HMP/YOI Norwich, a complex multi-functional prison serving East Anglia, was found to have deteriorated over three years in HM Inspectorate of Prison’s healthy prison tests.

In 2016, the prison was assessed as reasonably good for safety, respect, purposeful activity and rehabilitation and release planning. In an inspection in October and November 2019 all four grades had slipped to not sufficiently good.

The prison, holding just under 700 male prisoners, comprises a local reception site, a training facility and an open resettlement facility.

Peter Clarke, HM Chief Inspector of Prisons, said while the complexity of the prison brought “not insignificant management challenges, the combination of facilities ought, if managed effectively, to offer real opportunities to help prisoners progress through their sentence to the point of resettlement into the local community.”

“Our findings suggested that the prison still had some way to go before such a vision could be fully realised.”

The prison management, Mr Clarke added, told inspectors “they had faced considerable difficulties and that the prison had deteriorated significantly. They were also keen to tell us that the deterioration had been reduced with some recent improvement over the last year.”

Levels of recorded violence at Norwich had increased and were relatively high, although there were comparably fewer serious incidents (around 5% of assaults). About a fifth of prisoners said they felt unsafe.

Use of force by staff had also increased and it was too soon to assess the effectiveness of procedures aimed at improving supervision of the use of force.

There had been six self-inflicted deaths since 2016 but inspectors were assured of progress in learning from those deaths. Work to review the activity allocation and time out of cell of those identified as being in crisis was very positive and the prison had begun piloting new case management (ACCT) arrangements. Mr Clarke added: “We found many weaknesses in case management practice, although the prisoners themselves told us they felt well cared for.”

Many staff were very inexperienced, a source of considerable frustration for prisoners, though three-quarters said they felt respected by staff. Much low level poor behaviour went unchallenged.

The general environment at Norwich was reasonable and most wings were mostly clean. However, the promotion of equality and diversity in the prison had deteriorated markedly since 2016 and required immediate attention to ensure the needs of minority groups were understood and met.

There was sufficient activity to engage about 80% of the population, but inspectors found between 30 and 35% of prisoners locked up during the working day. Demanding commercial standards were achieved in the prison workshops, influenced by the prison’s productive external commercial links, with some “hard-to-reach” individuals supported by educational outreach. Overall, however, teaching standards were inconsistent and punctuality and attendance were poor.

The prison lacked an overarching offender needs analysis, strategy or action plan to ensure it became a place of meaningful and effective rehabilitation. Finding suitable accommodation for those being released remained a challenge.

Overall, Mr Clarke said:

“The findings indicated that local managers were right that there were improvements to be seen at Norwich. Much of this improvement was, however, recent, inconsistent and not particularly well coordinated. It was also hard to discern a coherent and considered plan for the prison, a plan consistent with the development of a rehabilitative culture. In addition, there remained a number of safety risks that needed to be addressed, prisoners needed to be supported and incentivised to engage purposefully with the regime and there was much to do in ensuring that an inexperienced staff group received the support they needed.”

– END –

Notes to editors
1. The report, published on 27 February 2020, can be read on the HM Inspectorate of Prisons website.

2. HM Inspectorate of Prisons is an independent inspectorate, inspecting places of detention to report on conditions and treatment, and promote positive outcomes for those detained and the public.

3. HMP/YOI Norwich was built in 1887 on the site of the Britannia barracks home of the Royal Norfolk Regiment. The establishment has a mixture of buildings dating from 1887 to 2010, when the new A wing and activity centre was built. The prison is a complex site – it is split into three areas, each serving different functions: the main prison (a local prison), the local discharge unit (LDU) (a category C unit) and Britannia House (which holds category D prisoners).

4. HM Inspectorate of Prisons assesses adult prisons against four ‘healthy prison tests’ – safety, respect, purposeful activity and rehabilitation and release planning. There are four assessments – good (4), reasonably good (3), not sufficiently good (2) and poor (1). In 2016 Norwich scored 3-3-3-3. In 2019 it scored 2-2-2-2.

5. Notable features from this inspection: although categorised as a local prison, HMP/YOI Norwich had multiple functions, accommodating category B, C and D prisoners in three separate sites; it had a dedicated unit that provided specialist support for elderly prisoners and those requiring social and palliative care; 40% of the population were under 30; only 38% of prisoners were released to sustainable accommodation; 60% of staff were within their first two years of service; in our survey, 46% of prisoners in the closed site declared a disability; and there had been six self-inflicted deaths since the previous inspection.

6. This unannounced inspection took place between 21 October and 1 November 2019.

7. Please contact John Steele at HM Inspectorate of Prisons on 07880 787452, or at john.steele@justice.gov.uk, if you would like more information.