Report on a full unannounced inspection of HMP Bronzefield, 13 - 22 October 2010 by HMCIP. Report compiled January 2011, published Wednesday 30th March 2011

[ This is the most shocking report MOJUK has read in years, HMP Bronzefield is a privately run prison, managed by Sodexo Justice Services (aka Kalyx), notorious for its' miss-management of Harmondsworth IRC ]

Concerns:
- Entering the prison, it is immediately apparent that the women it holds are needy and challenging

- a shocking level of self-harm. In the 12 months before the inspection there had been 2,771 self-harm incidents - more than seven a day

- over half of the women involved had harmed themselves more than once. One woman had harmed herself 93 times in one month

- the prison could not meet the needs of the small number of 'restricted status' women, and a national strategy for managing women with such complex demands was lacking;

- One woman, who had exhibited unpredictable and violent behaviour, had effectively been held in the segregation unit for three years with very little human contact or activity to occupy her

- conditions in which she was held seemed likely to lead to further psychological deterioration and were completely unacceptable.

- little evidence that senior staff in the Prison Service had oversight of women segregated for long periods to ensure their conditions were humane

--Bronzefield is not an appropriate place for women with these needs and there was a lack of a national strategy to manage women with such complex demands

- majority of prison custody officers were men, which was inappropriate

- Foreign national women had good specialist support but some were isolated by language barriers and this affected their relationships with and access to staff, other women and general services.

- health care was, surprisingly, shockingly poor with an unnecessarily complicated appointment system, chaotic administration, inconsistent pharmacy services and no female GPs;

- There were no female GPs. Communication between health care staff was poor. Pharmacy services were tortuous and inconsistent.

- A notice in the dentist's surgery stated that treatment would only be offered if a woman had been 'in pain for at least three days'

- progress in implementing the national integrated drug treatment system was slow and hampered by staff shortages.

Bronzefield is a local closed women's prison which, at the time of this announced inspection in October 2010, held around 500 women, [7% over capacity[ most of whom were on remand or serving short sentences. However, it also held longer-term restricted status women (female and juvenile category-A prisoners) and those serving life sentences.

Entering the prison, it is immediately apparent that the women it holds are needy and challenging. Around a quarter of those we surveyed had been in the prison for less than a month and just under half had less than six months to serve. A third told us they had a drug problem when they came in to the prison. Half had children under 18.

The report describes a shocking level of self-harm (although not one that is untypical in a women's local prison). In the 12 months before the inspection there had been 2,771 self-harm incidents - more than seven a day. Of those, six out of 10 had involved tying ligatures and just over half of the women involved had harmed themselves more than once. One woman had harmed herself 93 times in one month. Records for the use of force by staff showed that a high proportion were interventions to prevent women tying ligatures to themselves.

Within an already challenging population group, there were some women whose needs were even greater. The prison held a small number of 'restricted status' women, some of whom had severe personality disorders. Their needs could simply not be met by the prison. One woman, who had exhibited unpredictable and violent behaviour, had effectively been held in the segregation unit for three years with very little human contact or activity to occupy her. The conditions in which she was held seemed likely to lead to further psychological deterioration and were completely unacceptable. There was little evidence that senior staff in the Prison Service had oversight of women segregated for long periods to ensure their conditions were humane. Bronzefield is not an appropriate place for women with these needs and there was a lack of a national strategy to manage women with such complex demands.

However, the overall culture of the prison provided an appropriate and positive foundation to help meet the requirements of most of the women it held. The physical environment was good - it was well designed, clean and well maintained. Induction arrangements were thorough, imaginative and individually tailored - they provided a good introduction to the prison for newly arrived women, some of whom were unsurprisingly shocked and distressed. Staff-prisoner relationships were good but the majority of prison custody officers were men, which was inappropriate. Electronic terminals or 'pods' on each house block allowed women to make orders from the canteen, choose meals and manage their funds, and encouraged self-reliance. An excellent Listener group (prisoners trained by the Samaritans) provided invaluable support to other women. There was also effective use of talented prisoners to support the less able in the workshops; this may have been of benefit to both parties as, on the whole, while education, training and work opportunities were good, there was little that was suitable for more able women. Time out of cell was very good.

Work on diversity focused mainly on race and needed to be developed in other areas. There was good leadership from the Director. In our survey, the perceptions of black and minority ethnic women were worse than those of women as a whole. Foreign national women had good specialist support but some were isolated by language barriers and this affected their relationships with and access to staff, other women and general services.

This generally positive environment was matched by good support for women at their most vulnerable times. On average, 46 ACCT documents (care plans for women identified as being at risk of self-harm or suicide) were opened each month. These provided a basis for good and well organised support and there were regular management checks on individual cases. There was effective strategic oversight of the process. There was little bullying and when it did occur, it was effectively dealt with.

There was a strong focus on helping women maintain contact with their children and families. The mother and baby unit was excellent - the nursery nurses provided compassionate and individual support with a clear emphasis on promoting parental responsibility, the environment was excellent and there were good links with relevant external organisations. Staff commitment was illustrated by the nursery nurses' successful application for funding to transform the nursery garden. A full-time family support worker provided specialist support but staff throughout the prison were aware and supportive of women's domestic situations. Visits were well organised and there were a variety of specialist family days. For a small fee, families could hold children's birthday parties with their mother during family visits. Very vulnerable women we spoke to described the positive impact this provision had on their self-esteem and wellbeing.

There was good individual work in other areas of resettlement but the prison recognised that this needed to be underpinned by a clear strategy.

The one major exception to this generally positive picture was health care - which was shockingly poor. It was surprising that this should be so given the obvious needs of the women, the effective arrangements the prison had made to meet the other needs of the women and that concerns about health care had been forcibly raised by the local Independent Monitoring Board.

Across the range of health care provision specialist inspectors' findings were damning. Administration was chaotic. The appointment system was unnecessarily complicated. There were no female GPs. Communication between health care staff was poor. Pharmacy services were tortuous and inconsistent. A new dentist had not been inducted into the prison. A notice in the dentist's surgery stated that treatment would only be offered if a woman had been 'in pain for at least three days'. Inpatient and mental health care were better - although there were only 15 women on the mental health caseload, which seemed an unfeasibly low number given the very visible need throughout the prison. The prison was in the process of implementing the national integrated drug treatment system but progress was slow and hampered by staff shortages. There was, however, little evidence of much use of illegal drugs.

With the exception of health care, Bronzefield did a very difficult job well. At the time of the inspection, that job was about to become more difficult as the prison had just been told about the savings it had to make in the coming years. The inspection showed how a number of good but often small pieces of work across the prison combined to create a positive and supportive environment to meet the needs of very vulnerable women. Many of these initiatives relied on the work of voluntary organisations. The challenge for the prison now is to ensure that funding constraints do not put that good work at risk.

Nick Hardwick

HM Chief Inspector of Prisons

Source for this page:
HM Chief Inspector of Prisons