Segregation Monitoring & Review

  1. All closed establishments must have local procedures in place to monitor & review the use of segregation.

2.     The outcome of the review procedures must be:

a.     Monitoring the implementation and adherence to the PSO on Segregation (click here for examples)

b.     Monitoring and reviewing the use of segregation throughout the prison. Monitoring overall trends in the use of segregation (click here for examples)

c.     Reviewing and advising on the training and educational needs of staff (click here for examples)

d.     Conducting individual analysis on certain groups of prisoners. For example:

§        Prisoners held in segregation for long continuous periods (eg. 3 months or more). Such prisoners should be considered for assessment for a DSPD (Dangerous & Severe Personality Disorder) unit or CSC (Close Supervision Centre).

§        Prisoners who are transferred from another prison’s segregation unit who is kept in segregation for a month or more

§        Prisoners who have been held in special accommodation and/or mechanical restraints

§        Prisoners who have been held in segregation whilst on an open F2052SH

§        Prisoners for whom the Initial Segregation Safety Screen suggests there are healthcare reasons not to segregate (regardless of the prisoner’s final location)

3.     The reviewing and monitoring function may best be achieved by setting up a Segregation Monitoring & Review Group (SMARG). The following people should be considered for membership of the monitoring group:

a.     Operational manager with responsibility for the segregation unit

b.     Segregation unit officer(s)

c.     Chaplain

d.     Member of the healthcare team

e.     Psychologist

f.      Probation

g.     Suicide Prevention co-ordinator

Establishments could alternatively opt for the segregation manager to carry out the monitoring and review function.

4.     A quarterly report should be submitted to the Governor and Area Manager highlighting the key observations and summarising the use of segregation over the previous quarter. As a minimum, the report should:

a.     Identify general areas of concern, for example, where the segregation unit is not meeting the PSO / Review Board timetable / where ethnic minority statistics give cause for concern etc.

b.     Identify individual prisoners that need scrutiny eg. prisoners who have spent more than 3 months in continuous segregation, prisoners in the segregation unit on an open F2052SH, prisoners who are medically recommended against segregation after completion of the Safety Algorithm etc.

5. It is good practice for a member of the Independent Monitoring Board to be invited to attend the SMARG meetings (where   held) / provided with a copy of the quarterly report. Members of the IMB carry out their role as observers / monitors and should take no part in any management decisions.

 

Back to top