 Section 1. Safety 18 HMYOI Werrington

21 Section 1. Safety Section 1. Safety Courts, escorts and transfers Expected outcomes: Children and young people transferring to and from the establishment are treated safely, decently and efficiently. 1.1 Most boys felt safe on escort vehicles. Some boys spent lengthy periods in court cells for a brief court appearance and no use was made of videolink. Not all boys arrived with up-to-date information. 1.2 Most boys reported feeling safe on escort vans and, in our survey, 62% of boys said they had been offered food and drink during their journeys against the comparator of 38%. Boys and staff told us that sharing vans with adults was not uncommon, and some boys experienced lengthy delays at court for short appearances. We saw one boy leave before 8.30am and return after 5pm. He said he had been in court for less than five minutes and spent the rest of the time with nothing to occupy him in a court cell. No use was made of the on-site videolink facility. 1.3 The vans taking boys to court in the morning were equipped with water and gel bags and packed lunches for the boys to have while at court. The vans were not clean enough: there was chewing gum on the floor and wall in one cell. The staff could not find a first aid kit on one of the vans. Lengthy journeys were not common, but we did see boys arrive too late for evening association. Some boys continued to arrive without full or up-to-date documentation. Recommendations 1.4 The establishment should make use of the on-site videolink facilities. 1.5 Vans should be clean and properly equipped. 1.6 All relevant information about a boy should be available to the establishment before, or at the point of, his arrival. (Repeated recommendation 1.4) HMYOI Werrington 19

22 Section 1. Safety Early days in custody Expected outcomes: Children and young people are treated with respect and feel safe on their arrival into prison and for the first few days in custody. Children and young people s individual needs are identified and addressed, and they feel supported on their first night. During a young person s induction he/she is made aware of the establishment routines, how to access available services and how to cope with being in custody. 1.7 The reception building remained an excellent facility. New arrivals were dealt with appropriately before going to the first night unit. The first night cells were much improved since the previous inspection and were prepared ready for boys to move into. Induction had been revamped since the previous inspection. 1.8 The purpose-built reception building, new at the previous inspection, had been maintained to a high standard and provided all the facilities needed for boys to be received into the establishment safely. Reception staff were welcoming and helpful. This was evidenced during a boy s reception telephone call to his mother, when we heard an officer helpfully explain to her how she could arrange a visit, what clothes her son was allowed to have and how to get them to him. In our survey, 82% of boys against a comparator of 65% said they had been treated well or very well in reception. There was no routine strip-searching. 1.9 Nearly all first night procedures took place in reception. Boys had a microwave meal if they arrived too late for the evening meal, and were able to have a shower, make a telephone call home and change into prison clothes. A reception officer conducted a private interview during which the risk assessment management (RAM, an approved YJB assessment tool) documentation was completed. The RAMs we looked at were completed to a reasonable standard but not all included actions to address risk. Cell-sharing risk assessments were completed in reception and reviewed the following day by a custodial manager or governor. A nurse carried out a comprehensive health assessment. Boys were issued with basic kit and toiletries and were able to buy a reception pack In our survey, more than three-quarters of boys said they felt safe on their first night, although only 54% of boys who identified themselves as having a disability said they had felt safe compared with 87% of their peers. The first night unit had been moved since the previous inspection to a new location and the cells prepared for new arrivals were much improved. The co-location of the unit with boys on the enhanced level of the rewards and sanctions scheme generated a calmer atmosphere for new arrivals and the opportunity to learn about the establishment. Wing officers showed boys how equipment in their cells worked. Useful information was displayed on the walls in the first night cells. Additional observations were in place for boys who arrived without full information The induction programme had been reduced from two weeks to one which kept boys more occupied. The programme mirrored the regime and enabled new arrivals to experience the day s activities and movement around the site before moving to one of the larger residential units. Boys still expressed mixed views about the usefulness of induction and feedback was analysed each month to try to make the experience as useful as possible. 20 HMYOI Werrington

23 Section 1. Safety Recommendation 1.12 Where concerns are identified in the risk assessment management documentation, relevant action points should be developed, allocated to a member of staff and followed up. Care and protection of children and young people Safeguarding Expected outcomes: The establishment promotes the welfare of children and young people, particularly those most at risk, and protects them from all kinds of harm and neglect Safeguarding and child protection arrangements worked well and vulnerable boys were identified and cared for appropriately. There were strong links between the safeguarding and security teams but safeguarding was not embedded in the work of residential officers Working relationships between the establishment and the local authority social services department remained strong. The governor was a member of the local safeguarding children board (LSCB) and he or the head of safeguarding attended LSCB meetings. A quarterly strategic meeting took place in the establishment with senior officials from the LSCB and partner agencies to review data on safeguarding. Quarterly meetings to review child protection measures and the use of restraint were also in place. Establishment policies were developed and reviewed as part of these partnership arrangements and relationships were described as trusting and transparent. There was an overarching and comprehensive safeguarding policy Inspectors met council managers during the inspection and they reported that the working relationships they had with prison staff were open and transparent. They spoke positively of the approach taken by staff to safeguarding and compared this favourably with work practice in residential child care in the community The safeguarding team was now well established and included safeguarding officers, MMPR (managing and minimising physical restraint) coordinators and two local authority social workers who were an integral part of the team and met all boys received into the establishment There were strong links between the safeguarding team and the security department. The team worked effectively to oversee the violence reduction strategy, analyse information reports and respond promptly to concerns Comprehensive care plans were developed for boys with complex needs. The weekly multiagency safeguarding and health meeting (MASH) was well attended and named staff were asked to follow up action points. The meetings facilitated efficient information sharing, the completion of action points and continuing review of care for as long as necessary A monthly safeguarding meeting with representatives from internal departments and partner agencies reviewed data and monitored trends across all safeguarding areas. HMYOI Werrington 21

24 Section 1. Safety 1.20 The concept of safeguarding was not regarded as integral to the role of residential staff and tended to be seen as the preserve of specialist staff (see paragraph 1.69). Recommendation 1.21 Safeguarding should be embedded in the work of residential officers. Child protection Expected outcomes: The establishment protects children and young people from maltreatment by adults or other children and young people The child protection arrangements remained good. Prison staff were aware of their responsibilities and links with the local authority were effective The child protection procedures were clear and straightforward and outlined in a policy document. Staff were aware of their role in relation to child protection and understood how to make referrals Since the beginning of 2014, the establishment had contacted the local authority on 29 occasions for advice on child protection matters. These enquiries were usually raised by one of the two prison social workers and most related to complaints made by boys following restraint, with some allegations of historical abuse. There had been two formal referrals over this period and one strategy meeting, which was chaired by a social work manager In September 2013, a boy had been seriously assaulted by another boy whom he was sharing a cell with. The case was promptly referred to the local authority and the police and, during the internal enquiry that followed, it was established that a risk assessment had not been completed. A lessons-learned exercise was carried out, resulting in additional checks to ensure procedures were followed properly. Victims of bullying and intimidation Expected outcomes: Everyone feels safe from bullying and victimisation. Children and young people at risk/subject to victimisation are protected through active and fair systems known to staff, young people and visitors which inform all aspects of the regime Many boys still said they did not feel safe and there were no opportunities for them to discuss their perceptions of safety, bullying and victimisation. Information-sharing arrangements were good and the number of information reports relating to bullying and intimidation had reduced. 3 Local authorities convene a strategy meeting where there is reasonable cause to believe a child is suffering or is likely to suffer significant harm. 22 HMYOI Werrington

25 Section 1. Safety 1.27 Many boys said they did not feel safe in the establishment. This was reflected in our survey and in the establishment s anti-bullying survey conducted in August Given the relatively small population accommodated on two wings, disruptive behaviour by any one individual could have a widely unsettling effect During the previous six months, 202 information reports relating to bullying had been submitted compared with 297 over the same period in Systems for identifying bullying and victims were good and information sharing among departments and agencies was very good. There was a safeguarding helpline for visitors, but it was little used. Boys suspected of bullying were discussed at a weekly bullying reduction meeting and action to protect victims was determined. An internal line for boys to report bullying was being considered. However, there were no opportunities for boys to discuss their perceptions of safety, bullying and victimisation and how these could be improved We spoke to two boys who rarely left their cells because they were afraid of other boys. Both were known to the multi-agency safeguarding and health (MASH) meeting. Although we were confident that these boys were being supported by staff they still felt unable to participate in the regime and alternative arrangements should have been made Mediation was used to avoid conflict and boys were moved between residential units and activities where possible, but given the small size of the establishment these options were limited. Suicide and self-harm prevention Expected outcomes: The establishment provides a safe and secure environment which reduces the risk of self-harm and suicide. Children and young people are identified at an early stage and given the necessary support. All staff are aware of and alert to vulnerability issues, are appropriately trained and have access to proper equipment and support There had been a decrease in the number of self-harm incidents since the last inspection and a few boys accounted for most of these. The quality of ACCT 4 procedures varied and no members of staff had been identified to work consistently with individual boys A comprehensive suicide and self-harm prevention policy had been reviewed in January The deputy head of safeguarding acted as the child protection coordinator and youth offending team workers were routinely informed of incidents of self-harm The safeguarding team monitored data on incidents of self-harm. There had been 53 incidents in the previous six months compared with 73 recorded at the last inspection. A few boys accounted for multiple incidents. Over the previous 12 months there had been no acts of self-harm which had been considered life threatening and two boys had been placed on constant watch At the time of the inspection, four boys were being monitored on ACCT procedures. On average 12 ACCT documents were opened each month compared with 15 at our last inspection. Residential staff were responsible for the care of boys subject to ACCT procedures and oversight of cases took place at MASH meetings. 4 assessment, care in custody and teamwork case management of boys at risk of suicide and self-harm HMYOI Werrington 23

26 Section 1. Safety 1.35 The quality of ACCT documents that we sampled varied. Attendance at reviews by staff and case managers was not consistent and some reviews only involved residential officers. Personal officers and caseworkers rarely attended. Initial assessments were reasonable but there was little evidence that boys were involved in identifying their own care needs or were helped to present these at care reviews. Not all care plans identified the person responsible for taking actions forward. Records largely described observations and few reflected the boy s thoughts or feelings. Boys who were on ACCTs were nevertheless positive about the level of support they had received Quality assurance checks were completed by a range of staff including the duty governor and members of the safeguarding team. Areas for improvement were reported to case managers. Recommendations 1.37 The quality of ACCT documentation should be consistently good While boys are subject to ACCT procedures, they should have a consistent personal officer or caseworker working alongside them. These key figures should help boys prepare for ACCT reviews and should form an integral part of the care plan. Behaviour management Expected outcomes: Children and young people live in a safe, well-ordered and motivational environment where their good behaviour is promoted and rewarded. Unacceptable behaviour is dealt with in an objective, fair and consistent manner The behaviour management strategy included all relevant policies and emphasised the importance of a proportionate response to poor behaviour and the encouragement of good behaviour. Mediation was available to boys and was used appropriately The behaviour management policies had been incorporated into one overarching strategy which was explained to boys during their induction The strategy emphasised the importance of a proportionate response to poor behaviour and the need for a considered decision on whether to use verbal warning, rewards and sanctions warning, minor report or adjudication. Despite this, in practice there seemed to be an overreliance on the use of adjudications. The strategy emphasised the importance of acknowledging and encouraging good behaviour, but boys told us this rarely happened and we saw little evidence of it reflected in electronic case notes Mediation was carried out with boys, or groups of boys, who were in conflict. There were few options for moving boys to keep them apart so emphasis was placed on encouraging mutual toleration. Participation in mediation resulted in lighter sanctions. 24 HMYOI Werrington

27 Section 1. Safety Rewards and sanctions Expected outcomes: Children and young people are motivated by an incentives scheme which rewards effort and good behaviour and applies sanctions appropriately for poor behaviour. The scheme is applied fairly, transparently and consistently, and is motivational The rewards and sanctions scheme had been reviewed and a revised scheme was being prepared for implementation. This aimed to address the weaknesses in the existing scheme such as multidisciplinary input, helping boys to change their behaviour and looking at boys in the round when determining their rewards and sanctions level Changes in status in the rewards and sanctions scheme were now preceded by a formal review. Boys who transferred in on enhanced status could retain that status and boys who wished to be promoted to enhanced level were responsible for applying with supporting comments from key members of staff involved in their care. There was an appropriate monitoring system to ensure that boys who applied for promotion were not held back while staff completed their paperwork. Differentiation between the levels was reasonable and the basic level was not over punitive, for example boys did not stop eating in association with other boys. Boys on the enhanced landing appreciated the relative peace of the unit; the waiting list to move on to the wing was managed appropriately At the time of the inspection, 21% of boys were on the highest level of the scheme and 12% on the lowest. Several boys told us they did not find the scheme motivational or fair. Weaknesses in the operation of the rewards and sanctions scheme identified at the previous inspection were still evident reviews were not multidisciplinary, did not always take account of all the boy s circumstances and targets, and help was not always provided to address poor behaviour. Boys told us they did not always know when they received a demerit and that merits for good behaviour were very hard to achieve. Most entries in electronic case notes focused on poor behaviour Managers had carried out a review of the scheme, with contributions from boys, to present to the senior management team. The revised policy had the potential to improve consistency and transparency, and position rewards and sanctions as a core part of behaviour management. Recommendation 1.47 All rewards and sanctions scheme reviews should be fully documented and should take account of all the boy s circumstances. Clear individual targets should be set to help boys improve their behaviour. (Repeated recommendation 1.41) HMYOI Werrington 25

28 Section 1. Safety Security and disciplinary procedures Expected outcomes: Security and good order are maintained through an attention to physical and procedural matters, including effective security intelligence as well as positive relationships between staff and children and young people. Disciplinary procedures are applied fairly and for good reason. Children and young people understand why they are being disciplined and can appeal against any sanctions imposed on them Physical security was proportionate and focused on the safety of children. Information was shared promptly with the safeguarding team and the police, but not always acted on quickly enough. Stripsearching was undertaken following a risk assessment. Minor reports were used, but the number of adjudications remained high. Children had access to advocates The approach to security remained proportionate to the risks posed and did not restrict access to activities unnecessarily. For example, communal eating was the scene of many of the confrontations and fights between boys, prompting staff intervention and often the use of force. Despite this the establishment continued to facilitate eating out together for most boys The security department had received an average of just over 300 information reports a month for the previous six months, most of which continued to relate to bullying, inappropriate behaviour, violence, threats and drugs. The information was carefully analysed and the department had a good overview of the establishment and the boys held. Some follow-up actions were not taken quickly enough, for example searches or testing on receipt of drugs information (see substance misuse section) The security department had good links with the safeguarding team and the local police and information was shared effectively. The security committee met monthly and, while there had been some improvement in attendance, it was still not good enough from all departments. Appropriate security targets were set Searches were now entirely intelligence led and there were no longer routine annual cell searches. Strip-searches were carried out following risk assessment and authorisation by a governor. These were logged and there had been 11 so far in During a full lock-down search before the inspection, senior managers had commendably resisted the suggestion from the national search team to subject boys to a strip-search There were no boys on closed visits at the time of the inspection. Closed visits had been used a few times in 2014, not always for behaviour or incidents related directly to visits. These were reviewed regularly and boys did not stay on closed visits for unnecessarily long periods The number of adjudications remained very high and the rate per hundred boys over the preceding six months was higher than at the previous inspection. In our survey, 76% of boys against the comparator of 64% said they had had an adjudication and this rose to 100% of boys who said they had a disability (see section on diverse needs) During the revision of the rewards and sanctions scheme, managers had reviewed the use of adjudications and had identified ways to reduce the number appropriately. There was early evidence of the use of alternative methods of addressing behaviour. Reparation continued to be an option, with boys undertaking work to repair damage they had caused. The main 26 HMYOI Werrington

29 Section 1. Safety charges continued to be fighting, assaults and disobedience; more serious charges were referred to the independent adjudicator who visited regularly The minor reports system, a process similar to adjudications but designed to be used for less serious matters, was used effectively. There had been 128 minor reports in the previous six months, more than previously. These were heard by custodial managers and punishments reflected the agreed tariff The adjudications room had been improved since the previous inspection and was now far more age appropriate. Adjudications involving the independent adjudicator took place in a larger and more formal setting. Documentation was issued at least the day before the hearing and boys were seen by a Barnardo s advocate in advance of their hearing to see if they wanted help. Hearings could, and were, adjourned if a boy needed to seek advice after the hearing had started Boys were given the opportunity to explain their view of what had happened and mitigating circumstances were taken into account. Participation in mediation was taken into account when determining punishments, which included the use of suspended awards. Adjudicators adhered to a published tariff which listed the punishments. Removal from unit was not used as a punishment. Adjudication review meetings continued to take place quarterly to monitor trends and review the tariff and use of minor reports. Recommendations 1.59 Staff from all departments should attend the security committee meeting to enable the development of appropriate strategic objectives. (Repeated recommendation 1.49) 1.60 Closed visits should only be used following illicit behaviour related to visits. (Repeated recommendation 1.51) Bullying and violence reduction Expected outcomes: Active and fair systems to prevent and respond to bullying behaviour are known to staff, children and young people and visitors The number of fights and assaults remained high and a large proportion of boys reported feeling unsafe. Despite this, the number of serious injuries sustained was small. A small number of boys could quickly disrupt the establishment. Boys needed to be consulted about safety The violence reduction strategy was linked to other relevant local policies and strategies. The establishment s response to bullying and violence and the support available were explained to boys during induction In our survey, 43% of boys against the comparator of 27% said that they had felt unsafe at some time and 21% said they felt unsafe at the time the survey was conducted. This was in contrast to what boys in our discussion groups said they felt about safety within the establishment, comparing it favourably to other establishments. HMYOI Werrington 27

30 Section 1. Safety 1.64 In the establishment s survey of 98 boys, 37% said they had been hit or kicked by another boy at some time and 28% said that they had been threatened. Moving around the establishment and gym were highlighted in both surveys as times when they felt most unsafe. The problem of boys pressurising others to hand over their canteen remained an issue and staff were alert to this A few challenging boys were often disproportionately associated with violent incidents and, because of the small scale of the establishment, had a significant impact on its stability. The security analyst was helpful in identifying individuals. Some violence was spontaneous and could erupt and subside quickly Restrictions on watching television after 10.30pm had recently been introduced and boys shouting at others through windows had increased. During our night visit we observed staff managing this new measure in a balanced way. In an establishment survey, 20% of boys said someone had verbally abused them during the night by shouting at them. These findings needed to be explored in consultation with boys (see main recommendation S62) Data on the use of a bullying reduction programme and on violent incidents were monitored at the weekly safeguarding meetings. There had been 115 fights and assaults in the previous six months, slightly less than at our last inspection. Most of these were low-level incidents but in three cases boys had sustained serious injuries Information was shared with other departments at a weekly bullying reduction committee meeting. Care plans were produced for vulnerable boys and these were reviewed each week at the MASH meetings. This arrangement worked well and ensured that the needs of individuals who were vulnerable to bullying were always under active consideration Since January 2014, 53 boys had been placed on a three-tier bullying reduction procedure which ranged from monitoring with no sanctions to removal to the reintegration support unit (RSU). The bullying reduction committee decided on the measure to be taken and the security department made a useful contribution to this meeting. It was not evident in case notes that residential officers played a significant role in monitoring suspected bullies in all cases (see recommendation 1.21) A consequential thinking (emotional control) course had been attended by 45 boys. The content of this programme was relevant to the needs of the population and the course was in the process of being evaluated by NOMS. The use of force Expected outcomes: Force is used only as a last resort and if applied is used legitimately and safely by trained staff. The use of force is minimised through preventive strategies and alternative approaches and this is monitored through robust governance arrangements The use of force was higher than reported at the previous inspection. There was one recorded use of pain compliance, and more use was being made of handcuffs. Governance had been strengthened in the previous year At the last inspection we reported 246 incidents of use of force in the previous six months, 102 of which had involved full use of restraint techniques. This compared with 270 and 107 respectively at the current inspection. Planned uses of force were recorded, although the 28 HMYOI Werrington

31 Section 1. Safety camera remained outside the cell in which the restraint took place, making observation of the intervention difficult Fights, assaults and confrontation between boys were the most common reasons for force being used. In the documentation, CCTV footage and incidents we viewed or observed the force and, in particular, control and restraint were used as last resorts. There was evidence of de-escalation being used properly and most boys were taken back to their cells after an incident. The use of force log identified one incident in which pain infliction in the form of the mandibular angle technique had been used 5. This was inappropriate and more attention should have been paid to this aspect of the restraint during the boy s debrief Governance of use of force had been strengthened since the previous inspection with the introduction of a quarterly review meeting chaired by the manager of Staffordshire youth offending service and involving members of the LSCB. Those present at the meeting watched CCTV footage, reviewed documentation of incidents and discussed use of force statistics and trends and national initiatives such as the introduction of MMPR. It was rare to find this level of oversight by a local authority. Attendees at the meeting had asked to attend MMPR training when it was delivered to staff There was appropriate monitoring and follow up of delayed use of force documentation and line managers were alerted to staff who were repeatedly late completing it. CCTV footage was retrieved for spontaneous incidents and these and any planned interventions were reviewed at a weekly force minimisation meeting attended by social workers, advocates and prison staff. The quality of the CCTV was reasonably good, but camera angles and the position of incidents sometimes made it difficult to see the restraint in detail. At the meeting we attended, some incidents were viewed more than once to ensure an accurate assessment was made. All staff present showed good knowledge of the boys involved as well as those on the periphery of an incident. An instance of helpful behaviour by a boy not involved in an incident was noted for recognition, together with learning points for staff Health care staff attended planned interventions and saw all boys subject to spontaneous force promptly after the event. A monthly report of injuries to boys was sent to NOMS and the Youth Justice Board. No injuries to boys requiring treatment had been recorded in the six months before the inspection. Handcuffs had been used in 19% of incidents involving use of force. On some of the CCTV footage that we viewed, boys appeared compliant and the need for handcuffs was not clear Special accommodation had been used appropriately on three occasions when items of furniture had been removed from cells occupied by boys in the RSU Boys were debriefed by the duty governor following a restraint and this was followed up by a more detailed debrief from a member of the safeguarding team. We found some cases in which the safeguarding debrief had not taken place soon enough after the incident. Some recorded little evidence of engagement by the boy giving his view of the incident, how it could have been managed differently and how similar incidents could be avoided. Child protection issues were followed up quickly by the safeguarding team. An advocate also spoke to all boys who had been restrained. Recommendation 1.79 Pain infliction should not be applied to boys. (Repeated recommendation 1,76) 5 A form of restraint which involves pressure being applied at a point below the ear HMYOI Werrington 29

32 Section 1. Safety Housekeeping points 1.80 The use of handcuffs should be kept under review by the use of force meeting Debriefs should be prompt and should pay proper attention to the level of force used. Separation/removal from normal location Expected outcomes: Children and young people are only separated from their peers with the proper authorisation, safely, in line with their individual needs, for appropriate reasons and not as a punishment Most boys returned to their units after a short period in the reintegration and support unit. A few boys remained there for lengthy periods with a focus on reintegration. The regime and conditions in the unit were adequate The RSU remained a clean environment and cells were being refurbished with new flooring and toilets. Cells were of a reasonable size with natural light. There was little graffiti and showers were clean At the time of the inspection, three boys were resident at different times in the RSU, one staying overnight only. Inspectors spoke to the other two who were satisfied with the support they had received and with their daily programmes and reintegration plans. All three boys returned to normal location, as was the case with most boys who spent time in the RSU Comparison with the same six-month period in 2013 showed that fewer boys had stayed in the RSU awaiting adjudication, but more had been held there for reasons of good order. A few remained for significant periods. One boy had remained in the RSU for 66 days before transferring elsewhere and another two boys had each spent 46 days there. Of the 172 boys held there in the previous six months, 27 had spent longer than 10 days in the unit. The segregation and monitoring review group met quarterly to discuss a wide range of information and statistics Separation was properly authorised and was reviewed at least weekly, and in many instances more frequently. Reintegration planning was undertaken soon after a boy went to the unit and not later than the first review of his separation. Some of the boys needed carefully managed reintegration. For most, including some of those who stayed longest, this was accomplished successfully with gradual reintroduction to their peer group and situations which had led to their move to the RSU. Some documentation was patchy and there was not always a separate reintegration plan with clear targets The regime was adhered to consistently. One boy who had previously spent time in the RSU told us he preferred it there as the regime was predictable and he always had the time out of his cell and activities that he was told he would get. Boys had daily access to showers, exercise (or a small unit fitness room if the weather was bad), telephones, health care and a governor. Chaplains and advocates visited regularly. Boys could attend regular education off the unit, or receive one-to-one sessions in the small classroom on the unit according to their reintegration plan. The classroom was used for other individual sessions with substance misuse workers, caseworkers or chaplains. Staff on the unit knew the boys well and talked 30 HMYOI Werrington

33 Section 1. Safety about them and the challenges they posed in an appropriate child-focused way. Planned mental health training for staff working on the unit had still not taken place. Recommendation 1.88 All segregation unit staff should receive mental health training. (Repeated recommendation 1.84) Substance misuse Expected outcomes: Children and young people with drug and/or alcohol problems are identified at reception and receive effective treatment and support throughout their stay in custody A designated drug strategy committee coordinated all strands of drug and alcohol work. The new young people s drug and alcohol support service (YPDASS) provided a good range of support and was in the process of developing more age-appropriate interventions A multi-agency drug strategy committee met monthly to monitor, coordinate and develop drug and alcohol services. The substance misuse policy was up to date and informed by a comprehensive needs analysis. The policy contained a supply reduction action plan but lacked an annual action plan for drug and alcohol services The establishment had not received boys requiring clinical substance misuse treatment for some time, but a specialist provider, Delphi Medical, was contracted to provide this service should the need arise In our survey, 34% of respondents said they had received help with their drug problem compared to only 16% in A fully staffed and experienced team from Lifeline now provided the YPDASS. The service was well integrated into the establishment and easily accessible. All new arrivals were assessed on their first day (except for weekends) using an adapted version of CHAT (comprehensive health assessment tool). The service ran an induction group which focused on harm reduction information, and the education department continued to deliver a drug and alcohol awareness course during induction The YPDASS encouraged all boys to engage with the service and the team s active caseload stood at 80 (compared to 51 during the last inspection). We saw evidence of good quality one-to-one work supplemented by in-cell work packs. Group work courses included alcohol and cannabis awareness and the team were in the process of adapting these to the needs of this age group. A new psychoactive substances (NPS) module was being developed in response to emerging trends. The service linked in with the PACT (Prison Advice and Care Trust) worker, contributed to family days and offered direct contact to family members subject to a boy s consent YPDASS workers attended initial and final detention and training order meetings and ACCT reviews. Boys with complex needs were discussed at the weekly safeguarding meeting (MASH) and a range of joint working protocols had been developed to agree care pathways with other departments There was little evidence of drug or alcohol availability in the establishment but, in our survey, 23% of boys said it was easy to get illegal drugs compared to 11% in There had HMYOI Werrington 31

34 Section 1. Safety been no positive drug tests in the past six months, although intelligence-led searching and mandatory drug testing did not always take place promptly and only three of 20 suspicion tests requested in the last five months had been carried out. Finds were mainly for tobacco but some recent intelligence on NPS was worrying. Supply reduction was well integrated into the overall drug strategy and there was good information sharing between departments. Recommendation 1.96 The establishment should ensure that substance-related intelligence is acted on promptly. Housekeeping point 1.97 The drug strategy policy should contain an annual development plan for drug and alcohol services. 32 HMYOI Werrington

35 Section 2. Respect Section 2. Respect Residential units Expected outcomes: Children and young people live in a safe, clean and decent environment which is in a good state of repair and suitable for adolescents. 2.1 There had been considerable improvement in the standard of accommodation since the previous inspection and most cells were clean and free of graffiti. The environment in wing association areas and exercise yards was too institutional. Boys were locked in showers to maintain supervision, which was inappropriate. 2.2 There had been considerable improvement in the environment since the previous inspection. Most cells were clean and free of graffiti. In contrast to our previous inspection, we saw only one smashed observation panel and no excessive scaling of toilets. Furniture was in good order, although not all cells had a lockable cupboard. All cells had curtains. 2.3 Four boys were sharing two cells which had been designed for single occupancy. Attempts had been made to screen toilets with curtains, but this was inadequate and boys spoke of embarrassment in using the toilets and complained of a lack of air freshening products. 2.4 Communal showers were clean, but some were poorly ventilated and smelt damp. Boys were locked together in showers to maintain supervision, which was inappropriate, and had to bang on the door to attract the attention of staff to let them out. 2.5 External areas were clean, but the wings needed softening with pictures and murals and the exercise yards were austere with no seats. There were not enough activities for boys in the association areas and plans to locate youth clubs on wings were welcome. 2.6 In our survey, only 32% of boys said their cell bell was normally answered within five minutes. An electronic cells call register was in place on all wings. The register showed that most were now answered in time, but further improvement was required. Quality assurance arrangements were good. 2.7 Bedding was changed regularly and the quality of prison-issue clothing was reasonably good with weekly kit changes. All boys could wear their own clothes. Laundry arrangements were adequate and there were advanced plans to improve facilities on the wings. 2.8 In our survey, 65% of boys said applications were sorted out fairly and 47% said they were sorted out quickly. We saw evidence that applications were responded to promptly. 2.9 Boys complained that telephones on wings were often out of order. Two of the telephones that we tested were not working. Recommendations 2.10 Cells designed for one should not accommodate two people. (Repeated recommendation 2.12) HMYOI Werrington 33

36 Section 2. Respect 2.11 Children should not be locked together in showers Wings and exercise yards should be decorated and equipped to reflect the needs of the population Cell call bells should be answered promptly. (Repeated recommendation 2.13) Relationships between staff and children and young people Expected outcomes: Children and young people are treated with care and fairness by all staff, and are expected, encouraged and enabled to take responsibility for their own actions and decisions. Staff set clear and fair boundaries. Staff have high expectations of all children and young people and help them to achieve their potential The interactions between staff and boys that we observed were consistently good and staff knew about the boys they were responsible for. The personal officer scheme was not operating well and was being re-launched Interactions between staff and boys that we observed during the inspection were consistently positive. Members of staff we spoke to had good knowledge of the boys they were responsible for. The significant numbers of non-discipline staff involved in the lives of the boys engendered a positive atmosphere. However, in our survey, 34% of boys against the comparator of 24% said they had no member of staff to turn to if they had a problem. The measuring the quality of prison life survey conducted by the prison also highlighted similar concerns about relationships, which needed further exploration The personal officer scheme was still not working effectively and was being re-launched. Fewer boys than in 2013 said they had met their personal officer within the first week or that personal officers had tried to help them. There was little evidence from other areas of boys lives, such as ACCT (assessment, care in custody and teamwork case management) care plans, that personal officers played a pivotal role. The quality of entries on wing files still consisted largely of negative comments about institutional behaviour. In spite of the knowledge that many officers had of the boys, there were few entries about personal circumstances, family or progress and achievements The Youth Council was chaired and minutes taken by boys supported by staff from Kinetic. Minutes showed purposeful engagement from boys who were enthusiastic about the forum. However, there was evidence of matters carried over at several meetings while the Council awaited the outcome of management actions. Recommendation 2.18 Each boy should have a designated officer on their residential unit who is their central point of contact and support and takes responsibility for their day-to-day care and wellbeing through frequent contact and by attending relevant meetings relating to their care. (Repeated recommendation 2.21) 34 HMYOI Werrington

37 Section 2. Respect Equality and diversity Expected outcomes: The establishment demonstrates a clear and coordinated approach to eliminating discrimination, promoting equitable outcomes and fostering good relations, and ensures that no child or young person is unfairly disadvantaged. This is underpinned by effective processes to identify and resolve any inequality. The diverse needs of each young person are recognised and addressed: these include, but are not restricted to, race equality, nationality, religion, disability (including mental, physical and learning disabilities and difficulties), gender, transgender issues and sexual orientation The management of equality and diversity was weak. Equality meetings were well attended but not sufficiently purposeful. There were no forums and no engagement with community agencies to support minority groups. More consultation was needed. Good work had been done to help two foreign national boys obtain legal advice funded by the local authority, but support for individuals from minority groups was weak. Strategic management 2.20 The management of equality and diversity was weak. Equality policies, procedures and practice required review and the establishment had lost some expertise in the area following staff changes. Independent advice had been commissioned to help the establishment review its equality work, which was a constructive development A comprehensive equality policy had recently been published which covered all protected characteristics. In a number of respects, the policy had not been implemented and did not reflect practice. There was a detailed action plan, but actions were largely generic and not related to identified areas of need The bimonthly diversity and equality action team (DEAT) meeting was well attended. Members of the senior management team took the lead for each protected characteristic with the intention of reporting developments to the DEAT. However, reports lacked substance and generated little discussion. There was evidence that matters were repeatedly carried over to subsequent meetings. There was useful discussion of equality monitoring data and action was taken to explore some concerns raised by the data. No community equality partners attended the meetings An equality officer had recently been appointed as part of the resettlement team. She was often redeployed to other tasks to fill staff shortages and we were not confident that she had enough time to devote to a review of equality work. The role of children s equality representatives had not been formally established or supported The promotion of equality and diversity had improved since our previous inspection, but required further improvement There were no focus groups for boys from different minority groups. Pending the equality review, it was intended that boys would be consulted on equality issues at the Youth Council. We were not convinced that this was the best vehicle for consultation given the extensive agenda of the Council. HMYOI Werrington 35

38 Section 2. Respect 2.26 Most discrimination incident report forms (DIRFs) submitted so far in 2014 had related to race equality. While investigations appeared fair, with appropriate outcomes, documentation often lacked detail and we were concerned that this would undermine effective quality assurance. All responses were checked by the deputy governor, but there was no external scrutiny of responses. The reducing reoffending team was introducing an equality course for boys who had been found to be discriminatory Only a minority of staff had undertaken the basic Civil Service e-learning equality training session which, in any event, was inadequate for the complex task at hand. Diverse needs 2.28 Arrangements for the identification of boys with disabilities by health care staff were effective, but we were not confident that boys from other protected groups were always identified. Reception staff did not use an equality questionnaire for new arrivals and were unaware that boys from Roma, Gypsy and Traveller groups should be separately identified. Although 9% of boys responding to our survey identified themselves as belonging to this group, the establishment was not aware of any There was no engagement with community support groups for any protected groups, which compounded the lack of specific forums In our survey, 40% of boys said they were from a minority ethnic group and 21% said they were Muslim. Both groups reported a similar experience to others across a wide range of questions, although black and minority ethnic boys reported a significantly worse experience in a number of key areas of respect. Only 54% said staff treated them with respect against 80% of white boys, and 19% said they had been treated fairly under the incentives and earned privileges scheme compared with 57% (see main recommendation S63) In our survey, 75% of boys with a disability reported feeling unsafe at some time compared with 39% of other boys, and 100% of respondents with a disability said they had had an adjudication compared to 72% of other boys. The monitoring data presented to the May DEAT meeting indicated that boys with disabilities were out of range for adjudications but minutes did not indicate any discussion of this Information on children with special educational needs (SEN) was shared effectively. SEN coordinators distributed a list of boys with behaviour identified to relate to educational need, including advice to wing staff on how to support and communicate with them No boys had identified themselves as gay or bisexual at the time of the inspection. Posters promoting positive images of gay people had been removed from notice boards by boys and more had been requested from Stonewall At the time of the inspection, 13 foreign national boys were being assisted by resettlement caseworkers, with additional support from Barnardo s advocates. There was no longer an entitlement to legal aid for most immigration advice and good work had been done by Barnardo s to help two boys obtain advice funded by the local authority. Resettlement caseworkers had identified Vietnamese boys as potentially being at risk of trafficking. These cases were referred to an agency in the community which provided specialist support. 36 HMYOI Werrington

39 Section 2. Respect Faith and religious activity Expected outcomes: All children and young people are able to practise their religion. The chaplaincy plays a full part in establishment life and contributes to young people s overall care, support and resettlement Provision of and access to faith services was sound. The chaplaincy was well integrated into the establishment and pastoral care was good The chaplaincy was awaiting security clearance for a newly appointed Catholic chaplain and, with this appointment, had good coverage of the religious needs of the population The team was integrated into the regime and chaplains attended key meetings such as equality and safer custody, although not the senior management team. Chaplains were visible throughout the establishment talking to boys. They visited all children on ACCTs and all children in the reintegration and support unit each day. They regularly worked with boys and their families, for example following bereavement In our survey, 51% of non-muslim boys said that their religious beliefs were respected, rising to 91% for Muslim boys. Two-thirds of boys said that it was easy to attend religious services The chapel contained easy chairs for chaplains to talk informally to boys. There was a multifaith room with washing facilities for use in preparation for prayers, but the Muslim population was now too large for the facility. Part of the chapel was to be divided off for this purpose A charity, Reflex, provided one-to-one mentoring to 36 boys of all faiths, in particular to help them improve their self esteem, raise their aspirations and offer alternatives to criminal behaviour. There was reasonable provision of classes and courses, such as bible study, i2i and the Alpha course. Complaints Expected outcomes: Effective complaints procedures are in place for children and young people, which are easy to access and use and provide timely responses. Children and young people are provided with the help they need to make a complaint. Children and young people feel safe from repercussions when using these procedures and are aware of an appeal procedure In our survey, fewer boys than the comparator said that complaints were dealt with fairly. Most responses that we looked at were satisfactory, although witnesses had not always been interviewed. Quality assurance of responses was good In our survey, only 29% of boys who had made a complaint said complaints were sorted out fairly against the comparator of 45%. HMYOI Werrington 37

40 Section 2. Respect 2.43 In the sample of complaints that we examined, most responses were satisfactory, polite and easy to understand and apologies were offered where appropriate. However, potential witnesses did not appear to have been interviewed and fully investigated with all complaints. Nearly all responses were made promptly. Advocates from Barnardo s assisted boys with complaints and were generally satisfied with the fairness of the process. During the six months before the inspection, 19% of complaints had been upheld. No complaints against staff had been upheld Quality assurance was good. Nearly all responses were checked by the head of safeguarding, the safeguarding manager or the senior social worker. A sample of responses was also checked by the deputy governor. Legal rights Expected outcomes: Children and young people are supported by the establishment staff to exercise their legal rights freely Induction staff and caseworkers continued to take responsibility for identifying legal status and contacting legal advisers. Bail applications were arranged within appropriate timescales The comprehensive legal services policy described the key procedures to help boys obtain the necessary information and support to exercise their legal rights Induction staff continued to record information about boys legal status on a 24 hour legal questionnaire. Boys were asked if they wished to appeal against their sentence or conviction and if they needed bail information or legal support The questionnaire was forwarded to caseworkers who facilitated contact with legal advisers and bail information and support through youth offending team workers. Bail applications for remanded boys were arranged within appropriate timescales. Legal issues were addressed at initial planning meetings and boys could obtain assistance from Barnardo s advocates Recalled children were quickly identified and licence conditions were explained and discussed at review meetings. Health services Expected outcomes: Children and young people are cared for by a health service that assesses and meets their health needs while in custody and which promotes continuity of health and social care on release. The standard of health service provided is equivalent to that which children and young people could expect to receive elsewhere in the community Overall, health services were good. The comprehensive health assessment tool (CHAT) aided effective assessment and management. Access to adolescent-specific training and take-up of clinical supervision were too limited. Dental and pharmacy services were good. Mental health services remained very good, although the lack of speech and language services remained a concern. 38 HMYOI Werrington

41 Section 2. Respect Governance arrangements 2.51 NHS England (Shropshire and Staffordshire) commissioned Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent Partnership Trust (SSOTP) to provide primary care services. South Staffordshire and Shropshire NHS Foundation Trust provided child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS). Appropriate governance meetings informed the well attended partnership board. Working relationships between the providers, commissioners and the establishment were excellent. Learning from audits, significant events, complaints and regular health service user forums informed service development. A health needs assessment had been completed in 2013 and a new needs assessment had been commissioned A senior nurse manager and senior nurse provided effective clinical leadership. The nursing team had a good skill mix. There was 24-hour nursing cover. GPs from a local practice provided five clinics a week Health staff used an appropriate range of policies. A recent communicable disease incidence had been managed appropriately. All staff were in date with mandatory training. Adolescentspecific training remained difficult to access, although some additional safeguarding training had been sourced. Too few staff received regular clinical supervision Health services were delivered from the health department and three wing-based dispensing rooms. All areas complied with infection control standards and provided an excellent environment Nursing staff had good access to regularly checked emergency equipment. Not all custody staff were trained in first aid or in using automated defibrillators. Ambulance response times were generally good Health staff were easily identifiable and we observed excellent interactions with boys. Electronic clinical records (SystmOne) and care planning were good. All new arrivals received age-appropriate information on health services A confidential health complaints system was well advertised. Forms and envelopes were easily accessible and boys could post their complaint to PALS (Patient Advice and Liaison Services) in a prepaid envelope. The three complaints since our last inspection had been managed appropriately An effective whole-prison approach to health promotion was led by the well attended health promotion action group and there were age-appropriate displays and literature across the establishment. Boys had good access to nicotine replacement therapy, barrier protection, screening services and immunisation and vaccination clinics. Recommendations 2.59 Specific child-focused skills and knowledge training, including mental health, should be available to nursing staff. (Repeated recommendation 2.66) 2.60 All prison staff should have up-to-date basic life support skills, including use of automated defibrillators. (Repeated recommendation 2.65) 2.61 All health staff should receive regular documented clinical supervision. HMYOI Werrington 39

42 Section 2. Respect Delivery of care (physical health) 2.62 In our survey, 64% of boys against the comparator of 52% said that the quality of health services was good Nurses saw all new arrivals promptly for a private initial assessment, and appropriate referrals were made. Effective liaison with community services ensured continuity of care. All boys received further assessments of their physical and mental health including neurodisability using the CHAT during their first few weeks in the establishment Nurses were very visible on the wings and boys asked for any services they needed. There was an appropriate range of primary care services and waiting times were good. Boys with lifelong conditions had regular reviews. Boys who received an accidental injury or were involved in a violent incident were seen promptly Access to external hospital appointments was excellent and was well managed. Any cancellation was reported as a significant incident. Pharmacy 2.66 Medicines were supplied promptly by Lloyds Pharmacy. A pharmacist attended monthly to complete required stock checks and audits. There were overarching trust policies and regular staff were familiar with local working practices and risk management procedures. However, these were not formalised in written procedures. Overall, medicines were managed and stored appropriately and associated record keeping was satisfactory. Direct access to a pharmacist was advertised well but was not used Prescribing levels were low and appropriate to the population. Prescriptions were paper based and all the administration records we examined were complete. Medicines were administered up to four times a day from the wing dispensing rooms. Controlled drugs were administered from the health department. We observed safe drug administration. The inpossession policy allowed some boys to take appropriate responsibility for their medication following a risk assessment Nurses could administer an appropriate range of medicines without access to a doctor under a homely remedies policy and patient group directions 6, ensuring timely treatment The medicines and therapeutics committee had not met for some time due to poor attendance. Recommendation 2.70 An appropriate range of establishment specific policies and procedures should be ratified by a well attended medicines and therapeutics committee which meets regularly. 6 Enable the supply and administration of prescription-only medicine by persons other than a doctor or pharmacist, usually a nurse 40 HMYOI Werrington

43 Section 2. Respect Dentistry 2.71 SSOTP provided a fortnightly clinic and emergency input as required. All boys were offered a dental check up and the average wait for routine appointments was four weeks. NHSequivalent dental treatment was available and appropriate entries were made on SystmOne. We were unable to observe a consultation during the inspection The dental surgery was large and well equipped, with a separate decontamination room. All dental equipment was appropriately maintained and dental waste was disposed of professionally. Delivery of care (mental health) 2.73 In our survey, 18% of boys reported that they had emotional or mental health problems and 63% of these said that someone in the establishment was helping them with this. Working relationships between prison and mental health staff were effective. Some discipline staff had received mental health awareness training since our last inspection, but regular training was required Any mental health needs were promptly identified through reception screening and appropriate referrals. Boys could also self-refer or be referred for a further assessment while in custody. Any boy with significant mental health needs was referred to CAMHS. There was still no access to speech and language therapy to support boys with communication and behavioural challenges CAMHS offered psychological therapies and a monthly psychiatrist clinic and had an average caseload of 20 to 30 boys. About six new referrals were received a month. Boys had good levels of service and appointments were rarely cancelled. Liaison with community services was good No boys had been transferred to residential NHS mental health services in the previous year. However, staff told us that there had been occasions when transfer to another prison establishment with inpatient facilities had been indicated, but had not been carried out due to a lack of nationally agreed transfer pathways. Recommendations 2.77 Mental health awareness training, including learning disability, for prison staff should be prioritised to ensure they can support and manage children effectively. (Repeated recommendation 2.94) 2.78 Boys should have access to speech and language therapy on site There should be a national transfer pathway for boys who need admission to a prison establishment with inpatient facilities. HMYOI Werrington 41

44 Section 2. Respect Catering Expected outcomes: Children and young people are offered varied meals to meet their individual requirements and food is prepared and served according to religious, cultural and prevailing food safety and hygiene regulations Although boys were negative about the quality and quantity of food, we found it to be adequate. It was inappropriate to deny some boys the opportunity to eat in association as a sanction Boys remained negative about the quality and quantity of food. We found portion sizes and food quality to be adequate. Some boys suggested there was favouritism in the size of portions, although the serving of meals that we observed was well supervised The four-week menu cycle included a reasonable range of options, including vegetarian, vegan, religious and medical diets. Fresh fruit and vegetables were served daily. Breakfast provided an option of cereal or porridge and toast The kitchens and serveries were clean and well maintained. Boys cleaned the kitchen and prepared food. Not all boys employed on the serveries had received basic hygiene training, 2.84 Boys were only able to eat together at breakfast and dinner and ate lunch in their cells. Boys on loss of privileges had meals served at their cell doors, which was not an appropriate sanction Consultation arrangements were adequate. The catering manager attended the monthly boys focus group meeting and there was evidence that reasonable requests to change the menu were implemented. A survey was completed bi-annually with further evidence of suggestions being implemented. Comments books were kept behind the servery and boys had to ask the supervising officer for the book if they wished to make a comment. Comments were seldom made. Recommendations 2.86 Boys should not be denied the opportunity to eat together as a sanction All boys employed in the preparation and service of food should be appropriately trained to do so. Purchases Expected outcomes: Children and young people can purchase a suitable range of goods at reasonable prices to meet their diverse needs, and can do so safely Purchases were managed efficiently but slowly. Boys arriving late in the week had to wait too long for their first canteen delivery. 42 HMYOI Werrington

45 Section 2. Respect 2.89 The arrangements for ordering goods were efficient and boys knew how much money they had in their account. However, it took too long for goods to be delivered. Boys could place an order from the canteen list each Wednesday. Although goods arrived the following Wednesday, they were placed in storage and not delivered until Saturday, 10 days after the order had been placed. We were told that this was because it was easier to deliver goods during the weekend regime There were no interim arrangements for boys arriving in the establishment later than Wednesday which meant that some could wait up to 16 days for their first canteen order to be delivered Goods could be ordered from Argos, Amazon and Azhar. Newspapers could also be ordered. Recommendations 2.92 Goods ordered from the canteen list should be delivered when they arrive at the prison There should be interim arrangements for boys arriving later in the week to purchase some goods. HMYOI Werrington 43

46 Section 3. Purposeful activity 44 HMYOI Werrington

47 Section 3. Purposeful activity Section 3. Purposeful activity Time out of cell Expected outcomes: Children and young people spend most of their time out of their cell, engaged in activities such as education, leisure and cultural pursuits, seven days a week Boys received a similar amount of time unlocked as at the previous inspection, and this still fell short of our expectations. The number of boys who said they could exercise daily had increased but this was still poor as the opportunity for exercise clashed with the need to complete other tasks. 3.2 Over the previous six months, the establishment had recorded an average of 7.1 hours out of cell, significantly less than our expectations. We estimated that most boys received about eight hours. Over the last two months staffing levels had been cited as the reason for regular cancellations of association. 3.3 During our checks, 28% of boys were locked up during core activity time. There did not appear to be a good reason for all of this. In some cases boys had been kept back from activity periods to see agencies, which was not appropriate. 3.4 At the time of the inspection, two boys who presented a risk to themselves or others were locked up for most of the day. Although these boys were discussed regularly at multi-agency safeguarding and health (MASH) meetings, outcomes for them were not satisfactory (see section on victims of bullying and intimidation). 3.5 Survey results indicated that boys had more time out on exercise than at the previous inspection, but only 27% against the comparator of 65% said that they could exercise daily. The exercise period was scheduled during domestic hour a time allocated for a range of tasks. Recommendations 3.6 All boys should receive 10 hours out of cell each day. (Repeated recommendation 3.5) 3.7 Boys should have at least one hour outside each day. (Repeated recommendation 3.6) 7 Time out of cell, in addition to formal purposeful activity, includes any time children and young people are out of their cells to associate or use communal facilities to take showers or make telephone calls. HMYOI Werrington 45

48 Section 3. Purposeful activity Education, learning and skills Inspection of the provision of education and educational standards, as well as vocational training in YOIs for young people, is undertaken by the Office for Standards in Education (Ofsted 8 ) working under the general direction of HM Inspectorate of Prisons. For information on how Ofsted inspects education and training see the Ofsted framework and handbook for inspection. Expected outcomes: All children and young people engage well in education, learning and skills that enable them to gain confidence and experience success. Expectations of children and young people are high. Children and young people are encouraged and enabled to make progress in their learning and their personal and social development to increase their employability and help them to be successful learners on their return to the wider community. Education, learning and skills are of high quality, provide sufficient challenge to children and young people and enable them to gain meaningful qualifications. 3.8 The Manchester College learning and skills manager and the head of reducing reoffending had worked very well together to resolve most of the weaknesses identified at the previous inspection. Attendance at education had improved, as had achievements. The range of educational classes had increased and the choice of vocational training had improved. The quality of teaching and learning was good, with some outstanding, and support for boys with special educational needs was effective. Access to the library had improved and was now satisfactory. 3.9 Ofsted made the following assessments about the learning and skills and work provision: Overall effectiveness of learning and skills and work: Outcomes for children and young people engaged in learning and skills and work activities: Quality of learning and skills and work activities, including the quality of teaching, training, learning and assessment: Effectiveness of leadership and management of learning and skills and work activities: Good Good Good Good Management of education and learning and skills 3.10 The Manchester College learning and skills manager and the head of reducing reoffending had worked very well together to provide clear strategic direction and a service committed to the highest standards. They had successfully resolved most of the weaknesses identified at the previous inspection in a remarkably short period. Relationships between college staff and the regime services team had significantly improved, which enabled them to provide jointly good quality opportunities for boys to learn and develop vocational skills. There were no staff shortages or long-term absences, which helped considerably to reduce the proportion of classes that were cancelled and to improve attendance. 8 Ofsted is the Office for Standards in Education, Children s Services and Skills. It reports directly to the UK Parliament and is independent and impartial. It (inter alia) inspects and regulates services that provide education and skills for all ages, including those in custody. For information on Ofsted s inspection framework, please visit: 46 HMYOI Werrington

49 Section 3. Purposeful activity 3.11 Teaching staff were well qualified and experienced. Opportunities for teachers and vocational trainers to participate in continuous professional development and to improve their professional practice were good. The college had strengthened the observation of teaching and learning process so that it now provided a robust tool for improving the quality of learning sessions. However, a minority of observation reports failed to record and make use of all the available evidence when assessing teachers performance. For example, sections dealing with improvement actions for the teacher or with learner and teacher feedback on the quality of the lesson were simply left blank In line with a recommendation made in the previous inspection report, the college and the regime services team had worked together to produce the self-assessment report and quality improvement plan. Managers had a good understanding of the key strengths and weaknesses of the provision. As a consequence, the self-assessment report involved all staff and contained accurate, well-supported and realistic judgements about the quality of provision. Recommendation 3.13 The procedure for observing lessons should be improved further so that observers record and make use of all the available evidence when assessing teachers performance and the quality of learning. Provision of activities 3.14 Despite the numbers found locked up during the core day, there were sufficient activity places, and procedures for allocating boys to activities were fair and managed well. College staff were skilled in using initial assessment to help boys to enrol on courses that met their needs. The range of education courses had increased since the last inspection and met the needs of the boys effectively. The range of vocational training had also improved and now included a multi-skills workshop and opportunities for boys to work as baristas in the prison coffee shop. Following a recommendation at the last inspection, a successful independent living skills course was now offered, as well as a popular programme of well-attended youth club sessions run by a youth charity, Kinetic. Quality of provision 3.15 The quality of teaching, learning and assessment was good and some of it was outstanding. Teachers provided a wide range of appropriate and relevant activities which engaged boys interest and enabled them to make good progress in developing their skills. Activities to improve personal and social skills were particularly effective. Teachers successfully encouraged the boys to reflect on their learning and to identify ambitious but realistic goals for the future. Youth workers provided good support for boys to encourage them to adapt their behaviour and to help improve their confidence Vocational training was good. Motivated and enthusiastic trainers encouraged boys during each session to reflect on their progress and identify what they had to improve. They coached learners well and provided good demonstrations to help them learn new skills quickly, such as in bricklaying. The prison course for aspiring baristas was exceptionally well designed to meet learners needs. HMYOI Werrington 47

50 Section 3. Purposeful activity 3.17 Additional support for learners was particularly good. The special educational needs coordinator supported boys learning very effectively, and put in place a wide range of strategies to overcome complex barriers to learning. Support assistants skilfully supported and challenged the high proportion of boys who needed extra help in lessons, and improved their independent learning skills successfully. Good individual support was provided for boys who were not able to attend classes and for those who were aiming to achieve GCSEs and higher-level qualifications Boys benefited from a comprehensive induction which enabled them to make informed choices about their education and vocational training, and to learn about the support available. Initial assessment was thorough and detailed, enabling boys individual needs to be identified accurately and appropriate learning targets to be set Teachers, support workers and vocational trainers provided clear feedback during sessions. Assessment of written and practical work was accurate and detailed. The progress made by boys towards achieving their targets was recorded fully in their individual learning plans Classrooms were attractive and well equipped with a good range of learning technology. However, the equipment was not used consistently well to support learning. Teachers did not always make enough use of learning technology to engage learners and often relied too heavily on worksheets. A room was set aside for the virtual campus 9, but this resource was underused Boys showed a high level of mutual respect and supported each other well in their learning. Teachers promoted equality and diversity well through a wide range of projects and lesson themes. For example, boys awareness of mental health was raised through partnership work with a national charity, and their understanding of other cultures was increased through celebrations of religious festivals such as Eid. Project work displayed on classroom walls demonstrated a high level of awareness of disability. In a minority of lessons, teachers did not challenge the use of inappropriate language Teachers and trainers provided a good range of opportunities for boys to develop their English and mathematics skills. Learners with skills lower than foundation level completed courses at an appropriate level in English and mathematics and made good progress in improving their skills. Boys expanded their understanding of terminology and specialist vocabulary in courses such as sports science and art. However, the promotion and development of English and mathematics in vocational training was often weak Boys working in the prison kitchen, and those engaged in recycling work and in the greenery initiative, gained good work experience and developed a range of employability skills, such as team-working and taking responsibility. Recommendations 3.24 More and better use should be made of learning technology in sessions to engage learners more fully The virtual campus should be used to enhance job search opportunities for boys The use of mathematics and English in vocational training should be promoted more strongly. 9 Enables prisoners to have internet access to community education, training and employment opportunities 48 HMYOI Werrington

51 Section 3. Purposeful activity Education and vocational achievements 3.27 Success rates on almost all courses had improved since the last inspection. They had been on an upward trajectory for the last three years, and were now very high. Retention had also improved and was excellent. Attendance and punctuality were good. Education staff allocated boys to a course that reflected their interests, aptitudes and the length of their sentence. There were few differences in performance between different groups of learners. In previous years, there had been considerable disparities, particularly in the case of learners from black and minority ethnic groups, who had under-performed. Provisional data for 2013 to 2014 indicated that this gap had now largely been closed and that black and minority ethnic learners were performing as well as their peers. Library 3.28 The library was subcontracted to Staffordshire Library Service. It was well organised and managed by a full-time library manager and one part-time assistant. Boys benefited from wellfurnished and welcoming settings and two new computers with up-to-date software. The library was open on weekday mornings and afternoons and on Saturday mornings Boys on each wing had a weekly scheduled session to visit the library and borrow up to four books for two weeks. The system to monitor the attendance of boys was good The library had a good stock of books for the population, including the small number of foreign nationals. The stock included a good range of fiction, non-fiction, easy-read books, audio books, and legal materials. There were also small collections of books in the reintegration and support unit, and boys who had to work on their own, because of vulnerability or risk to others, had satisfactory access to books. However, the range and number of books in vocational areas and books for GCSE studies were not adequate The library increased the awareness of boys through promotional activities such as Black History Month. It worked well in partnership with the establishment staff to promote a range of beneficial activities, such as healthy eating, and fitness and well-being. Recommendation 3.32 The number and range of books for GCSE studies should be increased. Physical education and healthy living Expected outcomes: All children and young people understand the importance of healthy living, and are encouraged and enabled to participate in and enjoy physical education in safety, regardless of their ability. The programme of activities is inclusive and well planned. It is varied and includes indoor and outdoor activities Physical education facilities and resources were good, but the outdoor area was not used enough. Access to PE was good and the facilities were used well, with plans to increase the small amount of accredited learning available. Support for boys who were less confident about their physical fitness and those who were referred to improve their fitness or health was effective. HMYOI Werrington 49

52 Section 3. Purposeful activity 3.34 The PE facilities and resources were good. They included a large sports hall used for indoor football, volleyball and basketball, a well-equipped room for weight training, and a wellmaintained outdoor football pitch. A team of six qualified instructors provided an appropriate level of instruction and support. An accredited course in sports science had been introduced recently and further accredited courses were planned. However, insufficient use was made of the large outdoor area and, other than football, no outdoor activities were organised Boys had good access to PE facilities during the week, in the evening and at the weekend. A high proportion used the gym regularly and participated in a wide range of activities. Boys who were less confident about using the gym were able to use the facilities at different times to other users and had access to a separate, smaller weights room. There were good links with the local community through a football team which played regularly in a local league. This provided good opportunities for boys to engage in competitive sport and develop teamwork skills and self-discipline Induction to the gym provided boys with an appropriate overview of the facilities and covered health and safety issues fully. PE staff provided good support for boys referred to the gym to improve their fitness and health. They promoted healthy living appropriately, including the importance of a balanced diet. PE staff undertook a full assessment of the risks associated with all activities and equipment and took appropriate action where necessary to minimise risk Good use was made of feedback from boys to improve the service. Annual surveys and feedback from the Youth Council had led to improvements and to a proposed indoor cricket activity. A notice board provided clear information about comments received and actions taken in response to feedback There were too few showers for the number of gym users. Only nine cubicles were available and boys had to wait too long for a shower. Recommendations 3.39 The outdoor field should be used more effectively to promote the health and fitness of boys The showering facilities in the gym should be adequate for the population. 50 HMYOI Werrington

53 Section 4. Resettlement Section 4. Resettlement Pre-release and resettlement Expected outcomes: Planning for a child or young person s release or transfer starts on their arrival at the establishment. Resettlement underpins the work of the whole establishment, supported by strategic partnerships in the community and informed by assessment of young people s risk and need. Ongoing planning ensures a seamless transition into the community. 4.1 The strategic management of resettlement was good, although some improvements were required to the policy. Use of release on temporary licence was being promoted and some very useful tracking of outcomes was being carried out. 4.2 The governance of resettlement was managed by the head of reducing reoffending and head of casework. Resettlement work was well organised and the casework team were closely involved in pathway work. This integrated approach helped ensure there were effective outcomes for boys. 4.3 The comprehensive reducing reoffending policy was informed by an annual needs analysis, which was being revised. Many questions on the existing prison needs analysis survey required only closed responses and the opportunity for boys to comment on the quality of their experiences was limited. 4.4 The resettlement policy identified key pathway priorities and included the additional pathway of case management and transitions, supporting the transition from custody to community and partnership working. There were good links with a variety of partnership agencies and lead responsibility had been identified for each pathway. 4.5 The policy did not cover how the establishment should meet the identified needs of specific groups, for example black and minority ethnic boys. 4.6 There was no action plan but reducing reoffending meetings each quarter were well attended and minutes demonstrated action to develop services. 4.7 Since March 2013, the establishment had requested accommodation and education, training and employment outcomes for children from youth offending teams (YOTs) three months after release. Findings showed that while most children were released to settled accommodation, such as family, others were placed in hostel or bed and breakfast accommodation. Although all boys were released with some form of education, training or employment (ETE), half the boys were not in ETE three months later (see section on reintegration planning). Findings had been shared with YOT senior managers for discussion and action. 4.8 During the previous year, 15 boys had been granted 99 ROTLs; placements were fully supervised for the first two weeks. Boys were told about ROTL opportunities at review meetings and we observed how this motivated them. HMYOI Werrington 51

54 Section 4. Resettlement 4.9 The establishment had recently started to work in partnership with Staffordshire County Council Open Door, providing voluntary work experience ROTL placements linked to the work and training completed by boys in the establishment. This initiative looked very promising. Pertemps recruitment agency supported employment opportunities for boys after release. Recommendation 4.10 The reducing reoffending policy should describe how the establishment should meet the identified needs of specific groups of boys. Housekeeping point 4.11 The needs analysis questionnaire should give boys the opportunity to comment on the quality of their experiences. Training planning and remand management Expected outcomes: All children and young people have a training or remand management plan which is based on an individual assessment of risk and need. Relevant staff work collaboratively with children and young people and their parents or carers in drawing up and reviewing their plans. The plans are reviewed regularly and implemented throughout and after young people s time in custody to ensure a smooth transition to the community Planning reviews were timely and well run but targets needed to be more specific. Caseworkers carried out most of the work associated with the planning process and all boys were allocated a caseworker promptly. There was scope for caseworkers to undertake more planned work with boys. Public protection arrangements were efficient Boys continued to be allocated and seen promptly by a caseworker. Caseloads were manageable and each caseworker managed remanded and sentenced children irrespective of identified risk. Some had not received training for their work. The team worked effectively with YOTs and internal staff such as social workers, advocates and health care Initial training and remand management plans were drawn up in consultation with the boy and his YOT worker; many parents continued to attend meetings. Reviews were undertaken within appropriate timescales Plans were discussed at reviews but none of the plans that we looked at named staff members responsible for meeting targets, referring simply to personal officers or education. Targets in many plans were not specific to individual needs, simply stating ETE or letters, visits, phones with no indication of what was to be achieved. A few targets were excellent, for example attend offending behaviour programmes to have a better understanding of the consequences of actions for himself and others. Some targets continued to require boys to adhere to rules and regimes. 52 HMYOI Werrington

55 Section 4. Resettlement 4.16 We observed well managed review meetings at which boys were fully engaged. YOT workers attended and social workers and advocates attended one review that we observed, but there was no routine attendance by personal officers or staff from other departments. Caseworkers did not ask for written contributions and relied on information from electronic case notes. Release and transition planning for moves to the adult estate were discussed at reviews and started well in advance Caseworkers had attended about 40% of post-review meetings with YOTs held 10 days after release; they still did not attend ACCT reviews (assessment, care in custody and teamwork case management) or rewards and sanctions reviews There was no expectation that caseworkers would hold planned one-to-one meetings with boys outside the reviews. Caseworkers said they had impromptu meetings with boys on the wings but this was not a suitable environment to discuss plans or to challenge behaviour The casework custodial manager now quality assured 10% of cases by scrutinising Asset 10, case files, training plans and review observations. Caseworkers received written and verbal feedback, including positive comment and constructive criticism. There was evidence that quality assurance arrangements had improved individual performance and team practice Three boys had applied for release on home detention curfew in the previous six months, and one application had been granted. Recommendations 4.21 Targets in training/remand plans should be based on identified need and should describe what they aim to achieve Caseworkers should attend all post-release reviews in the community Caseworkers should undertake planned formal casework meetings with boys outside of reviews. Housekeeping points 4.24 Personal officers and staff from other departments should contribute to reviews Caseworkers should be involved in all reviews, including ACCT and rewards and sanctions reviews. Public protection 4.26 The public protection policy was comprehensive and public protection arrangements were sound. Each boy was assessed on arrival to identify public/child protection issues and an electronic database was maintained. Boys who were subject to restrictions had these explained to them by their caseworker. 10 Youth Justice Board assessment documentation completed by youth offending teams HMYOI Werrington 53

56 Section 4. Resettlement 4.27 Monthly risk management meetings continued to review all sentenced boys identified as posing a risk on release, during their last three months in custody. All remanded boys identified with risk factors and other individual cases were considered as necessary. Boys subject to mail and telephone call monitoring were reviewed and minutes recorded the reasons for continuing this. Minutes showed that there were fewer attendees at risk management meetings than the eight required by the terms of reference, for example only three staff had attended meetings in June and August 2014, and only two in May. Caseworkers and social workers did not attend and partnerships agencies attended rarely. Housekeeping point 4.28 Attendance at risk management meetings should reflect the terms of reference. Indeterminate sentence young people 4.29 Children serving indeterminate sentences were not held at the establishment and boys identified as likely to receive such a sentence were identified on remand, and information provided by their caseworker. Boys serving long determinate sentences received the same services as those on detention and training orders. Looked-after children 4.30 Two experienced establishment social workers, one a senior social worker, screened information accompanying new arrivals each day to identify looked-after children, or those who had previously been looked after. Once they had been identified, boys were seen promptly Social workers linked with local authority children s services to see that they met their responsibilities for looked-after children and we saw good examples of work undertaken by social workers to ensure that this was done In our survey, 36% of children said that they had been in local authority care. At the time of the inspection, 46 boys (45%) had been identified as looked-after children, including those subject to full care orders or care leavers, boys who had been accommodated by their local authority without care orders and all remanded children; several boys fell into more than one category The social workers attended a range of establishment meetings, including use of force, bullying reduction and multi-agency safeguarding and health. They did not attend ACCT reviews. Housekeeping point 4.34 The on-site social workers should attend ACCT reviews. 54 HMYOI Werrington

57 Section 4. Resettlement Reintegration planning Expected outcomes: Children and young people s resettlement needs are addressed prior to release. An effective multi-agency response is used to meet the specific needs of each individual young person in order to maximise the likelihood of successful reintegration into the community Reintegration planning remained good. No boys were released without an address and there was evidence that accommodation was pursued rigorously when necessary. Careers advice and guidance were good and health care and substance misuse planning for release was effective. Work on finance, benefit and debt was developing, and, although children complained about delays in visiting start times, the visits we observed were managed efficiently and started promptly. Support provided by the family engagement coordinator was very good and family relationship and parenting courses were delivered. A range of programmes addressed attitudes, thinking and behaviour; the reinforcement of learning from these programmes across the establishment had started During the previous six months, an average of 13 children had been released and an average of six transferred each month Effective plans were made for boys release or transition to adult prisons at reviews in consultation with their YOT workers. They included travel and living plans and supervision arrangements Boys continued to be provided with clothes and suitable bags on release and stored clothes could be laundered, Accommodation 4.39 In our survey, only 19% of children said they knew who to contact for help with finding accommodation against the comparator of 31%. Despite this, we were reassured that where problems with accommodation did exist this was actually identified and addressed at the initial training planning and remand planning meetings and, if necessary, at subsequent reviews No children were released without an address and most left to settled accommodation with family. A minority were accommodated in hostels or bed and breakfast accommodation. Post-release data obtained from YOTs identified that one-fifth of children were released to non-sustainable accommodation creating a serious cause for concern in terms of managing reducing re-offending rates. Minutes of the reducing reoffending meeting in July 2014 recorded that two named staff had been tasked to analyse boys who had gone out to accommodation that was not settled and whether this had affected re-offending rates We saw examples of staff rigorously pursuing YOTs to obtain accommodation, escalating cases when necessary to advocates and legal advisers. Recommendation 4.42 Information obtained from the analysis of accommodation provision and reoffending rates should be used to improve service provision. HMYOI Werrington 55

58 Section 4. Resettlement Education, training and employment 4.43 The careers advice and guidance provided by The Manchester College was good. The careers adviser, the tutor responsible for ROTL, YOTs, establishment staff and community agencies worked effectively in partnership. They contributed significantly to the successful transition of boys into education, training and employment after release All boys received an initial interview and a clear action plan very soon after their arrival. Staff allocated boys to a programme which met their needs and reflected the agreed action plan, taking into account the length of their sentence. Each boy s progress was reviewed regularly and his action plan updated. Parents and caseworkers received detailed information about each boy s progress. ROTL was used well to improve the chances of boys progressing into education, training or employment. However, the prison s recent initiative to collect accurate data on boys destination on release revealed that, after three months, only half were in education, training or employment Each boy was offered a number of pre-release courses depending on his individual needs or requests. For example, within the last 12 months, 14 boys had requested a financial awareness course which the College then delivered. Each boy was supported to prepare a CV, and attended a course to prepare for employment interviews for ROTL or for release. The establishment had recently introduced an effective and popular independent living skills course for boys due for release. Health care 4.46 All boys were seen one to two days before discharge to identify any outstanding health needs and offer health promotion advice. YOT workers were contacted to help boys to register with a GP if required. Discharge letters were routinely sent to the boy s GP with details of current medication and immunisation history, although we saw examples of key information, such as significant health events or outstanding hospital appointments, not included. The local YOT nurse attended regularly to ensure effective through-the-gate care, which was commendable. Overall links with relevant community services were good CAMHS (child and adolescent mental health service) started discharge planning early and arranged appropriate community follow-up for boys with mental health issues. Housekeeping point 4.48 Discharge letters to GPs should include all key information, including hospital attendance, significant health events and outstanding hospital appointments. Drugs and alcohol 4.49 The young people s drug and alcohol support service had developed community and transition pathways to facilitate through care support. Representatives from the local community young people s drug and alcohol service attended drug strategy meetings, and good links had been established with community YOTs There was evidence of detailed transition and release plans. Boys received harm reduction information before release and caseworkers attended post-release reviews for boys when possible. 56 HMYOI Werrington

59 Section 4. Resettlement Finance, benefit and debt 4.51 Problems with finance, benefit and debt were identified at initial and subsequent training plan reviews and significant problems were referred to YOT workers. Some new initiatives were being implemented to address need A financial awareness course was one element of an independent living skills course being developed by The Manchester College. Seventeen boys had completed a money management course during the previous 12 months but this had ceased because of staff shortages Kinetic Youth Service had developed an Assessment and Qualifications Alliance achievement award in money management in association with Barclays Bank. Three boys had completed this. The next stage was to support boys to open bank accounts. In our survey, 31% of boys thought they would have a problem with money/finances on their release against 49% in Children, families and contact with the outside world 4.54 Boys were entitled to one visit a week on Wednesday, Friday, Saturday or Sunday afternoons. Remanded boys were allowed an unbooked visit within 72 hours of arrival. Boys on the enhanced level of the rewards and sanctions scheme were allowed an additional visit a month. Closed visits were very rare. Visit sessions were seldom over-subscribed Boys complained that visits often started late. Visits that we observed started promptly when the visitor arrived in good time. Information for visitors did not advise them to arrive early so that identity checks and searches could be undertaken before visit start times. Visitors were received in a small mobile visitors centre which was not very welcoming. The visits hall was shabby There was no visitors support group, although PACT provided a family engagement coordinator funded by the Barrow Cadbury Trust who provided very good support to boys and their families. She worked closely with local authorities and other agencies concerned with troubled families. At the time of the inspection, the coordinator was working closely with 16 boys and their families. She helped boys rebuild relationships with their families and continued to do this for three months after release to help to sustain stable relationships A range of family relationship and parenting courses were delivered. PACT ran eight Building Bridges courses each year, each attended by about four boys and one of their parents. Recommendations 4.58 Conditions in the visitors centre should be improved so that it provides a welcoming environment A visitors support group should be set up. Attitudes, thinking and behaviour 4.60 During the eight months before the inspection, 146 boys had attended a range of seven courses identified in the 2013 needs assessment as the most appropriate. Victim awareness and consequential thinking had each been attended by 93 boys. The courses were in the process of being validated by NOMS and the Youth Justice Board. HMYOI Werrington 57

60 Section 4. Resettlement 4.61 The course programmes were published in an interventions catalogue and circulated to YOTs. Staff awareness of programmes was promoted as part of staff induction. Boys suitability for courses was assessed by the interventions team within two weeks. Boys were allocated a programme worker and prioritised for courses according to risk and release date. Fifty-nine boys were on a waiting list for a course at the time of the inspection There had been a recent initiative to follow up boys who had completed courses to reinforce learning, but this was not yet embedded. 58 HMYOI Werrington

61 Section 5. Recommendations and housekeeping points Section 5. Recommendations and housekeeping points The following is a listing of recommendations, housekeeping points and examples of good practice included in this report. The reference numbers at the end of each refer to the paragraph location in the main report. Main recommendations To the Governor 5.1 Boys should have a regular opportunity to discuss with staff they trust their perceptions of safety and how they think safety could be improved. (S62) 5.2 The review of equality work should be sufficiently resourced to achieve improved outcomes for children. Support groups should be established for boys who belong to minority groups. (S63) Recommendations To NOMS Courts, escort and transfers 5.3 Vans should be clean and properly equipped. (1.5) 5.4 All relevant information about a boy should be available to the establishment before, or at the point of, his arrival. (1.6) Health services 5.5 There should be a national transfer pathway for boys who need admission to a prison establishment with inpatient facilities. (2.79) Time out of cell 5.6 All boys should receive 10 hours out of cell each day. (3.6) 5.7 Boys should have at least one hour outside each day. (3.7) Recommendations To the governor Courts, escort and transfers 5.8 The establishment should make use of the on-site videolink facilities. (1.4) Early days in custody 5.9 Where concerns are identified in the risk assessment management documentation, relevant action points should be developed, allocated to a member of staff and followed up. (1.12) HMYOI Werrington 59

62 Section 5. Recommendations and housekeeping points Care and protection of children and young people 5.10 Safeguarding should be embedded in the work of residential officers. (1.21) 5.11 The quality of ACCT documentation should be consistently good. (1.37) 5.12 While boys are subject to ACCT procedures, they should have a consistent personal officer or caseworker working alongside them. These key figures should help boys prepare for ACCT reviews and should form an integral part of the care plan. (1.38) Behaviour management 5.13 All rewards and sanctions scheme reviews should be fully documented and should take account of all the boy s circumstances. Clear individual targets should be set to help boys improve their behaviour. (1.47) 5.14 Staff from all departments should attend the security committee meeting to enable the development of appropriate strategic objectives. (1.59) 5.15 Closed visits should only be used following illicit behaviour related to visits.(1.60) 5.16 Pain infliction should not be applied to boys. (1.79) 5.17 All segregation unit staff should receive mental health training. (1.88) Substance misuse 5.18 The establishment should ensure that substance-related intelligence is acted on promptly. (1.96) Residential units 5.19 Cells designed for one should not accommodate two people. (2.10) 5.20 Children should not be locked together in showers. (2.11) 5.21 Wings and exercise yards should be decorated and equipped to reflect the needs of the population. (2.12) 5.22 Cell call bells should be answered promptly. (2.13) Relationships between staff and children and young people 5.23 Each boy should have a designated officer on their residential unit who is their central point of contact and support and takes responsibility for their day-to-day care and wellbeing through frequent contact and by attending relevant meetings relating to their care. (2.18) Health services 5.24 Specific child-focused skills and knowledge training, including mental health, should be available to nursing staff. (2.59) 60 HMYOI Werrington

63 Section 5. Recommendations and housekeeping points 5.25 All prison staff should have up-to-date basic life support skills, including use of automated defibrillators. (2.60) 5.26 All health staff should receive regular documented clinical supervision. (2.61) 5.27 An appropriate range of establishment specific policies and procedures should be ratified by a well attended medicines and therapeutics committee which meets regularly. (2.70) 5.28 Mental health awareness training, including learning disability, for prison staff should be prioritised to ensure they can support and manage children effectively. (2.77) 5.29 Boys should have access to speech and language therapy on site. (2.78) Catering 5.30 Boys should not be denied the opportunity to eat together as a sanction. (2.86) 5.31 All boys employed in the preparation and service of food should be appropriately qualified to do so. (2.87) Purchases 5.32 Goods ordered from the canteen list should be delivered when they arrive. (2.92) 5.33 There should be interim arrangements for boys arriving later in the week to purchase some goods. (2.93) Education, learning and skills 5.34 The procedure for observing lessons should be improved further so that observers record and make use of all the available evidence when assessing teachers performance and the quality of learning. (3.13) 5.35 More and better use should be made of learning technology in sessions to engage learners more fully. (3.24) 5.36 The virtual campus should be used to enhance job search opportunities for boys. (3.25) 5.37 The use of mathematics and English in vocational training should be promoted more strongly. (3.26) 5.38 The number and range of books for GCSE studies should be increased. (3.32) Physical education and healthy living 5.39 The outdoor field should be used more effectively to promote the health and fitness of boys. (3.39) 5.40 The showering facilities in the gym should be adequate for the population. (3.40) HMYOI Werrington 61

64 Section 5. Recommendations and housekeeping points Pre-release and resettlement 5.41 The reducing reoffending policy should describe how the establishment should meet the identified needs of specific groups of boys. (4.10) Training planning and remand management 5.42 Targets in training/remand plans should be based on identified need and should describe what they aim to achieve. (4.21) 5.43 Caseworkers should attend all post-release reviews in the community. (4.22) 5.44 Caseworkers should undertake planned formal casework meetings with boys outside of reviews. (4.23) Reintegration planning 5.45 Information obtained from the analysis of accommodation provision and re-offending rates should be used to improve service provision. (4.42) 5.46 Conditions in the visitors centre should be improved so that it provides a welcoming environment. (4.58) 5.47 A visitors support group should be set up. (4.59) Housekeeping points Behaviour management 5.48 The use of handcuffs should be kept under review by the use of force meeting. (1.80) 5.49 Debriefs should be prompt and should pay proper attention to the level of force used. (1.81) Substance misuse 5.50 The drug strategy policy should contain an annual development plan for drug and alcohol services. (1.97) Pre-release and resettlement 5.51 The needs analysis questionnaire should give boys the opportunity to comment on the quality of their experiences. (4.11) Training planning and remand management 5.52 Personal officers and staff from other departments should contribute to reviews. (4.24) 5.53 Caseworkers should be involved in all reviews, including ACCT and rewards and sanctions reviews. (4.25) 5.54 Attendance at risk management meetings should reflect the terms of reference. (4.28) 62 HMYOI Werrington

65 Section 5. Recommendations and housekeeping points 5.55 The on-site social workers should attend ACCT reviews(4.34) Reintegration planning 5.56 Discharge letters to GPs should include all key information, including hospital attendance, significant health events and outstanding hospital appointments. (4.48) HMYOI Werrington 63

66 Section 6 Appendix I: Inspection team 64 HMYOI Werrington

67 Section 6 Appendix I: Inspection team Section 6. Appendices Appendix I: Inspection team Ian MacFadyen Joss Crosbie Paul Fenning Deri Hughes-Roberts Angela Johnson Joe Simmonds Lucy Higgins Colette Daoud Specialist inspectors Sigrid Engelen Majella Pearce Sharon Monks Jai Sharda Steve Hailstone Shahram Safavi Team leader Inspector Inspector Inspector Inspector Researcher Researcher Research trainee Substance misuse inspector Health services inspector Pharmacist Ofsted inspector Ofsted inspector Ofsted inspector HMYOI Werrington 65

68 Section 6 Appendix II: Progress on recommendations from the last report 66 HMYOI Werrington

69 Section 6 Appendix II: Progress on recommendations from the last report Appendix II: Progress on recommendations from the last report The following is a summary of the main findings from the last report and a list of all the recommendations made, organised under the four tests of a healthy prison. The reference numbers at the end of each recommendation refer to the paragraph location in the previous report. If a recommendation has been repeated in the main report, its new paragraph number is provided here. Safety Children and young people, particularly the most vulnerable, are held safely. At the last inspection in 2013, young people were treated well on arrival and the new reception building was an excellent resource. The first night accommodation was very poor. Safeguarding arrangements were comprehensive and thorough. Vulnerable young people told us they were well looked after. Although levels of violence were high, the atmosphere in the establishment was discernibly less tense than we had found previously. Bullying was evident and more needed to be done to understand its scale and nature. The number of adjudications was extremely high. Use of force and separation were used proportionately. Treatment and conditions in the separation unit had improved. Support for young people with substance misuse problems was good. Outcomes for children and young people were reasonably good against this healthy prison test. Main recommendation The first night accommodation should be clean, adequately equipped and properly furnished. (S70) Achieved Recommendations All relevant information about a young person should be available to the establishment prior to or at the point of their arrival. (1.4) Not achieved (Recommendation repeated, 1.6) Initial risk assessments should include clear actions to address identified issues of concern. (1.11) Partially achieved Care maps and ACCT reviews should clearly indicate who is responsible for targets set and followup actions, including conducting regular discussions to ensure consistency. (1.31) Not achieved The reasons for young people s poor perceptions of the rewards and sanctions scheme should be investigated and action taken to ensure consistent and fair application of the scheme. (1.40) Partially achieved All rewards and sanctions scheme reviews should be fully documented and should take account of all the young person s circumstances. Clear individual targets should be set to help young people improve their behaviour. (1.41) Not achieved (Recommendation repeated, 1.48) HMYOI Werrington 67

70 Section 6 Appendix II: Progress on recommendations from the last report Demotion to basic level should be subject to a full review and should not be automatic. (1.42) Achieved Staff from all departments should attend the security committee meeting to enable the development of appropriate strategic objectives. (1.49) Partially achieved (Recommendation repeated, 1.60) Young people should not be strip-searched under restraint. (1.50) Achieved Closed visits should only be used following illicit behaviour related to visits. (1.51) Not achieved (Recommendation repeated, 1.61) The very high number of adjudications should be investigated and action taken to reduce them. (1.60) Partially achieved The incidence of bullying should be robustly monitored and the results should be used to measure the effectiveness of interventions. (1.69) Achieved Pain infliction should not be applied to young people. (1.76) Not achieved (Recommendation repeated, 1.81) All segregation unit staff should receive mental health training. (1.84) Not achieved (Recommendation repeated, 1.90) The security committee, attended by all appropriate departments, should establish and monitor the drug and alcohol strategy and action plans. (1.95) Achieved Respect Children and young people are treated with respect for their human dignity. At the last inspection in 2013, the living conditions were poor. Much of the residential accommodation was cramped, untidy, run down and gloomy. Many of the cells were in very poor condition. The quality of relationships had improved and staff had raised their expectations about how young people should behave. The personal officer scheme was ineffective. Young people from minority groups did not appear to be disadvantaged but consultation with them was weak and a more strategic approach was needed to the promotion of diversity. The complaints system had been improved and was now efficient. Health care provision was good and the chaplaincy provided good spiritual support but needed to extend their involvement. Although food was unpopular with young people, we found it to be good. Outcomes for children and young people were not sufficiently good against this healthy prison test. Main recommendation The residential accommodation should be clean, tidy and well maintained. (S71) Achieved 68 HMYOI Werrington

71 Section 6 Appendix II: Progress on recommendations from the last report Recommendations The wings should be decorated and maintained to reflect the population and cells should be maintained in good decorative condition. (2.10) Achieved Residential staff should ensure that young people keep their cells and communal areas clean by offering appropriate incentives and practical help where necessary. (2.11) Achieved Cells designed for one should not accommodate two young people. (2.12) Not achieved (Recommendation repeated, 2.10) Cell call bells should be answered promptly. (2.13) Partially achieved (Recommendation repeated, 2.13) Each young person should have a designated officer on their residential unit who is their central point of contact and support and takes responsibility for their day-to-day care and wellbeing through frequent contact and by attending relevant meetings relating to their care. (2.21) Not achieved (Recommendation repeated, 2.18) All electronic case notes should be comprehensive, with balanced comments reflecting positive and negative behaviour. (2.22) Not achieved (Recommendation repeated, 2.19) All aspects of equality and diversity should be promoted throughout the establishment. (2.29) Partially achieved Support groups should be established for young people who belong to minority groups (2.30) Not achieved (Recommendation repeated, 2.30) The establishment should ensure that the needs of young people from minority groups are addressed by actively promoting all aspects of diversity (2.37) Partially achieved Quality assurance of case work should be enhanced to ensure that young people receive consistent support with legal rights. (2.50) Achieved An up-to-date health needs assessment should address the health and well being needs of young people, including the need for wider access to speech and language therapy to support young people with communication and behavioural challenges. (2.64) Partially achieved All prison staff should have up-to-date basic life support skills, including use of automated defibrillators. (2.65) Partially achieved (Recommendation repeated, 2.63) Specific child-focused skills and knowledge training, including mental health, should be available to nursing staff. (2.66) Partially achieved (Recommendation repeated, 2.62) Young people who miss one or more doses of prescribed medicines and/or do not renew regular essential prescriptions should always be followed up to ensure their wellbeing. The medicines administration record should clearly show the reason for missed doses. (2.80) Achieved HMYOI Werrington 69

72 Section 6 Appendix II: Progress on recommendations from the last report Mental health awareness training, including learning disability, for prison staff should be prioritised to ensure they can support and manage young people effectively. (2.94) Partially achieved (Recommendation repeated, 2.80) Young people should be employed to prepare food so that they can achieve related qualifications. (2.101) Not achieved (recommendation repeated xx) All meals should be issued at the servery and eaten in association. (2.102) Not achieved Purposeful activity Children and young people are able, and expected, to engage in activity that is likely to benefit them. At the last inspection in 2013, most young people had reasonable time out of their cell, although at the weekend those on punishment were locked up most of the day. Scheduled exercise had very recently been put in place. Classroom attendance had improved significantly and the number of cancelled classes had reduced. Behaviour in class was good. There were sufficient activity places. Achievements were variable. Overall the Ofsted judgement was that the provision required improvement. Young people had sufficient access to the library and there were some good facilities in the PE department. Outcomes for children and young people were not sufficiently good against this healthy prison test. Recommendations All young people should receive 10 hours out of cell each day. (3.5) Not achieved (Recommendation repeated, 3.6) Young people should have at least one hour outside each day. (3.6) Not achieved (Recommendation repeated, 3.7) The number of cancelled classes should continue to be reduced. (3.11) Achieved The establishment-wide self-assessment process should be formalised and linked with the operational development plan to improve the monitoring of progress. (3.12) Achieved A wider range of vocational training courses should be provided, with a focus on the development of independent living skills. (3.16) Achieved Youth club activities should be improved to enhance the opportunities for young people s learning and personal development. (3.17) Achieved The opportunity for young people to gain work experience in the establishment should be reviewed and enhanced. (3.18) Partially achieved 70 HMYOI Werrington

73 Section 6 Appendix II: Progress on recommendations from the last report The quality of teaching and learning should be improved so that all young people are sufficiently challenged in their learning. (3.21) Achieved Spelling and grammatical errors in young people s written work should be corrected to reinforce their learning. (3.22) Partially achieved The recording of young people s progress in individual learning plans should be improved. (3.23) Achieved Courses with low success rates should be improved by providing young people with additional support so that retention rates are increased and more young people complete courses. (3.27) Achieved Further accredited courses should be introduced and their effectiveness monitored. (3.33) Achieved Resettlement Children and young people are effectively helped to prepare for their release back into the community and to reduce the likelihood of reoffending. At the last inspection in 2013, the management of resettlement remained good and the planning arrangements were sound. The role of caseworkers needed to be more integrated. Work relating to public protection and looked-after children was good. Finding suitable accommodation on release remained difficult but follow-up tracking had been introduced. There had been some improvements in the work carried out under the resettlement pathways but more needed to be done to reinforce the work carried out by the programmes team. Reasonable steps were taken to help young people maintain family links. Outcomes for children and young people were good against this healthy prison test. Main recommendation All staff who have direct contact with young people should be familiar with the programmes that young people participate in and ensure that, wherever possible, their own work reinforces the learning that takes place on these courses. (S69) Partially achieved Recommendations Programmes delivered by the establishment to address young people s offending should be independently evaluated to ensure that they meet need and are effective in changing behaviour. (4.53) Partially achieved Attendance at, and contributions to, training planning and remand management meetings should be monitored and the gaps addressed. (4.23) Not achieved Caseworkers should be offered regular professional supervision focused on developing their practice in work with young people. (4.24) Partially achieved HMYOI Werrington 71

74 Section 6 Appendix II: Progress on recommendations from the last report Quality assurance should be introduced to ensure consistent and effective practice in case work with young people. (4.25) Achieved Caseworkers should be involved, wherever possible, in all reviews of young people during their time in custody, including ACCT and rewards and sanctions reviews. (4.26) Not achieved The accommodation that sentenced and remanded young people are released to and its sustainability should be monitored and recorded. Data should be used to evaluate the needs of the population and ensure that appropriate accommodation is available for all young people. (4.34) Achieved Release on temporary licence should be used to coordinate vocational training in the establishment with work experience in the community. (4.36) Achieved Contacts with employers should be developed to ensure that vocational training in the establishment is focused on employment. (4.37) Achieved Job search facilities should be provided for young people. (4.38) Partially achieved The prison should identify visitors attending the establishment for the first time to offer support and advice before their visit. (4.49) Achieved 72 HMYOI Werrington

75 Section 6 Appendix III: Establishment population profile Appendix III: Establishment population profile Please note: the following figures were supplied by the establishment and any errors are the establishment s own. Population breakdown by: Status Number of young people % Sentenced Recall Convicted unsentenced Remand Detainees Total Age Number of young people % 15 years years years years Total Nationality Number of young people % British Foreign nationals Total Ethnicity Number of young people % White British Irish Gypsy/Irish Traveller Other white Mixed White and black Caribbean White and black African 1 1 White and Asian Other mixed Asian or Asian British Indian Pakistani Bangladeshi Chinese Other Asian 1 1 Black or black British Caribbean African Other black Other ethnic group Arab HMYOI Werrington 73

76 Section 6 Appendix III: Establishment population profile Other ethnic group Not stated Total Religion Number of young people % Baptist Church of England Roman Catholic Other Christian denominations Muslim Sikh Hindu Buddhist Jewish Other No religion Total Other demographics Number of young people % Gypsy/Romany/Traveller 0 0 Total 0 0 Sentenced only length of stay by age Length <1 mth yrs 2 yrs + 4 yrs + Total of stay mths mths mths Age 15 years years years years Total Unsentenced only length of stay by age Length <1 mth yrs 2 yrs+ 4 yrs + Total of stay mths mths mths Age 15 years years years years 1 1 Total Main offence Number of young people % Violence against the person Sexual offences Burglary Robbery Theft and handling Fraud and forgery Drugs offences Other offences Offence not recorded / holding warrant 0 Total HMYOI Werrington

77 Section 6 Appendix III: Establishment population profile Number of DTOs by age and full sentence length, including the time in the community Sentence 4 mths 6 mths 8 mths Recall Total mths mths mths mths Age 15 years years years years Total Number of Section 91s, (determinate sentences only) by age and length of sentence Sentence Under 2 yrs 2 3 yrs 3 4 yrs 4 5 yrs 5 yrs + Recall Total Age 15 years 16 years years years 1 1 Total Number of extended sentences under Section 228 (extended sentence for public protection) by age and full sentence length, including the time in the community Sentence Under 2 yrs 2 3 yrs 3 4 yrs 4 5 yrs 5 yrs + Recall Total Age 15 years 16 years 17 years 18 years Total Number of indeterminate sentences under Section 226 (detention for public protection) by age and length of tariff Sentence Under 2 yrs 2 5 yrs 5-10 yrs yrs yrs Recall Total Age 15 years 16 years 17 years 18 years Total Number of mandatory life sentences under Section 90 by age and length of tariff Sentence Under 2 yrs 2 5 yrs 5-10 yrs yrs yrs 20yrs + Total Age 15 years 16 years 17 years 18 years Total HMYOI Werrington 75

78 Section 6 Appendix IV: Summary of children and young people questionnaires and interviews 76 HMYOI Werrington

79 Section 6 Appendix IV: Summary of children and young people questionnaires and interviews Appendix IV: Summary of children and young people questionnaires and interviews Children and young people survey methodology A voluntary, confidential and anonymous survey of the population of young people (15 18 years) was carried out by HM Inspectorate of Prisons. Sampling Questionnaires were offered to all young people. Distributing and collecting questionnaires Every attempt was made to distribute the questionnaires to respondents individually. This gave researchers an opportunity to explain the purpose of the survey and to answer respondents questions. We also stressed the voluntary nature of the survey and provided assurances about confidentiality and the independence of the Inspectorate. This information is also provided in writing on the front cover of the questionnaire. Interviews were offered to any young person who could not read or write in English, or who had literacy difficulties. Respondents were not asked to put their names on their questionnaire, although their responses could be identified back to them in line with child protection requirements. In order to ensure confidentiality, respondents were asked to seal their completed questionnaire in the envelope provided and either hand it back to a member of the research team at a specified time or leave it in their room for collection. Refusals were noted and no attempts were made to replace them. Survey response At the time of the survey on 1 September 2014 the young person population at HMYOI Werrington was 107. Questionnaires were distributed to 104 young people 11. We received a total of 97 completed questionnaires, a response rate of 93%. This included three questionnaires completed via interview. Four respondents refused to complete a questionnaire, two questionnaires were not returned and one was returned blank. Wing/unit Number of completed survey returns A 42 B 37 C Surveys were not distributed to three young people, two of whom were at court, and one at hospital on the day of the survey. HMYOI Werrington 77

80 Section 6 Appendix IV: Summary of children and young people questionnaires and interviews Presentation of survey results and analyses Over the following pages we present the survey results for HMYOI Werrington. First a full breakdown of responses is provided for each question. In this full breakdown all percentages, including those for filtered questions, refer to the full sample. Percentages have been rounded and therefore may not add up to 100%. We also present a number of comparative analyses. In all the comparative analyses that follow, statistically significant 12 differences are indicated by shading. Results that are significantly better are indicated by green shading, results that are significantly worse are indicated by blue shading. If the difference is not statistically significant, there is no shading. Orange shading has been used to show a statistically significant difference in young people s background details. Filtered questions are clearly indented and preceded by an explanation of how the filter has been applied. Percentages for filtered questions refer to the number of respondents filtered to that question. For all other questions, percentages refer to the entire sample. All missing responses have been excluded from analyses. Percentages shown in the full breakdown may differ slightly from those shown in the comparative analyses. This is because the data have been weighted to enable valid statistical comparison between establishments. The following comparative analyses are presented: The current survey responses from HMYOI Werrington in 2014 compared with responses from young people surveyed in all other young offender institutions. This comparator is based on all responses from young people surveys carried out in s since April The current survey responses from HMYOI Werrington in 2014 compared with the responses of young people surveyed at HMYOI Werrington in A comparison within the 2014 survey between the responses of white young people and those from a black and minority ethnic group. A comparison within the 2014 survey between the responses of Muslim young people and non-muslim young people. A comparison within the 2014 survey between the responses of young people who consider themselves to have a disability and those who do not consider themselves to have a disability. A comparison within the 2014 survey between responses of young people who have been in local authority care and those who have not been in local authority care. 12 A statistically significant difference between the two samples is one that is unlikely to have arisen by chance alone, and can therefore be assumed to represent a real difference between the two populations. Our significance level is set at 0.05 which means that there is only a 5% likelihood that the difference is due to chance. 78 HMYOI Werrington

81 Section 6 Appendix IV: Summary of children and young people questionnaires and interviews Survey summary SECTION 1: ABOUT YOU Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 How old are you? (6%) (20%) (60%) (14%) Are you a British citizen? Yes (94%) No... 6 (6%) Do you understand spoken English? Yes (98%) No... 2 (2%) Do you understand written English? Yes (97%) No... 3 (3%) What is your ethnic origin? White - British (51%) White - Irish... 6 (6%) White - Other... 3 (3%) Black or Black British - Caribbean... 7 (8%) Black or Black British - African... 4 (4%) Black or Black British - Other... 1 (1%) Asian or Asian British - Indian... 0 (0%) Asian or Asian British - Pakistani... 8 (9%) Asian or Asian British - Bangladeshi... 2 (2%) Asian or Asian British - Chinese... 0 (0%) Asian or Asian British - Other... 1 (1%) Mixed race - White and Black Caribbean... 8 (9%) Mixed race - White and Black African... 1 (1%) Mixed race - White and Asian... 0 (0%) Mixed race - Other... 2 (2%) Arab... 2 (2%) Other ethnic group... 1 (1%) What is your religion? None (28%) Church of England (18%) Catholic (19%) Protestant... 0 (0%) Other Christian denomination (14%) Buddhist... 0 (0%) Hindu... 0 (0%) Jewish... 0 (0%) Muslim (21%) Sikh... 0 (0%) HMYOI Werrington 79

82 Section 6 Appendix IV: Summary of children and young people questionnaires and interviews Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Do you consider yourself to be Gypsy/Romany/Traveller? Yes... 8 (9%) No (88%) Don't know... 3 (3%) Do you have any children? Yes... 6 (6%) No (94%) Do you consider yourself to have a disability? (i.e. do you need help with any long-term physical, mental or learning needs.) Yes (12%) No (88%) Have you ever been in local authority care? Yes (36%) No (64%) SECTION 2: ABOUT YOUR SENTENCE Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Are you sentenced? Yes (81%) No - unsentenced/on remand (19%) How long is your sentence (the full DTO sentence)? Not sentenced (19%) Less than 6 months (13%) 6 to 12 months (23%) More than 12 months, up to 2 years (15%) More than 2 years (29%) Indeterminate sentence for public protection (IPP)... 1 (1%) How long have you been in this establishment? Less than 1 month (19%) 1 to 6 months (48%) More than 6 months, but less than 12 months (21%) 12 months to 2 years (12%) More than 2 years... 0 (0%) Is this your first time in custody in a YOI, secure children's home or secure training centre? Yes (61%) No (39%) SECTION 3: COURTS, TRANSFERS AND ESCORTS Q1 Q2 On your most recent journey here, did you feel safe? Yes (89%) No... 5 (5%) Don't remember... 6 (6%) On your most recent journey here, were there any adults (over 18) or a mix of males and females travelling with you? Yes (31%) No (52%) Don't remember (18%) 80 HMYOI Werrington

83 Section 6 Appendix IV: Summary of children and young people questionnaires and interviews Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 On your most recent journey here, how long did you spend in the van? Less than 2 hours (43%) 2 to 4 hours (41%) More than 4 hours... 4 (4%) Don't remember (12%) On your most recent journey here, were you offered a toilet break? My journey was less than 2 hours (43%) Yes... 8 (8%) No (41%) Don't remember... 7 (7%) On your most recent journey here, were you offered anything to eat or drink? My journey was less than 2 hours (43%) Yes (35%) No (19%) Don't remember... 3 (3%) On your most recent journey here, how did you feel you were treated by the escort staff? Very well (14%) Well (33%) Neither (34%) Badly... 5 (5%) Very badly... 5 (5%) Don't remember... 8 (8%) Before you arrived here, did you receive any information to help you prepare for coming here? Yes - and it was helpful (16%) Yes - but it was not helpful (14%) No - I received no information (56%) Don't remember (15%) SECTION 4: FIRST DAYS Q1 Q2 Q3 How long were you in reception? Less than 2 hours (69%) 2 hours or longer (19%) Don't remember (12%) When you were searched, was this carried out in a respectful way? Yes (81%) No... 6 (6%) Don't remember/not applicable (13%) How well did you feel you were treated in reception? Very well (35%) Well (47%) Neither (17%) Badly... 1 (1%) Very badly... 0 (0%) Don't remember... 0 (0%) HMYOI Werrington 81

84 Section 6 Appendix IV: Summary of children and young people questionnaires and interviews Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 When you first arrived here, did staff ask if you needed help or support with any of the following things? (Please tick all that apply to you.) Not being able to smoke (47%) Money worries (18%) Loss of property (16%) Feeling worried/upset/needing someone 24 (27%) to talk to... Feeling scared (23%) Health problems (48%) Gang problems (38%) Getting phone numbers (45%) Contacting family (58%) Staff did not ask me about any of these 13 (15%) When you first arrived here, did you have any of the following problems? (Please tick all that apply to you.) Not being able to smoke (40%) Money worries... 7 (8%) Loss of property... 7 (8%) Feeling worried/upset/needing someone 12 (13%) to talk to... Feeling scared... 5 (6%) Health problems... 8 (9%) Gang problems... 9 (10%) Getting phone numbers (25%) Contacting family (27%) I did not have any problems (37%) When you first arrived here, were you given any of the following? (Please tick all that apply to you.) Toiletries/basic items (88%) The opportunity to have a shower (65%) Something to eat (86%) A free phone call to friends/family (87%) PIN phone credit (62%) Information about feeling worried/upset (37%) Don't remember... 4 (4%) I was not given any of these... 0 (0%) Within your first 24 hours here, did you have access to the following people or services? (Please tick all that apply to you.) Chaplain (38%) Peer mentor (12%) Childline/Samaritans (12%) The prison shop/canteen (11%) Don't remember (24%) I did not have access to any of these (39%) Before you were locked up on your first night, were you seen by a doctor or nurse? Yes (84%) No (11%) Don't remember... 5 (5%) Did you feel safe on your first night here? Yes (82%) No (11%) Don't remember... 7 (8%) Did the induction course cover everything you needed to know about the establishment? I have not been on an induction course... 7 (8%) Yes (54%) No (21%) Don't remember (17%) 82 HMYOI Werrington

85 Section 6 Appendix IV: Summary of children and young people questionnaires and interviews SECTION 5: DAILY LIFE AND RESPECT Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Can you normally have a shower every day if you want to? Yes (73%) No (27%) Don't know... 0 (0%) Is your cell call bell normally answered within five minutes? Yes (32%) No (55%) Don't know (13%) What is the food like here? Very good... 3 (3%) Good... 8 (9%) Neither (43%) Bad (26%) Very bad (18%) Does the shop/canteen sell a wide enough variety of products? I have not bought anything yet/don't know... 6 (6%) Yes (46%) No (48%) How easy is it for you to attend religious services? I don't want to attend religious services (11%) Very easy (27%) Easy (37%) Neither... 8 (9%) Difficult... 5 (5%) Very difficult... 3 (3%) Don't know... 6 (7%) Are you religious beliefs respected? Yes (60%) No (14%) Don't know/not applicable (26%) Can you speak to a Chaplain of your faith in private if you want to? Yes (70%) No... 3 (3%) Don't know/not applicable (27%) Can you speak to a peer mentor when you need to? Yes (30%) No (15%) Don't know (56%) Can you speak to a member of the IMB (Independent Monitoring Board) when you need to? Yes (19%) No (17%) Don't know (64%) HMYOI Werrington 83

86 Section 6 Appendix IV: Summary of children and young people questionnaires and interviews Q10 Can you speak to an advocate (an outside person to help you) when you need to? Yes (40%) No (14%) Don't know (46%) SECTION 6: RELATIONSHIPS WITH STAFF Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Do most staff treat you with respect? Yes (69%) No (31%) If you had a problem, who would you turn to? (Please tick all that apply to you.) No-one (34%) Social worker... 8 (9%) Personal officer (20%) Health services staff... 5 (6%) Wing Officer (22%) Peer mentor... 1 (1%) Teacher/education staff... 6 (7%) Another young person here (18%) Gym staff... 5 (6%) Caseworker (24%) Chaplain (18%) Advocate... 4 (4%) Independent Monitoring Board 1 (1%) Family/friends (43%) (IMB)... YOT worker (17%) Childline/Samaritans... 1 (1%) Have staff checked on you personally in the last week to see how you are getting on? Yes (29%) No (71%) When did you first meet your personal (named) officer? I still have not met him/her (15%) In your first week (26%) After your first week (27%) Don't remember (32%) How often do you see your personal (named) officer? I still have not met him/her (16%) At least once a week (35%) Less than once a week (49%) Do you feel your personal (named) officer tries to help you? I still have not met him/her (16%) Yes (47%) No (37%) SECTION 7: APPLICATIONS AND COMPLAINTS Q1 Q2 Is it easy to make an application? Yes (73%) No (11%) Don't know (16%) Are applications sorted out fairly? I have not made an application (25%) Yes (49%) No (26%) 84 HMYOI Werrington

87 Section 6 Appendix IV: Summary of children and young people questionnaires and interviews Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Are applications sorted out quickly (within 7 days)? I have not made an application (25%) Yes (35%) No (40%) Is it easy to make a complaint? Yes (62%) No (11%) Don't know (27%) Are complaints sorted out fairly? I have not made a complaint (47%) Yes (16%) No (38%) Are complaints sorted out quickly (within 7 days)? I have not made a complaint (48%) Yes (18%) No (34%) Have you ever felt too scared or intimidated to make a complaint? Yes (11%) No (63%) Never needed to make a complaint (26%) SECTION 8: REWARDS AND SANCTIONS, AND DISCIPLINE Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 What level of the rewards and sanctions scheme are you on? Don't know what the rewards and sanctions scheme is... 1 (1%) Enhanced (top) (21%) Standard (middle) (60%) Basic (bottom) (14%) Don't know... 3 (3%) Have you been treated fairly in your experience of the rewards and sanctions scheme? Don't know what the rewards and sanctions scheme is... 1 (1%) Yes (42%) No (43%) Don't know (14%) Do the different levels of the rewards and sanctions scheme encourage you to change your behaviour? Don't know what the rewards and sanctions scheme is... 1 (1%) Yes (54%) No (36%) Don't know... 8 (9%) Have you had a minor report since you have been here? Yes (49%) No (38%) Don't know (14%) If you have had a minor report, was the process explained clearly to you? I have not had a minor report (52%) Yes (38%) No... 9 (10%) HMYOI Werrington 85

88 Section 6 Appendix IV: Summary of children and young people questionnaires and interviews Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Have you had an adjudication ('nicking') since you have been here? Yes (76%) No (21%) Don't know... 3 (3%) If you have had an adjudication ('nicking'), was the process explained clearly to you? I have not had an adjudication (24%) Yes (68%) No... 7 (8%) Have you been physically restrained (C and R) since you have been here? Yes (35%) No (58%) Don't know... 6 (7%) If you have spent a night in the care and separation unit (CSU), how were you treated by staff? I have not been to the care and separation unit (73%) Very well... 6 (7%) Well... 4 (4%) Neither... 9 (10%) Badly... 4 (4%) Very badly... 1 (1%) SECTION 9: SAFETY Q1 Q2 Q3 Have you ever felt unsafe here? Yes (43%) No (57%) Do you feel unsafe now? Yes (20%) No (80%) In which areas have you felt unsafe? (Please tick all that apply to you.) Never felt unsafe (59%) Everywhere... 9 (10%) Care and separation unit... 2 (2%) Association areas (17%) Reception area... 2 (2%) At the gym (23%) In an exercise yard (21%) At work... 9 (10%) At education (20%) At religious services... 6 (7%) At meal times (24%) At healthcare... 5 (6%) Visits area (14%) In wing showers (13%) In gym showers (13%) In corridors/stairwells (21%) On your landing/wing (22%) During movement (22%) In your cell... 9 (10%) 86 HMYOI Werrington

89 Section 6 Appendix IV: Summary of children and young people questionnaires and interviews Q4 Q5 Q7 Q8 Q10 Have you ever been victimised by another young person/group of young people here? (e.g. insulted or assaulted you) Yes (31%) No (69%) If yes, what did the incident(s) involve/what was it about? (Please tick all that apply to you.) Insulting remarks (about you, your family or friends) (13%) Physical abuse (being hit, kicked or assaulted) (14%) Sexual abuse... 1 (1%) Feeling threatened or intimidated (13%) Having your canteen/property taken... 5 (6%) Medication... 1 (1%) Debt... 2 (2%) Drugs... 0 (0%) Your race or ethnic origin... 2 (2%) Your religion/religious beliefs... 2 (2%) Your nationality... 3 (3%) You are from a different part of the country to others... 2 (2%) You are from a Traveller community... 2 (2%) Your sexuality... 0 (0%) Your age... 1 (1%) You having a disability... 1 (1%) You were new here... 7 (8%) Your offence/crime... 1 (1%) Gang related issues... 5 (6%) Have you ever been victimised by staff here? (e.g. insulted or assaulted you) Yes (29%) No (71%) If yes, what did the incident(s) involve/what was it about? (Please tick all that apply to you.) Insulting remarks (about you, your family or friends) (12%) Physical abuse (being hit, kicked or assaulted)... 4 (5%) Sexual abuse... 1 (1%) Feeling threatened or intimidated... 6 (7%) Having your canteen/property taken... 1 (1%) Medication... 0 (0%) Debt... 0 (0%) Drugs... 0 (0%) Your race or ethnic origin... 3 (4%) Your religion/religious beliefs... 3 (4%) Your nationality... 2 (2%) You are from a different part of the country to others... 0 (0%) You are from a Traveller community... 0 (0%) Your sexuality... 1 (1%) Your age... 1 (1%) You having a disability... 0 (0%) You were new here... 2 (2%) Your offence/crime... 0 (0%) Gang related issues... 0 (0%) Because you made a complaint... 5 (6%) If you were being victimised, would you tell a member of staff? Yes (29%) No (48%) Don't know (23%) HMYOI Werrington 87

90 Section 6 Appendix IV: Summary of children and young people questionnaires and interviews Q11 Q12 Do you think staff would take it seriously if you told them you had been victimised? Yes (27%) No (34%) Don't know (40%) Is shouting through the windows a problem here? Yes (44%) No (41%) Don't know (15%) SECTION 10: HEALTH SERVICES Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Is it easy to see the following people if you need to? Yes No Don't know The doctor (58%) 23 (26%) 14 (16%) The nurse (78%) 11 (13%) 8 (9%) The dentist (38%) 34 (39%) 20 (23%) What do you think of the overall quality of the health services here? I have not been... 3 (3%) Very good (13%) Good (48%) Neither (24%) Bad... 7 (8%) Very bad... 3 (3%) If you are taking medication, are you allowed to keep some/all of it in your room? I am not taking any medication (53%) Yes, all of my meds (12%) Yes, some of my meds (20%) No (15%) Do you have any emotional or mental health problems? Yes (17%) No (83%) Are you being helped by anyone here with your emotional or mental health problems? (e.g. a psychologist, doctor, counsellor, personal officer or another member of staff) I do not have any emotional or mental health problems (84%) Yes... 9 (10%) No... 5 (6%) Did you have problems with alcohol when you first arrived here? Yes... 4 (5%) No (95%) Have you received any help with alcohol problems here? Yes... 6 (7%) No (93%) Did you have problems with drugs when you first arrived here? Yes (37%) No (63%) Do you have problems with drugs now? Yes... 7 (8%) No (92%) 88 HMYOI Werrington

91 Section 6 Appendix IV: Summary of children and young people questionnaires and interviews Q10 Q11 Have you received any help with drugs problems here? Yes (34%) No (66%) How easy or difficult is it to get illegal drugs here? Very easy (14%) Easy... 7 (8%) Neither... 7 (8%) Difficult... 7 (8%) Very difficult (14%) Don't know (46%) SECTION 11: ACTIVITIES Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 How old were you when you were last at school? 14 or under (48%) 15 or over (52%) Have you ever been excluded from school? Yes (76%) No (16%) Not applicable... 6 (7%) Did you ever skip school before you came into custody? Yes (70%) No (19%) Not applicable... 9 (11%) Do you CURRENTLY take part in any of the following activities? (Please tick all that apply to you.) Education (80%) A job in this establishment (32%) Vocational or skills training (11%) Offending behaviour programmes (26%) I am not currently involved in any of these (14%) If you have been involved in any of the following activities here, do you think they will help you when you leave prison? Not been involved Yes No Don't know Education 3 (4%) 58 (68%) 13 (15%) 11 (13%) A job in this establishment 14 (18%) 32 (42%) 15 (20%) 15 (20%) Vocational or skills training 17 (25%) 26 (38%) 9 (13%) 17 (25%) Offending behaviour programmes 16 (22%) 28 (39%) 12 (17%) 16 (22%) Do you usually have association every day? Yes (35%) No (65%) Can you usually go outside for exercise every day? Don't want to go... 7 (8%) Yes (27%) No (65%) HMYOI Werrington 89

92 Section 6 Appendix IV: Summary of children and young people questionnaires and interviews Q8 How many times do you usually go to the gym each week? Don't want to go (13%) None... 5 (6%) One to two times (52%) Three to five times (24%) More than five times... 4 (5%) SECTION 12: FAMILY AND FRIENDS Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Are you able to use the telephone every day, if you want to? Yes (65%) No (34%) Don't know... 1 (1%) Have you had any problems with sending or receiving mail (letters or parcels)? Yes (36%) No (57%) Don't know... 6 (7%) How many visits do you usually have each week, from family or friends? I don't get visits (23%) Less than one a week (19%) About one a week (40%) More than one a week... 5 (5%) Don't know (13%) How easy is it for your family and friends to visit you here? I don't get visits (24%) Very easy... 8 (9%) Easy (27%) Neither (17%) Difficult (14%) Very difficult... 6 (7%) Don't know... 2 (2%) Do your visits usually start on time? I don't get visits (25%) Yes (38%) No (29%) Don't know... 7 (8%) SECTION 13: PREPARATION FOR RELEASE Q1 Do you think you will have a problem with any of the following things, when you are released? (Please tick all that apply to you.) Finding accommodation (21%) Getting into school or college (27%) Getting a job (57%) Money/finances (30%) Claiming benefits (16%) Continuing health services... 6 (7%) Opening a bank account (19%) Avoiding bad relationships (15%) I won't have any problems (36%) 90 HMYOI Werrington

93 Section 6 Appendix IV: Summary of children and young people questionnaires and interviews Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Do you have a training plan, sentence plan or remand plan? (i.e. a plan that is discussed in your DTO/planning meetings, which sets out your targets) Yes (44%) No (20%) Don't know (36%) Were you involved in the development of your plan? I don't have a plan/don't know if I have a plan (57%) Yes (36%) No... 6 (7%) Do you understand the targets that have been set in your plan? I don't have a plan/don't know if I have a plan (60%) Yes (39%) No... 1 (1%) Do you have a caseworker here? Yes (92%) No... 3 (4%) Don't know... 4 (5%) Has your caseworker helped to prepare you for release? I don't have a caseworker... 7 (8%) Yes (45%) No (30%) Don't know (17%) Has your social worker been to visit you since you have been here? I don't have a social worker (42%) Yes (38%) No (20%) Have you had a say in what will happen to you when you are released? Yes (42%) No (36%) Don't know (22%) Do you know who to contact for help with any of the following problems, before your release? (Please tick all that apply to you.) Finding accommodation (19%) Getting into school or college (20%) Getting a job (24%) Help with money/finances (18%) Help with claiming benefits (16%) Continuing health services... 8 (11%) Opening a bank account (14%) Avoiding bad relationships (14%) I don't know who to contact (64%) HMYOI Werrington 91

94 Section 6 Appendix IV: Summary of children and young people questionnaires and interviews Q10 Q11 What is most likely to stop you offending in the future? (Please tick all that apply to you.) Not sentenced (20%) Having a mentor (someone you can ask 6 (7%) for advice)... Nothing, it is up to me (30%) Having a YOT worker or social worker 14 (16%) that I get on with... Making new friends outside (13%) Having children (14%) Going back to live with my family (26%) Having something to do that isn't crime 29 (32%)... Getting a place of my own (21%) This sentence (23%) Getting a job (44%) Getting into school/college (26%) Having a partner (girlfriend or 27 (30%) Talking about my offending behaviour 2 (2%) boyfriend)... with staff... Staying off alcohol/drugs (20%) Anything else... 2 (2%) Do you want to stop offending? Not sentenced (20%) Yes (74%) No... 3 (3%) Don't know... 3 (3%) Q12 Have you done anything, or has anything happened to you here, that you think will make you less likely to offend in the future? Not sentenced (20%) Yes (43%) No (37%) 92 HMYOI Werrington

95 Comparison with young people's comparator and previous survey results. Survey responses from children and young people: HMYOI Werrington 2014 Survey responses (missing data have been excluded for each question). Please note: where there are apparently large differences, which are not indicated as statistically significant, this is likely to be due to chance. NB: This document shows a comparison between the responses from all young people surveyed in this establishment with all young people surveyed for the comparator. Key to tables Any percentage highlighted in green is significantly better Any percentage highlighted in blue is significantly worse Any percentage highlighted in orange shows a significant difference in young people's background details Percentages which are not highlighted show there is no significant difference HMYOI Werrington 2014 Young people's comparator HMYOI Werrington 2014 HMYOI Werrington 2013 Number of completed questionnaires returned SECTION 1: ABOUT YOU 1.1 Are you 18 years of age? 14% 13% 14% 9% 1.2 Are you a foreign national? 7% 4% 7% 3% 1.3 Do you understand spoken English? 98% 99% 98% 98% 1.4 Do you understand written English? 97% 99% 97% 98% Are you from a minority ethnic group? (Including all those who did not tick white % 38% 40% 49% British, white Irish or white other category. 1.6 Are you Muslim? 21% 20% 21% 27% 1.7 Do you consider yourself to be Gypsy/Romany/Traveller? 9% 6% 9% 6% 1.8 Do you have any children? 7% 12% 7% 14% 1.9 Do you consider yourself to have a disability? 12% 19% 12% 16% 1.10 Have you ever been in local authority care? 36% 36% 36% 32% SECTION 2: ABOUT YOUR SENTENCE 2.1 Are you sentenced? 81% 77% 81% 77% 2.2 Is your sentence 12 months or less? 36% 38% 36% 34% 2.3 Have you been in this establishment for one month or less? 19% 16% 19% 21% 2.4 Is this your first time in custody in a YOI, secure children's home or secure training centre? SECTION 3: COURTS, TRANSFERS AND ESCORTS On your most recent journey here: 61% 54% 61% 60% 3.1 Did you feel safe? 89% 86% 89% 76% 3.2 Did you travel with any adults (over 18) or a mix of males and females? 31% 37% 31% 35% 3.3 Did you spend more than 4 hours in the van? 4% 7% 4% 7% For those who spent 2 or more hours in the escort van: 3.4 Were you offered a toilet break if you needed it? 15% 17% 15% 13% 3.5 Were you offered anything to eat or drink? 62% 38% 62% 63% 3.6 Were you treated well/very well by the escort staff? 47% 54% 47% 52% 3.7 Before you arrived, did you receive any helpful information to help you prepare for coming here? 16% 16% 16% 14% Page 1 of 7

96 Comparison with young people's comparator and previous survey results. Key to tables Any percentage highlighted in green is significantly better Any percentage highlighted in blue is significantly worse Any percentage highlighted in orange shows a significant difference in young people's background details Percentages which are not highlighted show there is no significant difference HMYOI Werrington 2014 Young people's comparator HMYOI Werrington 2014 HMYOI Werrington 2013 Number of completed questionnaires returned SECTION 4: YOUR FIRST FEW DAYS HERE 4.1 Were you in reception for less than 2 hours? 70% 85% 70% 65% 4.2 When you were searched, was this carried out in a respectful way? 81% 82% 81% 74% 4.3 Were you treated well/very well in reception? 82% 65% 82% 80% When you first arrived, did staff ask if you needed help or support with any of the following: 4.4a Not being able to smoke? 46% 51% 46% 53% 4.4b Loss of property? 16% 19% 16% 21% 4.4c Feeling scared? 23% 27% 23% 30% 4.4d Gang problems? 37% 46% 37% 53% 4.4e Contacting family? 58% 52% 58% 68% 4.4f Money worries? 19% 15% 19% 28% 4.4g Feeling worried/upset/needing someone to talk to? 27% 33% 27% 34% 4.4h Health problems? 47% 53% 47% 68% 4.4i Getting phone numbers? 45% 37% 45% 58% 4.5 Did you have any problems when you first arrived? 63% 75% 63% 71% When you first arrived, did you have problems with any of the following: 4.5a Not being able to smoke? 41% 45% 41% 49% 4.5b Loss of property? 8% 12% 8% 11% 4.5c Feeling scared? 6% 9% 6% 14% 4.5d Gang problems? 10% 15% 10% 16% 4.5e Contacting family? 27% 29% 27% 32% 4.5f Money worries? 8% 14% 8% 15% 4.5g Feeling worried/upset/needing someone to talk to? 13% 9% 13% 14% 4.5h Health problems? 9% 13% 9% 9% 4.5i Getting phone numbers? 25% 28% 25% 23% When you first arrived, were you given any of the following: 4.6a Toiletries/basic items? 88% 78% 88% 81% 4.6b The opportunity to have a shower? 65% 48% 65% 45% 4.6c Something to eat? 86% 83% 86% 81% 4.6d A free phone call to friends/family? 87% 80% 87% 80% 4.6e PIN phone credit? 62% 61% 62% 52% 4.6f Information about feeling worried/upset? 36% 33% 36% 25% Within your first 24 hours, did you have access to the following people or services: 4.7a A chaplain? 37% 50% 37% 37% Page 2 of 7

97 Comparison with young people's comparator and previous survey results. Key to tables Any percentage highlighted in green is significantly better Any percentage highlighted in blue is significantly worse Any percentage highlighted in orange shows a significant difference in young people's background details Percentages which are not highlighted show there is no significant difference HMYOI Werrington 2014 Young people's comparator HMYOI Werrington 2014 HMYOI Werrington 2013 Number of completed questionnaires returned b A peer mentor? 12% 14% 12% 15% 4.7c Childline/Samaritans 12% 20% 12% 11% 4.7d The prison shop/canteen? 11% 12% 11% 13% 4.8 Before you were locked up on your first night, were you seen by a doctor or nurse? 83% 65% 83% 78% 4.9 Did you feel safe on your first night here? 82% 80% 82% 76% 4.10 For those who have been on an induction course: did it cover everything you needed to know about the establishment SECTION 5: DAILY LIFE AND RESPECT 59% 62% 59% 55% 5.1 Can you normally have a shower every day if you want to? 74% 83% 74% 72% 5.2 Is your cell call bell normally answered within five minutes? 32% 37% 32% 26% 5.3 Do you find the food here good/very good? 12% 17% 12% 14% 5.4 Does the shop/canteen sell a wide enough variety of products? 46% 52% 46% 45% 5.5 Is it easy/very easy for you to attend religious services? 65% 54% 65% 73% 5.6 Do you feel your religious beliefs are respected? 60% 57% 60% 73% Can you speak to: 5.7 A chaplain of your faith in private? 70% 71% 70% 71% 5.8 A peer mentor? 30% 34% 30% 36% 5.9 A member of the IMB (Independent Monitoring Board)? 19% 27% 19% 16% 5.10 An advocate (an outside person to help you)? 40% 48% 40% 47% SECTION 6: RELATIONSHIPS WITH STAFF 6.1 Do most staff treat you with respect? 69% 70% 69% 74% 6.2 If you had a problem, would you have no-one to turn to? 34% 24% 34% 23% 6.3 Have staff checked on you personally in the last week to see how you are getting on? For those who have met their personal officer: 29% 39% 29% 38% 6.4 Did you meet your personal (named) officer within the first week? 31% 42% 31% 47% 6.5 Do you see your personal (named) officer at least once a week? 42% 58% 42% 49% 6.6 Do you feel your personal (named) officer tries to help you? 56% 67% 56% 78% SECTION 7: APPLICATIONS AND COMPLAINTS 7.1 Is it easy to make an application? 72% 79% 72% 74% For those who have made an application: 7.2 Do you feel applications are sorted out fairly? 65% 71% 65% 71% 7.3 Do you feel applications are sorted out quickly (within 7 days)? 47% 59% 47% 59% 7.4 Is it easy to make a complaint? 61% 59% 61% 52% Page 3 of 7

98 Comparison with young people's comparator and previous survey results. Key to tables Any percentage highlighted in green is significantly better Any percentage highlighted in blue is significantly worse Any percentage highlighted in orange shows a significant difference in young people's background details Percentages which are not highlighted show there is no significant difference HMYOI Werrington 2014 Young people's comparator HMYOI Werrington 2014 HMYOI Werrington 2013 Number of completed questionnaires returned For those who have made a complaint: 7.5 Do you feel complaints are sorted out fairly? 29% 45% 29% 33% 7.6 Do you feel complaints are sorted out quickly (within 7 days)? 35% 42% 35% 21% 7.7 Have you ever felt too scared or intimidated to make a complaint? 11% 9% 11% 7% SECTION 8: REWARDS AND SANCTIONS, AND DISCIPLINE 8.1 Are you on the enhanced (top) level of the reward scheme? 21% 27% 21% 28% 8.2 Have you been treated fairly in your experience of the reward scheme? 42% 51% 42% 45% 8.3 Do the different levels make you change your behaviour? 54% 48% 54% 52% 8.4 Have you had a minor report since you have been here? 49% 51% 49% 55% For those who have had a minor report: 8.5 Was the process explained clearly to you? 78% 81% 78% 76% 8.6 Have you had an adjudication ('nicking') since you have been here? 76% 64% 76% 69% For those who have had an adjudication ('nicking'): 8.7 Was the process explained clearly to you? 89% 85% 89% 87% 8.8 Have you been physically restrained (Cand R) since you have been here? 35% 41% 35% 37% 8.9 SECTION 9: SAFETY For those who had spent a night in the care and separation unit: did the staff treat you well/very well? 42% 43% 42% 36% 9.1 Have you ever felt unsafe here? 43% 27% 43% 31% 9.2 Do you feel unsafe now? 21% 8% 21% 14% 9.4 Have you ever been victimised by other young people here? 31% 21% 31% 21% Since you have been here, have other young people: 9.5a Made insulting remarks about you, your family or friends? 13% 12% 13% 6% 9.5b Hit, kicked or assaulted you? 14% 6% 14% 10% 9.5c Sexually abused you? 1% 0% 1% 0% 9.5d Threatened or intimidated you? 13% 7% 13% 7% 9.5e Taken your canteen/property? 6% 2% 6% 4% 9.5f Victimised you because of medication? 1% 0% 1% 0% 9.5g Victimised you because of debt? 2% 1% 2% 2% 9.5h Victimised you because of drugs? 0% 2% 0% 0% 9.5i Victimised you because of your race or ethnic origin? 2% 2% 2% 2% 9.5j Victimised you because of your religion/religious beliefs? 2% 1% 2% 0% 9.5k Victimised you because of your nationality? 3% 1% 3% 4% 9.5l Victimised you because you were from a different part of the country? 2% 3% 2% 1% 9.5m Victimised you because you are from a Traveller community? 2% 0% 2% 0% Page 4 of 7

99 Comparison with young people's comparator and previous survey results. Key to tables Any percentage highlighted in green is significantly better Any percentage highlighted in blue is significantly worse Any percentage highlighted in orange shows a significant difference in young people's background details Percentages which are not highlighted show there is no significant difference HMYOI Werrington 2014 Young people's comparator HMYOI Werrington 2014 HMYOI Werrington 2013 Number of completed questionnaires returned n Victimised you because of your sexual orientation? 0% 1% 0% 0% 9.5o Victimised you because of your age? 1% 0% 1% 0% 9.5p Victimised you because you have a disability? 1% 1% 1% 0% 9.5q Victimised you because you were new here? 8% 5% 8% 4% 9.5r Victimised you because of your offence/crime? 1% 2% 1% 0% 9.5s Victimised you because of gang related issues? 6% 4% 6% 6% 9.7 Have you ever been victimised by a member of staff here? 30% 25% 30% 17% Since you have been here, have staff: 9.8a Made insulting remarks about you, your family or friends? 12% 14% 12% 5% 9.8b Hit, kicked or assaulted you? 4% 5% 4% 1% 9.8c Sexually abused you? 1% 0% 1% 2% 9.8d Threatened or intimidated you? 7% 5% 7% 4% 9.8e Taken your canteen/property? 1% 3% 1% 2% 9.8f Victimised you because of medication? 0% 1% 0% 0% 9.8g Victimised you because of debt? 0% 0% 0% 0% 9.8h Victimised you because of drugs? 0% 1% 0% 0% 9.8i Victimised you because of your race or ethnic origin? 3% 3% 3% 4% 9.8j Victimised you because of your religion/religious beliefs? 3% 3% 3% 0% 9.8k Victimised you because of your nationality? 2% 2% 2% 1% 9.8k Victimised you because you were from a different part of the country? 0% 2% 0% 1% 9.8m Victimised you because you are from a Traveller community? 0% 1% 0% 0% 9.8n Victimised you because of your sexual orientation? 1% 0% 1% 0% 9.8o Victimised you because of your age? 1% 1% 1% 1% 9.8p Victimised you because you have a disability? 0% 1% 0% 1% 9.8q Victimised you because you were new here? 2% 2% 2% 4% 9.8r Victimised you because of your offence/crime? 0% 2% 0% 1% 9.8s Victimised you because of gang related issues? 0% 1% 0% 0% 9.8t Victimised you because you made a complaint? 6% 5% 6% 5% 9.10 If you were being victimised, would you tell a member of staff? 29% 26% 29% 31% 9.11 Do you think staff would take it seriously if you told them you had been victimised? 27% 31% 27% 31% 9.12 Is shouting through the windows a problem here? 44% 34% 44% 33% SECTION 10: HEALTH SERVICES 10.1a Is it easy for you to see the doctor? 58% 56% 58% 66% Page 5 of 7

100 Key to tables Comparison with young people's comparator and previous survey results. Any percentage highlighted in green is significantly better Any percentage highlighted in blue is significantly worse Any percentage highlighted in orange shows a significant difference in young people's background details Percentages which are not highlighted show there is no significant difference HMYOI Werrington 2014 Young people's comparator HMYOI Werrington 2014 HMYOI Werrington 2013 Number of completed questionnaires returned b Is it easy for you to see the nurse? 78% 67% 78% 75% 10.1c Is it easy for you to see the dentist? 38% 38% 38% 31% 10.2 For those who have been to health services: Do you think the overall quali is good/very good? 64% 52% 64% 65% 10.3 If you are taking medication, are you allowed to keep some/all of it in you cell? 68% 53% 68% 60% 10.4 Do you have any emotional or mental health problems? 18% 22% 18% 25% 10.5 If you have emotional or mental health problems, are you being helped b anyone here? 63% 68% 63% 64% 10.6 Did you have any problems with alcohol when you first arrived? 4% 8% 4% 11% 10.7 Have you received any help with any alcohol problems here? 7% 4% 7% 6% 10.8 Did you have any problems with drugs when you first arrived? 37% 38% 37% 30% 10.9 Do you have a problem with drugs now? 8% 8% 8% 5% Have you received any help with any drug problems here? 34% 24% 34% 16% Is it easy/very easy to get illegal drugs here? 23% 16% 23% 11% SECTION 11: ACTIVITIES 11.1 Were you 14 or younger when you were last at school? 48% 40% 48% 30% 11.2 Have you ever been excluded from school? 77% 88% 77% 93% 11.3 Did you ever skip school before you came into custody? 70% 77% 70% 75% Do you currently take part in any of the following: 11.4a Education? 80% 76% 80% 73% 11.4b A job in this establishment? 32% 31% 32% 31% 11.4c Vocational or skills training? 12% 16% 12% 18% 11.4d Offending behaviour programmes? 26% 18% 26% 25% 11.4e Nothing 14% 13% 14% 18% For those who have taken part in the following activities while in this establishment, do you think that they will help you when you leave prison: 11.5a Education? 71% 64% 71% 66% 11.5b A job in this establishment? 52% 51% 52% 53% 11.5c Vocational or skills training? 50% 50% 50% 54% 11.5d Offending behaviour programmes? 50% 52% 50% 53% 11.6 Do you usually have association every day? 34% 66% 34% 77% 11.7 Can you usually go outside for exercise every day? 27% 65% 27% 6% 11.8 Do you go to the gym more than five times each week? 4% 16% 4% 1% SECTION 12: KEEPING IN TOUCH WITH FAMILY AND FRIENDS 12.1 Are you able to use the telephone every day? 65% 83% 65% 74% 12.2 Have you had any problems with sending or receiving letters or parcels? 35% 40% 35% 36% 12.3 Do you usually have one or more visits per week from family and friends? 45% 40% 45% 34% Page 6 of 7

101 Comparison with young people's comparator and previous survey results. Key to tables Any percentage highlighted in green is significantly better Any percentage highlighted in blue is significantly worse Any percentage highlighted in orange shows a significant difference in young people's background details Percentages which are not highlighted show there is no significant difference HMYOI Werrington 2014 Young people's comparator HMYOI Werrington 2014 HMYOI Werrington 2013 Number of completed questionnaires returned Is it easy/very easy for your family and friends to visit you here? 36% 35% 36% 28% 12.5 Do your visits start on time? 38% 42% 38% 35% SECTION 13: PREPARATION FOR RELEASE Do you think you will have a problem with the following, when you are released: 13.1a Finding accommodation? 21% 25% 21% 27% 13.1b Getting into school or college? 27% 31% 27% 26% 13.1c Getting a job? 57% 53% 57% 53% 13.1d Money/finances? 31% 36% 31% 49% 13.1e Claiming benefits? 16% 17% 16% 27% 13.1f Continuing health services? 7% 7% 7% 9% 13.1g Opening a bank account? 19% 13% 19% 21% 13.1h Avoiding bad relationships? 15% 16% 15% 15% 13.2 Do you have a training plan, sentence plan or remand plan? 44% 49% 44% 40% For those with a training plan, sentence plan or remand plan: 13.3 Were you involved in the development of your plan? 83% 83% 83% 83% 13.4 Do you understand the targets set in your plan? 97% 94% 97% 97% 13.5 Do you have a caseworker here? 92% 86% 92% 85% 13.6 Has your caseworker helped to prepare you for release? 49% 49% 49% 38% For those with a social worker: 13.7 Has your social worker been to visit you since you have been here? 65% 72% 65% 63% 13.8 Have you had a say in what will happen to you when you are released? 42% 41% 42% 34% Do you know who to contact for help with the following problems? 13.9a Finding accommodation 19% 31% 19% 19% 13.9b Getting into school or college 21% 31% 21% 23% 13.9c Getting a job 24% 34% 24% 27% 13.9d Help with money/finances 17% 23% 17% 21% 13.9e Help with claiming benefits 16% 17% 16% 14% 13.9f Continuing health services 11% 14% 11% 11% 13.9g Opening a bank account 14% 18% 14% 12% 13.9h Avoiding bad relationships 14% 16% 14% 12% For those who were sentenced: Do you want to stop offending? 91% 93% 91% 83% Have you done anything or has anything happened to you here that you think will make you less likely to offend in the future 54% 50% 54% 47% Page 7 of 7

102

103 Diversity analysis Key question responses (ethnicity, religion) HMYOI Werrington 2014 Survey responses (missing data have been excluded for each question). Please note: where there are apparently large differences, which are not indicated as statistically significant, this is likely to be due to chance. Key to tables Any percentage highlighted in green is significantly better Any percentage highlighted in blue is significantly worse Any percentage highlighted in orange shows a significant difference in young people's background details Percentages which are not highlighted show there is no significant difference Black and minority ethnic young people White young people Muslim young people Non-Muslim young people Number of completed questionnaires returned Are you a foreign national? 8% 3% 9% 5% 1.3 Do you understand spoken English? 100% 100% 100% 98% 1.4 Do you understand written English? 100% 98% 96% 98% 1.5 Are you from a minority ethnic group? (Including all those who did not tick white British, white Irish or white other categories.) 86% 29% 1.6 Are you Muslim? 44% 5% 1.5 Do you consider yourself to be Gypsy/ Romany/ Traveller? 0% 15% 5% 9% 1.9 Do you consider yourself to have a disability? 8% 15% 5% 12% 1.10 Have you ever been in local authority care? 25% 43% 33% 38% 2.1 Are you sentenced? 75% 85% 86% 79% 2.4 Is this your first time in custody in a YOI, secure children's home or secure training centre? 65% 58% 64% 61% 3.2 Did you travel with any adults (over 18) or a mix of males and females? 29% 31% 41% 28% 3.6 Were you treated well/very well by the escort staff? 43% 52% 43% 47% 3.7 Before you arrived, did you receive any helpful information to help you prepare coming here? 5% 23% 9% 17% 4.2 When you were searched, was this carried out in a respectful way? 73% 89% 82% 84% 4.3 Were you treated well/very well in reception? 81% 84% 86% 82% 4.8 Before you were locked up on your first night, were you seen by a doctor or nurse? 73% 93% 74% 86% 4.9 Did you feel safe on your first night here? 83% 81% 86% 82% 5.1 Can you normally have a shower every day if you want to? 73% 73% 68% 74% 5.2 Is your cell call bell normally answered within five minutes? 18% 43% 26% 34% 5.3 Do you find the food here good/very good? 5% 17% 5% 13% 5.4 Does the shop/canteen sell a wide enough variety of products? 33% 52% 26% 51% 5.6 Do you feel your religious beliefs are respected? 70% 53% 91% 51% Page 1 of 3

104 Diversity analysis Key to tables Any percentage highlighted in green is significantly better Any percentage highlighted in blue is significantly worse Any percentage highlighted in orange shows a significant difference in young people's background details Percentages which are not highlighted show there is no significant difference Black and minority ethnic young people White young people Muslim young people Non-Muslim young people Number of completed questionnaires returned Can you speak to: 5.7 A chaplain of your faith in private? 73% 68% 86% 65% 5.8 A peer mentor? 28% 30% 35% 29% 5.9 A member of the IMB (Independent Monitoring Board? 23% 16% 35% 15% 5.10 An advocate (an outside person to help you)? 28% 46% 36% 41% 6.1 Do most staff treat you with respect? 54% 80% 67% 72% 6.2 If you had a problem, would you have no-one to turn to? 41% 29% 26% 35% 7.1 Is it easy to make an application? 72% 74% 64% 75% 7.4 Is it easy to make a complaint? 56% 64% 59% 62% 8.1 Are you on the enhanced (top) level of the reward scheme? 16% 26% 9% 25% 8.2 Have you been treated fairly in your experience of the reward scheme? 19% 57% 26% 46% 8.3 Do the different levels make you change your behaviour? 54% 54% 46% 56% 8.4 Have you had a minor report since you have been here? 50% 49% 50% 48% 8.6 Have you had an adjudication ('nicking') since you have been here? 79% 76% 64% 78% 8.8 Have you been physically restrained (C and R) since you have been here? 28% 41% 33% 37% 9.1 Have you ever felt unsafe here? 32% 50% 36% 45% 9.2 Do you feel unsafe now? 16% 23% 14% 21% 9.4 Have you been victimised by other young people here? 18% 39% 18% 33% Since you have been here, have other young people: 9.5d Threatened or intimidated you? 8% 18% 9% 15% 9.5i Victimised you because of your race or ethnic origin? 0% 4% 0% 3% 9.5j Victimised you because of your religion/religious beliefs? 0% 4% 5% 1% 9.5k Victimised you because of your nationality? 3% 4% 5% 3% 9.5p Victimised you because you have a disability? 0% 2% 0% 1% Page 2 of 3

105 Diversity analysis Key to tables Any percentage highlighted in green is significantly better Any percentage highlighted in blue is significantly worse Any percentage highlighted in orange shows a significant difference in young people's background details Percentages which are not highlighted show there is no significant difference Black and minority ethnic young people White young people Muslim young people Non-Muslim young people Number of completed questionnaires returned Have you been victimised by staff here? 33% 26% 46% 25% Since you have been here, have staff: 9.8d Threatened or intimidated you? 8% 6% 9% 6% 9.8i Victimised you because of your race or ethnic origin? 6% 2% 9% 1% 9.8j Victimised you because of your religion/religious beliefs? 3% 4% 9% 1% 9.8k Victimised you because of your nationality? 3% 2% 5% 1% 9.8p Victimised you because you have a disability? 0% 0% 0% 0% 9.10 If you were being victimised, would you tell a member of staff? 20% 37% 26% 30% 9.11 Do you think staff would take it seriously if you told them you had been victimised? 8% 39% 9% 31% 10.1a Is it easy/very easy for you to see the doctor? 45% 68% 50% 62% 10.1b Is it easy/very easy for you to see the nurse? 74% 84% 68% 82% 10.4 Do you feel you have any emotional or mental health problems? 8% 24% 9% 18% Do you currently take part in any of the following: 11.4a Education? 82% 80% 86% 81% 11.4b A job in this establishment? 32% 35% 18% 36% 11.4c Vocational or skills training? 16% 11% 9% 12% 11.4d Offending behaviour programmes? 32% 24% 32% 26% 11.4e Nothing? 8% 16% 5% 15% 11.6 Do you usually have association every day? 39% 34% 35% 35% 11.7 Can you usually go outside for exercise every day? 22% 33% 5% 34% 11.8 Do you go to the gym more than five times each week? 11% 0% 9% 3% 12.1 Are you able to use the telephone every day? 62% 67% 68% 62% 12.2 Have you had any problems with sending or receiving letters or parcels? 24% 43% 32% 38% 12.3 Do you usually have one or more visits per week from family and friends? 49% 44% 55% 41% 13.2 Do you have a training plan, sentence plan or remand plan? 32% 54% 18% 53% 13.8 Have you had a say in what will happen to you when you are released? 38% 44% 33% 46% Page 3 of 3

106

107 Diversity analysis - disability Key question responses (disability analysis) HMYOI Werrington 2014 Survey responses (missing data have been excluded for each question). Please note: where there are apparently large differences, which are not indicated as statistically significant, this is likely to be due to chance. Key to tables Any percentage highlighted in green is significantly better Any percentage highlighted in blue is significantly worse Any percentage highlighted in orange shows a significant difference in young people's background details Percentages which are not highlighted show there is no significant difference Consider themselves to have a disability Do not consider themselves to have a disability Number of completed questionnaires returned Are you a foreign national? 0% 8% 1.3 Do you understand spoken English? 100% 98% 1.4 Do you understand written English? 100% 97% 1.5 Are you from a minority ethnic group? (Including all those who did not tick white British, white Irish or white other categories.) 25% 42% 1.6 Are you Muslim? 9% 23% 1.5 Do you consider yourself to be Gypsy/ Romany/ Traveller? 17% 8% 1.10 Have you ever been in local authority care? 54% 34% 2.1 Are you sentenced? 91% 79% 2.4 Is this your first time in custody in a YOI, secure children's home or secure training centre? 33% 64% 3.2 Did you travel with any adults (over 18) or a mix of males and females? 25% 31% 3.6 Were you treated well/very well by the escort staff? 54% 46% 3.7 Before you arrived, did you receive any helpful information to help you prepare for coming here? 25% 14% 4.2 When you were searched, was this carried out in a respectful way? 75% 84% 4.3 Were you treated well/very well in reception? 92% 81% 4.8 Before you were locked up on your first night, were you seen by a doctor or nurse? 73% 85% 4.9 Did you feel safe on your first night here? 54% 87% 5.1 Can you normally have a shower every day if you want to? 70% 74% 5.2 Is your cell call bell normally answered within five minutes? 46% 30% 5.3 Do you find the food here good/very good? 17% 12% 5.4 Does the shop/canteen sell a wide enough variety of products? 67% 42% 5.6 Do you feel your religious beliefs are respected? 64% 60%

108 Diversity analysis - disability Key to tables Any percentage highlighted in green is significantly better Any percentage highlighted in blue is significantly worse Any percentage highlighted in orange shows a significant difference in young people's background details Percentages which are not highlighted show there is no significant difference Can you speak to: Consider themselves to have a disability Do not consider themselves to have a disability 5.7 A chaplain of your faith in private? 82% 68% 5.8 A peer mentor? 27% 28% 5.9 A member of the IMB (Independent Monitoring Board? 9% 20% 5.10 An advocate (an outside person to help you)? 64% 36% 6.1 Do most staff treat you with respect? 73% 71% 6.2 If you had a problem, would you have no-one to turn to? 20% 35% 7.1 Is it easy to make an application? 67% 74% 7.4 Is it easy to make a complaint? 46% 63% 8.1 Are you on the enhanced (top) level of the reward scheme? 25% 20% 8.2 Have you been treated fairly in your experience of the reward scheme? 27% 43% 8.3 Do the different levels make you change your behaviour? 64% 52% 8.4 Have you had a minor report since you have been here? 64% 47% 8.6 Have you had an adjudication ('nicking') since you have been here? 100% 72% 8.8 Have you been physically restrained (C and R) since you have been here? 46% 33% 9.1 Have you ever felt unsafe here? 75% 39% 9.2 Do you feel unsafe now? 25% 18% 9.4 Have you been victimised by other young people here? 54% 27% Since you have been here, have other young people: 9.5d Threatened or intimidated you? 25% 12% 9.5i Victimised you because of your race or ethnic origin? 8% 1% 9.5j Victimised you because of your religion/religious beliefs? 0% 2% 9.5k Victimised you because of your nationality? 0% 4% 9.5p Victimised you because you have a disability? 8% 0% 9.7 Have you been victimised by staff here? 33% 28%

109 Diversity analysis - disability Key to tables Any percentage highlighted in green is significantly better Any percentage highlighted in blue is significantly worse Any percentage highlighted in orange shows a significant difference in young people's background details Percentages which are not highlighted show there is no significant difference Since you have been here, have staff: Consider themselves to have a disability Do not consider themselves to have a disability 9.8d Threatened or intimidated you? 0% 9% 9.8i Victimised you because of your race or ethnic origin? 0% 3% 9.8j Victimised you because of your religion/religious beliefs? 8% 3% 9.8k Victimised you because of your nationality? 0% 3% 9.8p Victimised you because you have a disability? 0% 0% 9.10 If you were being victimised, would you tell a member of staff? 33% 27% 9.11 Do you think staff would take it seriously if you told them you had been victimised? 36% 26% 10.1a Is it easy/very easy for you to see the doctor? 67% 57% 10.1b Is it easy/very easy for you to see the nurse? 100% 76% 10.4 Do you feel you have any emotional or mental health problems? 67% 11% Do you currently take part in any of the following: 11.4a Education? 83% 82% 11.4b A job in this establishment? 33% 32% 11.4c Vocational or skills training? 25% 10% 11.4d Offending behaviour programmes? 54% 23% 11.4e Nothing? 17% 12% 11.6 Do you usually have association every day? 46% 33% 11.7 Can you usually go outside for exercise every day? 25% 26% 11.8 Do you go to the gym more than five times each week? 0% 5% 12.1 Are you able to use the telephone every day? 75% 64% 12.2 Have you had any problems with sending or receiving letters or parcels? 27% 37% 12.3 Do you usually have one or more visits per week from family and friends? 54% 42% 13.2 Do you have a training plan, sentence plan or remand plan? 67% 41% 13.8 Have you had a say in what will happen to you when you are released? 36% 43%

110

111 Diversity analysis Key question responses (local authority care analysis) HMYOI Werrington 2014 Survey responses (missing data have been excluded for each question). Please note: where there are apparently large differences, which are not indicated as statistically significant, this is likely to be due to chance. Key to tables Any percentage highlighted in green is significantly better Any percentage highlighted in blue is significantly worse Any percentage highlighted in orange shows a significant difference in young people's background details Percentages which are not highlighted show there is no significant difference Young people who have been in local authority care Young people who have not been in local authority care Number of completed questionnaires returned Are you a foreign national? 3% 6% 1.3 Do you understand spoken English? 100% 97% 1.4 Do you understand written English? 97% 97% 1.5 Are you from a minority ethnic group? (Including all those who did not tick white British, white Irish or white other categories.) 28% 47% 1.6 Are you Muslim? 18% 22% 1.5 Do you consider yourself to be Gypsy/ Romany/ Traveller? 6% 11% 1.9 Do you consider yourself to have a disabilty? 18% 9% 2.1 Are you sentenced? 89% 77% 2.4 Is this your first time in custody in a YOI, secure children's home or secure training centre? 36% 73% 3.2 Did you travel with any adults (over 18) or a mix of males and females? 41% 25% 3.6 Were you treated well/very well by the escort staff? 60% 39% 3.7 Before you arrived, did you receive any helpful information to help you prepare for coming here? 26% 11% 4.2 When you were searched, was this carried out in a respectful way? 84% 80% 4.3 Were you treated well/very well in reception? 82% 82% 4.8 Before you were locked up on your first night, were you seen by a doctor or nurse? 81% 86% 4.9 Did you feel safe on your first night here? 84% 83% 5.1 Can you normally have a shower every day if you want to? 80% 69% 5.2 Is your cell call bell normally answered within five minutes? 39% 29% 5.3 Do you find the food here good/very good? 8% 15% 5.4 Does the shop/canteen sell a wide enough variety of products? 47% 44% 5.6 Do you feel your religious beliefs are respected? 68% 53%

112 Diversity analysis Key to tables Any percentage highlighted in green is significantly better Any percentage highlighted in blue is significantly worse Any percentage highlighted in orange shows a significant difference in young people's background details Percentages which are not highlighted show there is no significant difference Can you speak to: Young people who have been in local authority care Young people who have not been in local authority care 5.7 A chaplain of your faith in private? 79% 63% 5.8 A peer mentor? 39% 22% 5.9 A member of the IMB (Independent Monitoring Board? 26% 13% 5.10 An advocate (an outside person to help you)? 62% 25% 6.1 Do most staff treat you with respect? 74% 68% 6.2 If you had a problem, would you have no-one to turn to? 31% 36% 7.1 Is it easy to make an application? 84% 66% 7.4 Is it easy to make a complaint? 72% 55% 8.1 Are you on the enhanced (top) level of the reward scheme? 24% 18% 8.2 Have you been treated fairly in your experience of the reward scheme? 49% 38% 8.3 Do the different levels make you change your behaviour? 57% 51% 8.4 Have you had a minor report since you have been here? 51% 45% 8.6 Have you had an adjudication ('nicking') since you have been here? 72% 77% 8.8 Have you been physically restrained (C and R) since you have been here? 36% 33% 9.1 Have you ever felt unsafe here? 49% 41% 9.2 Do you feel unsafe now? 22% 19% 9.4 Have you been victimised by other young people here? 31% 30% Since you have been here, have other young people: 9.5d Threatened or intimidated you? 16% 13% 9.5i Victimised you because of your race or ethnic origin? 3% 2% 9.5j Victimised you because of your religion/religious beliefs? 3% 2% 9.5k Victimised you because of your nationality? 0% 3% 9.5p Victimised you because you have a disability? 3% 0% 9.7 Have you been victimised by staff here? 24% 33%

113 Diversity analysis Key to tables Any percentage highlighted in green is significantly better Any percentage highlighted in blue is significantly worse Any percentage highlighted in orange shows a significant difference in young people's background details Percentages which are not highlighted show there is no significant difference Since you have been here, have staff: Young people who have been in local authority care Young people who have not been in local authority care 9.8d Threatened or intimidated you? 6% 7% 9.8i Victimised you because of your race or ethnic origin? 0% 4% 9.8j Victimised you because of your religion/religious beliefs? 6% 2% 9.8k Victimised you because of your nationality? 0% 4% 9.8p Victimised you because you have a disability? 0% 0% 9.10 If you were being victimised, would you tell a member of staff? 31% 25% 9.11 Do you think staff would take it seriously if you told them you had been victimised? 24% 31% 10.1a Is it easy/very easy for you to see the doctor? 57% 59% 10.1b Is it easy/very easy for you to see the nurse? 81% 77% 10.4 Do you feel you have any emotional or mental health problems? 37% 4% Do you currently take part in any of the following: 11.4a Education? 83% 80% 11.4b A job in this establishment? 38% 30% 11.4c Vocational or skills training? 12% 12% 11.4d Offending behaviour programmes? 29% 25% 11.4e Nothing? 12% 13% 11.6 Do you usually have association every day? 42% 31% 11.7 Can you usually go outside for exercise every day? 29% 24% 11.8 Do you go to the gym more than five times each week? 0% 5% 12.1 Are you able to use the telephone every day? 71% 61% 12.2 Have you had any problems with sending or receiving letters or parcels? 35% 38% 12.3 Do you usually have one or more visits per week from family and friends? 32% 49% 13.2 Do you have a training plan, sentence plan or remand plan? 53% 39% 13.8 Have you had a say in what will happen to you when you are released? 55% 36%

114

115

116 HM Inspectorate of Prisons is a member of the UK's National Preventive Mechanism, a group of organisations which independently monitor all places of detention to meet the requirements of international human rights law.