Report on Full Inspection of HMP & YOI Grampian: 4 - 15 February 2019

Summary of Inspection Findings

Summary of Inspection Findings

Satisfactory performance

Standard 1 Lawful and transparent custody

Satisfactory

Satisfactory performance

Standard 2 Decency

Satisfactory

Generally acceptable performance

Standard 3 Personal safety

Generally acceptable

Satisfactory performance

Standard 4 Effective, courteous and humane exercise of authority

Satisfactory

Generally acceptable performance

Standard 5 Respect, autonomy and protection against mistreatment

Generally acceptable

Satisfactory performance

Standard 6 Purposeful activity

Satisfactory

Not applicable

Standard 7 Transitions from custody to life in the community

Good

Satisfactory performance

Standard 8 Organisational effectiveness

Satisfactory

Poor performance

Standard 9 Health and wellbeing
Poor

HMIPS Standard 1

Lawful and Transparent Custody

The prison complies with administrative and procedural requirements of the law, ensuring that all prisoners are legally detained and provides each prisoner with information required to adapt to prison life.

The prison ensures that all prisoners are lawfully detained.  Each prisoner’s time in custody is accurately calculated; they are properly classified, allocated and accommodated appropriately.  Information is provided to all prisoners regarding various aspects of the prison regime, their rights and their entitlements.  The release process is carried out appropriately and positively to assist prisoners in their transition back into the community.

Inspection Findings
Overall Rating: Satisfactory Performance

Satisfactory performance

The admission processes within the establishment were very robust, with clear checks taking place regarding the legality of each prisoners warrant.  Staff demonstrated empathy when engaging with prisoners to ensure that they understood the reasons for them being sent to the establishment and the length of time they were likely to be there.  One major concern for HMIPS was that no nursing staff were available to conduct a medical assessment of prisoners who were admitted to the establishment after 21:30. This was immediately escalated as an area of high risk.  SPS staff placed the prisoner on 15-minute observations overnight until they had seen a nurse.

Once reception staff had completed the admission process, prisoners were located in the relevant residential area dependent on their classification and were given key information about the prison regime including the hall routine, making requests, visits and the complaints process.  National induction took place but it was very limited for adult male prisoners who were on protection.  A peer mentor assisted with the delivery of it to women, which was good practice, and HMP YOI Grampian should consider introducing it for adult male prisoners also.  Reception and national induction staff had a good understanding of translation services and how to use them, but knowledge of this was limited amongst residential staff.

Staff demonstrated a good knowledge of the cell sharing risk assessment (CSRA) process and how to record it on PR2.  However, there were no records to confirm primary and secondary assurance checks of this process were undertaken.

The pre-release processes conducted by the court desk staff and management were very robust, ensuring that dates on the warrant had been accurately calculated and that no outstanding warrants were in place.  The court desk staff also checked in advance what travel arrangements were required for each prisoner being liberated, particularly if someone was returning to one of the islands.  Once all of the prisoners being escorted to court had left reception the staff immediately contact the residential halls to ask them to escort prisoners who were being liberated to reception, in order that this process could be conducted timeously.  The front of house staff conducted relevant checks; however, concerningly they were done beyond the secure area.

Pages