ESTABLISHMENT

:

DATE:

AUDITOR:

PROLIFIC AND OTHER PRIORITY OFFENDERS

1
Mark

2 16 30

3 17 31

4 18 32

5 19 33

6 20 34

7 21 35

8 22 36

9 23 37

10 24 38

11 25

12 26

13 27

14 28

15
Mark

29
Mark

Score Total

4’s

3’s

2’s

1’s

0’s

NA

Total

Standard: PPO Overview: Strengths: Weaknesses:

Rating:

%

SOURCE DOCUMENTS: NATIONAL INSTRUCTIONS: PSO4615 Priority &other Priority Offenders PPO Strategy – Supplementary Home Office Guidance; Rehabilitate and Resettle Framework – September 2004 PSI 39//2000 Resettlement Performance Indicator PSO 0200 HM Prison Service Standards Manual PSO 0550 Prisoner Induction PSO 0900 Categorisation & Allocation PSO 2200 Sentence Management & Planning An Operational Guide PSO 2300 Resettlement PSO 6000 Parole, Release and Recall Manual PSO 6100 The Bail System PSO 6101 Bail Information Schemes PSO 6300 ROTL PSO 6700 Home Detention Curfew OTHER: NOMS Prolific &Other Priority Offenders – Premium Service Guidance NOMS Prolific &other Priority Offenders – Information for Prison Drug Strategy Staff – Policy and Practice Document (December 2006) Criminal Justice Act 2003

ESTABLISHMENT: AUDITOR: DATE: SIGNATURE: AUDIT TITLE/STANDARD: Prolific &Other Priority Offenders STANDARD: On receipt of information, from whatever source, that a prisoner is a PPO, the LIDS record must be updated to flag the prisoner as a PPO. This will apply whether the PPO is identified at first reception or subsequently. Subsequent changes in addresses must be entered onto the LIDS system REQUIRED OUTCOME: STRATEGY AND MANAGEMENT That all identified PPOs are flagged on the LIDS system as soon as the PPO identification is made. KEY AUDIT BASELINE: PSO 4615 Sec. 3.4. Area PPO Strategy Policy and Protocols Document Sec. 3 That an identified person/department is responsible for the flagging as defined WEIGHTING MARK 3 AUDIT FINDINGS:

SUGGESTED METHODOLOGY:
• Examine LIDS system against establishment PPO list • Check that responsible person/department is in place to enter LIDS system and to ensure that subsequent amendments to addresses are made.

• Check that there is a LIDS enquiry/retrieval system for PPOs in place ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE ATTACHED: YES/NO DISCUSSED WITH TEAM LEADER/AUDIT MANAGER: YES/NO TEAM LEADER’S SIGNATURE/AUTHORISED BY AUDIT MANAGER: DATE:

ESTABLISHMENT: AUDITOR: DATE: SIGNATURE: AUDIT TITLE/STANDARD: Prolific &other Priority Offenders STANDARD: Where know, the reception and discharge address of PPOs must be entered onto LIDS, and all details of village, town, and metropolitan borough must be included. For prisoners who are ‘NFA’ on reception, the town and county fields must be completed using the committal court as the proxy address. REQUIRED OUTCOME: That all current reception and discharge addresses of PPOs are entered onto LIDS, including proxy addresses. KEY AUDIT BASELINE: PSO 4615 Sec. 3.5. Area PPO Strategy Policy and Protocols Document Sec. 3 WEIGHTING 2 AUDIT FINDINGS: MARK

SUGGESTED METHODOLOGY:
• Examine LIDS system and compare information with other key sources i.e. OM file, F2050.

• Identify responsible person/department for entering address details onto LIDS. • Check LIDS amendment process against sources of information prompting address changes ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE ATTACHED: YES/NO DISCUSSED WITH TEAM LEADER/AUDIT MANAGER: YES/NO TEAM LEADER’S SIGNATURE/AUTHORISED BY AUDIT MANAGER: DATE:

ESTABLISHMENT: AUDITOR: DATE: SIGNATURE: AUDIT TITLE/STANDARD: Prolific & other priority Offenders STANDARD: Prisons must maintain and update the OASys record of all PPOs serving a year or more. Where resources permit, they should also do this in the case of prisoners serving under a year. REQUIRED OUTCOME: Offender Management departments/functions should ensure that this is maintained, and consider including those prisoners serving less than a year, resources permitting. KEY AUDIT BASELINE: PSO. 4615 Sec. 3.7. Eastern Area PPO Strategy Policy and Protocols Document Sec. 3 WEIGHTING 2 AUDIT FINDINGS: MARK

SUGGESTED METHODOLOGY:
• Examine local OASys protocols and practice. • Interview OASys/Offender Management staff responsible • Examine OASys files

ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE ATTACHED: YES/NO DISCUSSED WITH TEAM LEADER/AUDIT MANAGER: YES/NO TEAM LEADER’S SIGNATURE/AUTHORISED BY AUDIT MANAGER: DATE:

ESTABLISHMENT: AUDITOR: DATE: SIGNATURE: AUDIT TITLE/STANDARD: Prolific &other Priority Offenders. STANDARD: Prolific Offenders must be given due priority for appropriate interventions within prisons, and efforts should be made to avoid the movement of PPOs between prisons, so as not to detract from their rehabilitation. REQUIRED OUTCOME: KEY AUDIT BASELINE: PSO 4615 Sec. 4.1 Area PPO Strategy Policy and Protocols Document Sec. 3 PPO Information for Prison Drug Strategy Staff – Policy and Practice Document . WEIGHTING 2 AUDIT FINDINGS: MARK

SUGGESTED METHODOLOGY:
• • • • Interview OASys/Offender Management staff Interview Offender Supervisors Interview PPO Liaison Person Interview Carat service manager, and examine documentation Examine any other relevant documents.

• ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE ATTACHED: YES/NO DISCUSSED WITH TEAM LEADER/AUDIT MANAGER: YES/NO TEAM LEADER’S SIGNATURE/AUTHORISED BY AUDIT MANAGER: DATE:

ESTABLISHMENT: AUDITOR: DATE: SIGNATURE: AUDIT TITLE/STANDARD: Prolific &other Priority Offenders STANDARD: All establishments must provide a telephone/fax number and E Mail address, to act as a single liaison point for information about PPOs. This contact information must be passed to the PPO Clearing House, PPO Programme Team at NOMS HQ (E. Mail address prolific.offenders@hmps.gsi.gov.uk) REQUIRED OUTCOME: That a PPO single liaison point is identified and that contact details are registered with the PPO Clearing House at NOMS HQ. In addition that a PPO Lead Functional Manager is identified as being responsible for this. KEY AUDIT BASELINE: PSO 4615 Sec. 5.1 Area PPO Strategy Policy and Protocols Document Sec. 2 WEIGHTING 2 AUDIT FINDINGS: MARK

SUGGESTED METHODOLOGY:
• • • • Identify PPO Liaison Person Identify PPO Lead Functional Manager Check with PPO Clearing House at NOMS HQ Examine local PPO Policy document Examine any records.

• ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE ATTACHED: YES/NO DISCUSSED WITH TEAM LEADER/AUDIT MANAGER: YES/NO TEAM LEADER’S SIGNATURE/AUTHORISED BY AUDIT MANAGER: DATE:

ESTABLISHMENT: AUDITOR: DATE: SIGNATURE: AUDIT TITLE/STANDARD: Prolific &other Priority Offenders STANDARD: On the first occasion on which an establishment becomes aware of a PPO in it’s care, it must inform the designated home Basic Command Unit (BCU) contact, normally by E. Mail of this fact, providing the name of the prisoner, the name of the prison, and the PPO Liaison Person E. Mail, telephone and fax details. REQUIRED OUTCOME: That all relevant BCUs with PPOs resident in the establishment are fully aware of this fact, and that they are also aware of the specific liaison contact point at the prison for all matters concerning such PPOs. KEY AUDIT BASELINE: PSO. 4615 Sec. 5.2 Area PPO Strategy Policy and Protocols Document Sec. 2 WEIGHTING 2 AUDIT FINDINGS: MARK

SUGGESTED METHODOLOGY:
• Examine documentary processes proving such contacts have been made • Make sample contact with a BCU • Examine the scheme in operation.

ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE ATTACHED: YES/NO DISCUSSED WITH TEAM LEADER/AUDIT MANAGER: YES/NO TEAM LEADER’S SIGNATURE/AUTHORISED BY AUDIT MANAGER: DATE:

ESTABLISHMENT: AUDITOR: DATE: SIGNATURE: AUDIT TITLE/STANDARD: Prolific &other Priority Offenders STANDARD: Establishments must be ready to facilitate the involvement of resettlement in-reach teams from the home locality of PPOs. If a prisoner has been moved away from his home locality, the holding establishment should aim to return him to an appropriate local prison eight weeks before release. Note; this requirement has been amended to allow for the decision to be made in individual cases that such transfer is not automatically processed, to allow for interventions continuing at the holding establishment to be completed. Offender Manager and BCU representations may apply in these cases REQUIRED OUTCOME: That facilities are in place to allow resettlement in-reach teams to engage with the establishment. Also, to allow for the transfer of PPOs back to a suitable local prison if they are located away from their home locality, in agreement with the Offender Manager and home BCU , taking into consideration ongoing interventions being engaged in by the PPO. KEY AUDIT BASELINE: PSO 4615 Sec. 5.4 Area PPO Strategy Policy and Protocols Document Sec. 2 and 4 WEIGHTING 2 AUDIT FINDINGS: MARK

SUGGESTED METHODOLOGY:
• Check that local protocols include the facilitation of resettlement in-reach teams • Examine how information about the availability of this facility is transmitted to BCUs • Establish whether resettlement in-reach visits have occurred and arrangement system for them. • Explore what information has been published to staff and prisoners regarding resettlement in-reach and where it is available.

ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE ATTACHED: YES/NO DISCUSSED WITH TEAM LEADER/AUDIT MANAGER: YES/NO TEAM LEADER’S SIGNATURE/AUTHORISED BY AUDIT MANAGER: DATE:

ESTABLISHMENT: AUDITOR: DATE: SIGNATURE: AUDIT TITLE/STANDARD: Prolific &other Priority Offenders STANDARD: Each establishment holding PPOs must make arrangements to notify the home BCU (and in licence cases the National Probation Service) at least 28 days before the prisoner’s release. If the prisoner is likely to be released early on HDC, the possible HDC date should also be notified and subsequently confirmed. As a precaution, the BCU must also be notified on the day the prisoner is actually released. REQUIRED OUTCOME: That effective notification system is in place to notify BCUs 28 days before a prisoner’s release date and on the actual date of release. That decisions to release prisoners on HDC are notified to and confirmed with relevant BCUs KEY AUDIT BASELINE: PSO 4615 Sec. 5.5. Area PPO Strategy Policy and Protocols Document Sec. 4. WEIGHTING 3 AUDIT FINDINGS: MARK

SUGGESTED METHODOLOGY:
• Examine local system for notification of release dates to BCUs • Identify audit trail of such notifications

• Identify responsible person e.g. the PPO Liaison Person ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE ATTACHED: YES/NO DISCUSSED WITH TEAM LEADER/AUDIT MANAGER: YES/NO TEAM LEADER’S SIGNATURE/AUTHORISED BY AUDIT MANAGER: DATE:

ESTABLISHMENT: AUDITOR: DATE: SIGNATURE: AUDIT TITLE/STANDARD: Prolific &other Priority Offenders STANDARD: That establishment processes associated with PPOs are closely interlinked with the establishment Offender Management system and in particular the Offender Management Unit. REQUIRED OUTCOME: That the progress of PPOs is fully included within the overall Offender Management care planning for such prisoners, and that similar procedures are in place to trawl, collate and forward such information for PPOS not included within the OM framework i.e. Remands and those serving less than one year KEY AUDIT BASELINE: PPO Strategy – Supplementary Home Office Guidance (Annex B PSO 4615) September 2004. Area PPO Strategy Policy and Protocols Document Sec. 2 and 3. . WEIGHTING 2 AUDIT FINDINGS: MARK

SUGGESTED METHODOLOGY:
• Check OASys documentation • Establish whether local protocols exist for the trawling and collation of information regarding PPOs particularly by OM department. • Establish whether PPO Liaison Person ensures that internal departments are made aware of PPOs and that there is a system whereby they contribute qualitative information as above

• Check contributions from departments, and format for the same ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE ATTACHED: YES/NO DISCUSSED WITH TEAM LEADER/AUDIT MANAGER: YES/NO TEAM LEADER’S SIGNATURE/AUTHORISED BY AUDIT MANAGER: DATE:

ESTABLISHMENT: AUDITOR: DATE: SIGNATURE: AUDIT TITLE/STANDARD: Prolific &other Priority Offenders STANDARD: That all establishments will routinely involve the Police Lison Officer in the ongoing management of the PPO process. In particular cases where intelligence or specific personal information needs to be shared, the establishment will ensure that an Information Sharing Protocol is in place between the establishment and the police to facilitate this, and that it pays due regard to Data Protection issues. REQUIRED OUTCOME: Police Liaison Officer routinely involved in the PPO management process, and that information sharing is conducted within the required framework of Data Protection and an agreed protocol. The Area Professional Standards and Intelligence Officer will offer guidance on this. KEY AUDIT BASELINE: PSO 4615 Sec 5.3. Area PPO Strategy Policy and Protocols Document Sec. 4 WEIGHTING 2 AUDIT FINDINGS: MARK

SUGGESTED METHODOLOGY:
• Identify and examine local information sharing protocol • Interview OM and other relevant staff. • Interview Police Liaison Officer

• Interview establishment Data Protection Officer ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE ATTACHED: YES/NO DISCUSSED WITH TEAM LEADER/AUDIT MANAGER: YES/NO TEAM LEADER’S SIGNATURE/AUTHORISED BY AUDIT MANAGER: DATE:

ESTABLISHMENT: AUDITOR: DATE: SIGNATURE: AUDIT TITLE/STANDARD: Prolific &other Priority Offenders STANDARD: That establishments are required to maintain effective record of all action/activity in relation to the process of the PPO strategy. Data and information recorded must be of sufficient robustness so as to be auditable, and to meet any developing performance reporting requirements. REQUIRED OUTCOME: Establishment systems installed are compliant, effective and effective. In particular the formatting, completion and submission process of the monthly PPO Report to Area Office (based upon the BCU (PMF) reporting framework) KEY AUDIT BASELINE: Area PPO Strategy Policy and Protocols Document Sec. 5 WEIGHTING MARK 3 AUDIT FINDINGS:

SUGGESTED METHODOLOGY: • Examine OASys documentation • Interview OASys and OM staff • Interview PPO Liaison Person • Examine monthly reporting framework ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE ATTACHED: YES/NO DISCUSSED WITH TEAM LEADER/AUDIT MANAGER: YES/NO TEAM LEADER’S SIGNATURE/AUTHORISED BY AUDIT MANAGER: DATE: