National Monitoring Framework - February 2021 - Amazon AWS
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
National Monitoring Framework February 2021
This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0
except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/
doc/open-government-licence/version/3
doc/open-government-licence /version/3.
Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to
obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.
Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at imb@just
imb@justice.gov.uk
ice.gov.uk.National Monitoring Framework – IMB 3 Contents Introduction 4 1. The role 6 2. Purpose of monitoring 7 3. Independence in practice 10 4. Best practice 12 5. Monitoring 14 6. Priorities 20 7. Impact and escalation 22 8. Conclusion 26
4 IMB – National Monitoring Framework
Introduction
Independent Monitoring Boards play IMBs cover a wide range of
a crucial role in the independent establishments, from high security
oversight of prisons and places of prisons where prisoners may spend
immigration detention. Appointed decades, to holding rooms where
by Ministers, IMB members immigration detainees may spend a
are a regular presence in those few hours. The focus and priorities
establishments, reporting on the of monitoring will respond to the
conditions in detention and the specific needs and concerns of each
treatment of prisoners and detainees. environment, but the purposes and
They are part of the UK’s National principles of monitoring are the same.
Preventive Mechanism (NPM), set This National Monitoring Framework
up under the UN Optional Protocol has been agreed by the IMBs’
to the Convention against Torture, national management board and is
to prevent inhumane treatment in designed to
places of detention that operate
out of sight of the public. As • define the role of IMBs
members of their local community, • describe the purpose and principles
they are the public’s eyes and of monitoring
ears. Their work complements that • show how this can have an
of HM Inspectorate of Prisons impact on outcomes for prisoners
which carries out periodic in-depth and detainees.
inspections, and the Prisons and
Ombudsman who
Probation Ombudsman, More detailed guidance can be found
investigates deaths and complaints. on the IMB members’ website,
the annual report template and
guidance, and the monitoring
guidance being developed
for different aspects
of detention.5 IMBs cover a wide range of establishments
6 IMB – National Monitoring Framework
1. The role
The Prison Act 1952 and the Boards’ functions and powers are
Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 further defined in Prison Rules, Young
require the Secretary of State for Offender Institution Rules, Detention
Justice and the Home Secretary to Centre Rules and Short-term Holding
appoint independent boards to monitor Facility Rules. They include making
prisons and places of immigration frequent visits, having access to the
detention, from among members of records1 of the establishment, informing
the community. The legislation gives ministers immediately of any abuse,
members unrestricted access to these hearing complaints and requests, and
establishments and to the prisoners and producing an annual report.
detainees held in them.
In 2004, following the 2001 Lloyd review,
ministers also charged Boards to
• satisfy [themselves] as to the humane
and just treatment of those held in
custody within the establishment
and (for prisons and YOIs) the range
and adequacy of the programmes
preparing them for release
1
Except for healthcare records, staff personnel records and certain
classified informationNational Monitoring Framework – IMB 7 2. Purpose of monitoring The focus and purpose of monitoring • Safety (including violence and self- as set out in this framework is therefore harm measures, safeguarding and the outcomes for prisoners and use of force) detainees. Boards will need to check • Humane treatment (including that the proper processes are in place segregation/separation, equality and and effectively implemented, but they accommodation) are only a means to an end, which is • Health and wellbeing (including the outcome for those held in custody. primary care, mental health, exercise, Focusing on outcomes does not drug and alcohol treatment and mean that monitors believe everything soft skills) that they are told by prisoners or • Progression and release (including detainees, or that they are unaware education, training, offender of the challenges and risks that staff management and preparations for face. Insofar as the conditions and release or removal) deployment of staff affect the conditions and treatment of prisoners and Boards in establishments holding detainees, Boards must report on this. children and young people under 18 A prison that is not safe for staff will not will make a separate assessment of the be safe for detainees; a detention facility provision and availability of education, with poorly trained or managed staff will as this is a primary role of those have poor outcomes for detainees. establishments. Boards report their findings on a regular These headings are also a useful way basis to those responsible for managing of regularly reporting back Boards’ the establishment. Those findings are findings to managers during the year. brought together in published annual Reporting practice is set out in more reports, which make an assessment detail in the annual report templates and of the establishment under four guidance for prisons, under-18 YOIs main headings: and the immigration detention estate.
8 IMB – National Monitoring Framework
Board members have unfettered of Justice, Home Office, and Prison
access to all parts of the establishment Service. These documents confirm
and those held there, as well Boards’ independence and governance
as to documentation held in the structure and set out their rights and
establishment, and can report concerns responsibilities, including access to
to the establishment, the relevant documentation and to clerking support,
service, or the minister at any time. Their responsibilities in relation to security
relationship with the relevant government and confidentiality, and the right to be
department and monitored service is notified of segregation and serious
set out in protocols and memoranda incidents. All members should familiarise
of understanding with the Ministry themselves with these documents.9 IMBs play an important preventive role
10 IMB – National Monitoring Framework
3. Independence
in practice
Independence is fundamental to the Boards need to maintain good
role, name and values of IMBs. It is relationships with staff, so that their
required both in UK law and also concerns are listened to and acted
because of our membership of the on. They also need to understand the
NPM. But it is more than simply challenges staff face. However, they
a badge: it needs to be visible to must also maintain a critical distance,
prisoners and detainees, the monitored providing constructive challenge,
bodies, government departments and for example when explanations are
the public, and reflected in the way that excuses rather than reasons.
Boards work, the language used and
the priorities set. Boards have the right to obtain
information from the establishment,
Boards’ regular presence in an either directly or through documentation,
establishment gives them a unique reports and meetings. That may not
insight into the day to day experience show the whole picture, and Boards
of prisoners and detainees. This is an should always test that information
important preventive role, with the ability against the actual experience of
to spot trends and concerns before prisoners and detainees, and what
they become crises, and to confirm they themselves observe. This process
where there has been positive progress. is sometimes called triangulation:
Boards can provide a sense-check evidence-checking from different angles.
on the things that managers hope
and believe are happening. Managers
should welcome and respond to this,
and it provides a valuable source of
assurance to ministers and those
responsible for running the prison and
immigration detention services.National Monitoring Framework – IMB 11 Boards also need to guard against organisations can be useful and anything that can be perceived as important, but Boards should always undermining or questioning their reach their own judgements, based on independence, whether this is objective evidence. In the immigration language or behaviour that suggests detention estate, Boards need to they are part of the establishment, or be particularly alert to the fact that if they appear to act as advocates for detainees may wrongly believe that any either staff or individual prisoners or concerns they report may affect their detainees. Information from external immigration case.
12 IMB – National Monitoring Framework
4. Best practice
All institutions tend to develop their Boards can observe poor treatment
own culture and norms. This is or conditions that are not covered
particularly true of closed institutions, in the rules or frameworks, or which
where custom, practice and culture cannot yet be remedied, even by good
can become embedded. That is why managers and staff. Monitors should be
an outside view, that keeps asking asking ‘is it right?’ not just ‘is it possible
questions, is so important. or achievable now?’. They can and do
point to underlying issues that need to
Boards need to be aware of what is be addressed nationally: for example,
best practice, not just the accepted the impact on regimes of too few, or
practice in that particular establishment. too inexperienced staff; the fact that
The IMB members’ website provides two prisoners are held in a cell meant
useful guidance and information, as for one, with an unscreened toilet and
does the website of the National eat their meals in-cell; or the effect of
Mechanism Regional
Preventive Mechanism. long-term segregation or the indefinite
meetings and visits to other similar nature of immigration detention on the
establishments also help to provide a mental or physical health of a prisoner
wider context and useful comparators. or detainee.
It is important to monitor whether
establishments meet the requirements
set out in legislation and published
policy: prison rules, prison service
orders and frameworks, detention
centre rules, detention service orders,
service level agreements and contracts.
However, monitoring is not the same
as contract compliance or audit, which
is the responsibility of those running
the service. Law and policy provide a
floor, not a ceiling: the minimum that is
required, rather than the best practice.13 Monitors Figure / should be asking pull out quote ‘is it right?’
14 IMB – National Monitoring Framework
5. Monitoring
There are many aspects to monitoring:
Observation Reporting
Monitors have been described as It is essential to record what has been
the ‘eyes and ears’ of the public. No observed or said. If it isn’t written down,
other external body has such regular there’s no evidence that it happened. As
and direct access to prisoners and well as rota reports, records include, for
detainees. So, a crucial part of the role example, entries in assessment, care
is simply ‘being there’: watching and in custody/detention and teamwork
listening to what is going on wherever (ACCT/ACDT) and segregation/
prisoners or detainees are held. This is separation records, observations at
the purpose of rota visits. It is an active, reviews and Board minutes. These
not a passive, role: questioning and records may become public, through
challenging what is going on. It means freedom of information requests or in
being visible, carefully listening to what inquests or legal proceedings. They
is said and what is not said; noticing should be objective and unbiased,
what is happening on the periphery of should not compromise prisoner or
vision; seeing how staff and prisoners detainee confidentiality, and should
or detainees interact; seeking out allow a reader (whether the rest of the
the prisoners or detainees who don’t board, the establishment or a third
demand attention. party) to have a clear picture of both
positive and negative observations.National Monitoring Framework – IMB 15
Dealing with individual Relying on evidence
applications Every monitoring finding, statement
or recommendation, and especially
Board members receive thousands the judgements made in the annual
of applications or requests from report, should be justified by evidence,
prisoners and detainees with problems rather than assertion. Some evidence
or complaints that have not been is factual and objective: for example,
addressed by the establishment. Legally, statistics about length of immigration
prisoners and detainees do not have to detention, prisoners released to no
have gone through the establishment’s fixed abode, or violent incidents. But all
complaints system before they statistics need to be put into context,
approach the IMB, though in practice and to be tested and triangulated
they may be advised to do so as the with other evidence, for example from
quickest way of resolving the issue. observation. Do they show that things
Applications and requests range from are improving or deteriorating? Does
the practical and day-to-day (property, this square with what Boards observe or
letters, visits, clothing and bedding) to are told? What are the actual outcomes
issues such as healthcare, sentence for prisoners or detainees that lie behind
management and bullying. Applications the statistics? Some Boards have done
and requests can also reveal underlying their own statistical surveys or carried
patterns and themes that require more out thematic monitoring to shed light on
systemic action, and sometimes can a particular issue (see below).
expose more serious concerns that may
point to abuse or risk to life.16 IMB – National Monitoring Framework
a reliance on attending meetings can
mean that a board relies heavily on the
establishment’s own assessment of
what it is doing and achieving, rather
than the actual outcomes for prisoners
and detainees. There is always a risk of
becoming, or seeming to become, part of
Attending meetings the decision-making process. Members
should also be aware that the fact of
and reviews having been at a segregation review,
for example, (particularly when signing
It is important to observe how the the paperwork) can be taken to mean
establishment is managing issues, agreement with the decision, for example
such as equality or use of force, and if it is challenged in court. They should
how it is managing people, such as therefore ensure that any concerns about
those in segregation or separation, or continued segregation are noted and
at risk of self-harm. However, too great raised with prison managers.17 Monitors are the ‘eyes and ears’ of the public
18 IMB – National Monitoring Framework Monitoring doesn’t mean: Managing Inspecting Members may have been managers, in Inspection is a regular but occasional both public and private organisations, in-depth examination of a prison or and it is tempting to use that experience detention facility. Inspectors will be to tell managers how best to run able to compare that establishment things. This is particularly the case if with many other similar places and management experience has been make professional judgements in areas in a directly related context, such such as in education and healthcare. as healthcare, education or prisons. Inspection reports can be helpful to Monitoring should focus on the inform monitoring, and to indicate areas desired outcome rather than the which need, and should be getting, means of achieving it. It can of course improvement: again, monitors will be reveal where management policies looking at actual outcomes. and processes are not achieving the desired outcome.
National Monitoring Framework – IMB 19
Boards’ responsibility to take individual
applications from prisoners and
detainees is somewhat different from
their monitoring role; but it does put
IMBs in direct touch with the issues of
most concern to those in custody and
can help identify themes and monitoring
Investigating priorities. However, in dealing with
applications, Boards’ role is not to
The Prisons and Probation Ombudsman sort out the problem, or carry out an
will carry out investigations where investigation, but to make enquiries of
something has, or may have, gone those who are responsible for doing so,
wrong: complaints that have not been and to satisfy themselves that this has
satisfactorily resolved or deaths in been done.
custody. This is a reactive role, that can
involve detailed examination and testing Though Boards have a specific
of evidence. Monitoring, by contrast, monitoring role, liaison with other
is essentially preventive, though again independent organisations – principally
the lessons learned from deaths or HM Inspectorate of Prisons and the
complaints can inform monitoring Prisons and Probation Ombudsman
priorities and provide a framework for – can help to create a virtuous circle,
checking outcomes. in which the findings of monitors,
inspectors and investigators reinforce
and inform one another in order to
promote and influence best practice.
Similarly, the relationships with other
organisations within the NPM provide
a sound basis for both learning
and influence.20 IMB – National Monitoring Framework
6. Priorities
All Boards need to be able to report However, within those parameters,
on the fundamental aspects of any Boards have the flexibility to decide
place of detention: safety, humane their own priorities and objectives for
treatment, health and wellbeing, and the year, depending on the kind of
access to the interventions and support establishment and the particular risks
that can promote effective resettlement and concerns it poses. For example, in
or help detainees face what comes an under-18 YOI there will be a focus on
next. There will always be the need to good quality and accessible education,
monitor closely the riskiest and most and safeguarding of young people. A
important elements in detention: such as training prison, by definition, should
segregation/separation, serious incidents, provide good quality education and skills
staff numbers and cultures, use of force, training, as well as effective offender
violence and self-harm, the state of management. In an immigration removal
accommodation, access to a purposeful centre, issues around vulnerability and
regime. Guidance is being developed in length of detention are likely to be
relation to monitoring all these areas. high priority. Boards may also want to
focus on new or high-profile initiatives:
offender management in custody or the
introduction of PAVA incapacitant spray
in prisons; the adults at risk policy in
immigration detention.National Monitoring Framework – IMB 21 It is good practice for Boards to focus see whether interactions take place as on one area where they would like to planned and evidence real engagement; carry out in-depth work, such as a some follow a number of prisoners survey of prisoners, a deep dive into through their prison experience, or prison records, or following the prisoner look at those who self-isolate. Boards journey in a particular area. For example, in immigration short-term holding some Boards have carried out surveys of facilities have focused on the length prisoners about to be released, exposing of time spent in holding rooms how many in reality are released without and the timing of movements to accommodation; some have looked removal centres. Examples are at use of force and whether there are available centrally if Boards problematic patterns of use; some wish to embark on any have looked at key worker records to of this work.
22 IMB – National Monitoring Framework 7. Impact and escalation Board members commit a great deal sometimes a frustration when this of their time to monitoring prisons does not seem to happen, or when and places of immigration detention. Boards repeatedly raise the same They are uniquely placed to provide issue at national level (for example the real-time information on what is failure to manage prisoners’ property happening there, and why. They rightly effectively). However, Boards’ findings expect that this will have an impact and persistence can and do influence on the way these establishments change and improvement, both locally are run and resourced, and there is and nationally.
National Monitoring Framework – IMB 23
There are several different kinds of impact:
On individual prisoners On the establishment
or detainees Regular meetings with prison and
immigration detention managers and
The impact of this should not be under- controllers are an opportunity to raise
estimated. The IMBs’ role in helping to the systemic issues that arise from
resolve even apparently minor issues applications and from monitoring
impacts directly on the daily life and observations. This reflects back to
experience of prisoners and detainees, managers what is actually happening,
where everything they have, do or need which may be different from what they
is controlled by others. hope or expect. The more accurate and
evidence-based the reporting, the more
likely it is to be acted on.24 IMB – National Monitoring Framework
On the wider prison On ministers
and immigration Boards can at any time contact the
detention system relevant minister. This is a very important
right, but it also carries the responsibility
to use it judiciously, for matters that
Boards will uncover issues and are either important enough to bring
concerns that either cannot be, or to a minister’s attention, or relate to
are not, dealt with effectively by local political decisions that affect the prison
managers. If they are things that should or immigration service as a whole.
be achievable in a prison or immigration Otherwise, there is a risk that IMB
detention facility, the most effective concerns will be discounted, or simply
way of securing change is to escalate passed back to the service itself to
concerns through the prison and deal with. Matters that should be raised
immigration hierarchy. In prisons, this directly with ministers include: concerns
is through the prison group director of imminent disturbance or indiscipline;
or equivalent (if it is an issue specific potential breaches of human rights or
to that prison, function or area), or to statutory obligations; resource issues
the director general of prisons or the that affect the whole service; the impact
director of the youth custody service of legislation or national policies; the
(if it is an issue like staffing or resourcing, need for action by other departments,
which is a national or systemic issue). such as health or benefits.
In immigration detention, the route
is through area managers to the
Home Office director of detention
and escorting services. Boards
should always keep records of these
approaches and their outcomes.National Monitoring Framework – IMB 25
the themes in those individual reports.
Sometimes, there are thematic reports
on particular issues. There has been
increasing media interest in all these
reports, drawing public attention to the
valuable work done and the concerns
that are raised. IMBs also regularly
On the public provide both written and oral evidence
to parliamentary inquiries, drawing on
and Parliament both published reports and real-time
information collated from relevant Boards.
It is important that Boards’ work and
findings are part of the public and It is helpful for Boards to liaise with the
parliamentary debate. That is why Secretariat and National Chair when
Boards’ annual reports are so important, escalating issues, so that we can advise
highlighting both concerns and progress if these have also been raised by other
against previous recommendations. The Boards and can also keep a central
national annual reports for prisons and record of the issues that have been
immigration detention bring together raised, and their impact.26 IMB – National Monitoring Framework 8. Conclusion IMBs are unique, harnessing the outcomes for prisoners and detainees. commitment and knowledge of over a It is supplemented by more detailed thousand volunteers to provide regular practical guidance and training on independent oversight of places of specific areas, and is flexible enough detention. This framework provides for Boards to set their priorities, the core principles and purposes of based on the function and type of the that monitoring, and how it can work establishment they monitor and the to make maximum impact on the risks and possibilities it carries.
27 1,000+ volunteers provide regular independent oversight
About Independent Monitoring Boards
Members of an IMB are from the local community, appointed by ministers under the
Prison Act 1952 and the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999. Each IMB has a duty to
satisfy itself as to the humane and just treatment of those held in the establishment
that it monitors and (for prisons) the range and adequacy of the programmes
preparing them for release; to inform promptly the Secretary of State, or any official
to whom s/he has delegated authority as it judges appropriate, any concern it has;
to report annually to the Secretary of State on how well the establishment has met
the standards and requirements placed on it and what impact these have on those
in its custody.
Interested in becoming an IMB member?
For more information and for details about how to apply, visit www
www.imb.org.uk
.imb.org.ukYou can also read
