5. RISK ASSESSMENTS: OASYS AND IDENTIFYING AND MANAGING

DANGEROUS PRISONERS

5.1 This section addresses in some detail how the Offender Assessment System

(OASys) works in practice, the Prison Service's Dangerous Offender Strategy

and work currently under way in NOMS to develop a high risk offender's

strategy, and the role of assessments in relation to the identification and

management of dangerous prisoners in that context. There is some cross

over to the section on the management of prisoners with mental disorder.

Identifying Dan.qerous Prisoners

5.2 The introduction of OASys is described in paragraphs 6.43 to 6.52 of PW2.

The statement also described at paragraphs 6.53 to 6.57 Multi-Agency Public

Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) which are relevant to and underpin to a

significant extent the arrangements for managing dangerous prisoners within

prisons in the context of preparing release arrangements.

OASys

5.3 OASys is the principal assessment tool (outside the specific context of cell

sharing) for identifying prisoners who pose a particular risk to staff or other

prisoners. As described below the risk of serious harm assessment includes

the risk of harm to others. It applies to young adult offenders, adult offenders

serving sentences of over 12 months and to offenders serving sentences of

less than 12 months where there is a Probation Service assessment

completed at pre-sentence report stage. Those for whom an OASys

assessment is mandatory are described in more detail below at paragraph

13. The equivalent assessment tool in respect of juveniles is ASSET.

Implementation

5.4 As stated in paragraph 6.43 of PW2, the OASys IT application was rolled out

across the Prison Service, area by area, starting with the North West, Wales

and the South West in July 2003. Rollout in the public sector prisons was

completed in December 2004. Contracted out prisons do not have full use of

OASys. They use different IT systems supplied by their parent companies. It

57

is intended to link them with the rest of the prison estate through a secure

Extranet and this is expected tol be in place towards the end of 2005. A

short-term solution, to enable the contracted prisons to have limited access to

OASys, was implemented in most establishments at the end of 2004, or early

2005 although delivery to the last of them (the Wolds) was only completed in

June. Full integration into OASys must wait until the secure Extranet is

available.

5.5 Shadow key performance targets (KPTs) for each establishment have been

set for 2005-06 based on one assessment or review per eligible offender per

year. The overall KPT target for the year is 46,484 assessments.

Achieving full connectivity with the National Probation Service (NPS)

5.6 OASys was developed as a common tool for use both by the Prison Service

and the NPS. It has always been recognised that the full benefits will only be

achieved when the two Services' OASys IT systems are connected, enabling

the fast, secure, transfer of OASys assessments between them. Connectivity

will enable local prisons to use and build upon the many assessments

completed by the NPS at PSR stage and will have a marked knock-on effect

upon the availability of OASys assessments in all prison establishments.

5.7 Development of software to connect the Prison Service and NPS was

completed towards the end of 2004. Roll out was deferred, however, to

enable Criminal Justice Act 2003 (CJA 2003) changes to be implemented in

NPS. It was essential that OASys is able to support the new sentences

introduced under the CJA 2003 which came into force on 4 April 2005. Full

connectivity is now planned to be achieved by October 2005.

5.8 A pilot connectivity link with the NPS system went live in July 2004, linking

North West Area (public) prisons and a single probation area, Cheshire. This

proved that the electronic exchange of OASys assessments between prison

and probation works successfully. The value of OASys in prison will be

greatly increased by the achievement of full connectivity later this year

because it will give access to the 500,000 or so assessments on offenders

available on the NPS system. The PSO and the KPT reflect an expectation

that the Prison Service would be receiving completed assessments from the

58

NPS by now. There has, therefore, been some frustration on the part of

prison staff and from IMBs about the fact that OASys assessments have not

been transferred with prisoners. This position should be transformed once

full connectivity is achieved.

Integration with NOMIS

5.9 Full integration of the Prison and Probation OASys IT systems is planned to

be delivered as part of the NOMIS programme. This is a significant

undertaking and is dependent on a number of related projects involving

upgrades and changes to IT infrastructure and security accreditation of the

Probation IT network. Implementation of NOMIS is expected to begin in 2006

and it is hoped to redevelop OASys as a single system under NOMIS in time

for deployment to begin in April 2008.

Training

5.10 A national training programme has been delivered across the Prison Service.

This consisted of two one-day introductory sessions on risk assessment and

interviewing skills for assessors and supervisors, a two-day course on use of

the business process and underlying IT systems, and a period of personal

practice followed by a competence test. For general OASys users in prisons

a Computer Based Training (CBT) package has been developed and is

accessible from the OASys website on the HMPS Quantum Intranet. With

effect from April 2005 OASys training is delivered by the Prison Service

Training and Development Group (TDG) based at Newbold Revel.

Prison Service Order 2205

5.11 A revised PSO takes account of the operational experience gained from

using OASys and was published on the HMPS Quantum Intranet in April

2005. The revised PSO (document 23) is a shorter document, concentrating

on the mandatory actions, but with a supporting OASys Guidance Document

(document 24).

5.12 The revised PSO introduced a significant change to timescales for OASys

reviews (see chapter 6), which will reduce the resource requirement. The

59

initial OASys assessment must be completed as part of the induction process

or within 8 weeks (previously 12 weeks was allowed for Discretionary

Conditional Release ("DCR") offenders) and there is a mandatory review

once a year and from one to three months before release. This will reduce

the burden on establishments in operating OASys, but the PSO states that it

is good practice to undertake a review after completion of a significant

milestone or when needed to inform a key decision. This greater flexibility is

in line with Prison Service policy to reduce central prescription.

5.13 An OASys assessment is a requirement in respect of

i. Young offenders (sentenced when 18-20) with at least 4

weeks left to serve

ii. Automatic Conditional Release ("ACR") offenders (12

months and over, but less than 4 years) with at least 6

months left to serve up to the conditional release date

iii. All DCR offenders (4 years and over)

iv. All offenders sentenced under CJA 2003 (12 months and

over)

v. Life sentence offenders (OASys assessment is included

within the Life Sentence Plan system)

vi. Extended sentence recall offenders, if their time in

custody after recall will be one year or more

vii. Licence recall offenders, if their time in custody after

recall will be one year or more

5.14 OASys assessments are not routinely completed by the Prison Service on

those sentenced to less than 12 months imprisonment, except for young adult

offenders aged 18 to 20.

5.15 However, an OASys may sometimes be completed in other circumstances

where resources permit, for example for a prolific and other priority offender

(PPO). The Prison Service is a partner to the Prolific and Other Priority

Offender Strategy which is an inter-agency criminal justice initiative to

prioritise interventions in relation to PPOs identified by local Crime and

Disorder Reduction Partnerships as causing most harm to their communities.

The focus is upon those committing high volume crimes such as burglary and

60

street crime. OASys will be the main tool for assessing PPOs for

interventions. An assessment will be done on all PPOs by the Probation

Service at PSR stage. 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.

5.16 Some adult short-term prisoners will have had an initial OASys prepared by

the Probation Service prior to writing a pre-sentence report, and this will be

available to the Prison Service to inform offender management. The

introduction of Custody Plus, planned for autumn 2006, will see an increase

in the proportion of short term offenders coming into prison with an OASys

assessment completed at PSR stage. The Custody Plus Order is a key

provision in the CJA 2003. Offenders sentenced to a Custody Plus Order will

serve between 2 and 13 weeks in custody followed by a minimum of six

months probation supervision. The maximum sentence (prison and probation

combined) is 51 weeks. At present those sentenced to less than 12 months in

custody do not receive supervision by the Probation Service.

What an OASys assessment involves

5.17 A copy of a completed anonymised OASys assessment form is supplied as

document 25. OASys includes the following components:

Likelihood of Re-offending assessment

5.18 This section includes the case identification, offending information (Section

1); offence analysis (Section 2); then an assessment of factors linked to

offending:

• accommodation (Sections 3)

• education, training & employability (Section 4)

• financial management & income (Section 5)

• relationships (Section 6)

• lifestyle & associates (Section 7)

• drug misuse (Section 8)

• alcohol misuse (Section 9)

• emotional well-being (Section 10)

61

• thinking & behaviour (Section 11)

• attitudes (Section 12)

• health & other considerations (Section 13)

Risk of serious harm assessment

5.19 This section includes a screening section, a full analysis section and a harm

summary section. The risk of harm summary includes management issues

and the risk management plan. The risks addressed are:

• risk of serious harm to others

• risks to children

• risks to the individual

i. suicide

ii. self-harm

iii. coping in custody / hostel setting

iv. vulnerability

• other risks

i. escape/abscond

ii. control issues

iii. breach of trust.

OASys summary sheets

5.20 The summary screen draws together key information from the assessment of

the offender, and automatically calculates the likelihood of reconviction

scores. It summarises:

i. offending-related factors

ii. likelihood of reconviction score

iii. risk of serious harm to others

iv. current concerns about suicide, escape, etc.

Supervision plan (SSP)

5.21 This section includes an initial plan and a review plan, including transfer and

termination if applicable. The plan will be drawn up on the basis of the

criminogenic needs profile which has been built up in the core assessment

62

(1-13), and the risk profile described in the risk of harm section, with

reference to any Risk Management Plan at R11.12.

Self-assessment questionnaire (SAQ)

5.22 This is a questionnaire to give offenders an opportunity to record their views.

It provides the practitioner with a useful insight into how offenders see their

lives and their offending behaviour.

Request for Information (RFI)

5.23 The request for information document, RFI, can be used by anyone

contributing to an OASys assessment, for example a personal officer, a

departmental specialist (e.g. education, instructor, PEI etc) or a probation

supervising officer in the community contributing to an OASys assessment

being completed in custody.

5.24 By integrating supervision and sentence planning into the overall process of

assessment, OASys helps the assessor by making the links between these

two essential aspects of offender management.

5.25 OASys is designed so that the objectives for supervision by the Probation

Service and sentence planning by the Prison Service are clearly targeted to

the profile of risk and needs identified during the assessment stage. The

supervision and sentence planning section allows progress against objectives

to be monitored and this will, in turn, inform the re-assessment of risk of

reconviction and serious harm.

5.26 An OASys Assessor will interview the offender, research collateral

information and then complete the assessment, including risk of harm section

and the sentence plan on the computer in the OASys IT system on the basis

of the information gathered.

Organisation of OASys in prison establishments

5.27 The OASys project team provided a suggested 'blueprint' for the

development of a centralised sentence management unit in establishments,

63

which would support OASys and other resettlement and rehabilitative

activities. It is, however, ultimately up to establishments to decide how they

implement OASys and a few have preferred to keep existing sentence

planning arrangements with responsibility for OASys assessments dispersed

to trained staff on the wings rather than in a central unit.

5.28 The OASys Assessor is at the heart of the OASys process and of offender

management in the Prison Service. It is the OASys Assessor who interviews

the offender and afterwards completes the assessment on the computer in

the OASys IT system on the basis of the information gathered. Assessors

must be trained in using the OASys IT application and have the necessary

knowledge of offender behaviour and contact with offenders. They will

therefore usually be prison officers or seconded probation staff. Prior to

interviewing the offender, the Assessor will collect from the OASys Clerk and

from elsewhere as necessary, the collateral information which will inform the

assessment.

5.29 When the Assessor has completed an assessment it is routed to the

Supervisor for checking and approval. Every assessment must be checked

by a Supervisor, who will either approve it or return it for further work by the

Assessor. The Supervisor is normally at least one grade higher than the

Assessor. The role of the OASys Supervisor in ensuring that the work is

thorough and accurate is the key to consistent and high quality in assessment

and sentence planning.

5.30 The OASys Clerk undertakes all the administrative tasks, including reviewing

the task list at the beginning of each day, initiating routine OASys reviews as

prompted by the system and sending Requests for Information (RFI) to the

personal officer, relevant departments, units or external agencies. The Clerk

also completes the relevant parts of the Case ID section of the OASys set,

assigns the assessment to an Assessor and considers requests for access to

OASys records.

5.31 The OASys Manager is the person responsible for all aspects of the use of

the OASys system within the establishment. They will have specific

responsibility for ensuring that assessments are completed to the required

timescales and meet the required quality.

64

5.32 All staff will have access to the OASys records for offenders located in their

establishment. Such 'user' access enables staff to open the OASys

application directly and to read any part of a completed OASys

assessment(s), past and current, for the offenders held in the establishment

at the time. It does not enable them to enter any information into the

assessment, or to change anything in it.

5.33 Now implementation is complete, apart from the contracted prisons OASys is

beginning to becomeestablished in the Prison Service. The staff roles and

working arrangements are clear but the real benefits will only be fully realised

once full connectivity with the NPS has been achieved. Work within prisons

can then concentrate on completing OASys for all those in custody who are

eligible and have not been subject to an OASys assessment and updating the

assessments received directly from Probation colleagues. The NOMS OASys

Unit has two operational support managers who provide help and support to

establishments on OASys matters. However it is acknowledged that

additional quality management arrangements will be necessary to ensure

consistency of assessments, and joint work with the Probation Service is in

hand to put the necessary measures in place.

Decisions on interventions

5.34 OASys pulls information together and gives staff the raw material they need

to make better decisions to manage offenders safely and work with offenders

effectively, by enabling them to address those needs which put offenders at

risk of re-offending. It is a more comprehensive risk/needs tool than that

provided by the previous sentence planning system. By pulling information

together it provides the material needed for staff to make better decisions on

allocating offenders to regime interventions which are likely to address their

offending behaviour. For the more complex or high risk offenders, assessors

may need to seek specialist advice or refer the offenders for more in depth

assessments to ensure that they are matched to the right interventions.

5.35 OASys provides triggers for referral for specialist assessments for offending

behaviour programmes. These cover general offending behaviour

65

programmes, such as Enhanced Thinking Skills (ETS), sex offender

assessment and violent offender assessment.

5.36 Section 8 of OASys has been designed to gather sufficient information

needed to inform a referral to the CARATs (Counselling, Advice, Referral,

Assessment and Through care service), and provide information regarding

the nature and extent of an offender's drug misuse, their behaviour

associated with their drug misuse and their motivation to address these

issues. There are triggers within OASys for CARATs referral. Referrals from

OASys will be to the CARATs team for an assessment and not directly to a

drugs programme. OASys will complement CARATs procedures and provide

information to support the CARATs Care-planning framework.

Handling information on risk

5.37 As previously explained OASys does not cover all offenders, in particular

those adults serving sentences of under 12 months (unless an NPS PSR

stage assessment is available). In addition, until full connectivity between the

prison and probation OASys systems is achieved prisons will not have ready

access to initial probation assessments except where a paper copy has been

sent to the establishment. OASys assessments in prison are not completed

immediately but within 8 weeks of arrival at an establishment after sentence.

5.38 For eligible prisoners OASys can be a useful source of information on the

risks offenders pose both to themselves and others. To some extent, how risk

information from OASys is handled will be dependent upon local operational

practice and decisions. Security Information Reports (SIRs) can be used to

feed risk information to the establishment security department.

5.39 Since the OASys assessment may contain essential risk information on these

issues, it is vital that information from it is sent to the right place in a prison.

The OASys Clerk must check the Risk of Harm section of OASys for any

offender received into the establishment, or newly receiving an assessment.

If risk to others or risk of self harm is indicated in the assessment, the Clerk

must notify the area in which the offender is located as soon as the risk is

identified. The CARATs department must also be informed where self harm

through misuse of drugs is identified as a risk factor in OASys.

66

5.40 The risk of harm part of OASys is the main part that focuses on risk and it is

divided into three sections: screening, full risk of harm analysis and risk of

harm summary. If the screening process suggests that there are indications

of risk, then the relevant parts of the full risk of harm analysis will normally be

completed. If it is decided this is not necessary, the reasons for not doing so

must be recorded.

5.41 The risks addressed are: risk of serious harm to others, risks to children, risks

to the individual, suicide, self-harm, coping in custody, vulnerability, other

risks, escape/abscond, control issues and breach of trust. The risk of serious

harm to others is addressed in the OASys guidance in chapter 4. There are 4

levels of risk: low, medium, high and very high. Risk is categorised and

includes categories for risk to prisoners and to staff.

5.42 The risk of harm summary includes management issues and the risk

management plan (sections R10 and R 11 of OASys). Section R10.6 in the

risk of harm summary gives the risk of harm ratings and summary boxes on

current concerns and this information is also included in the general OASys

summary sheet.

5.43 For those offenders who have received a rating of very high, high or medium

in relation to risk of serious harm, risks to the individual and other risks, a

management plan must be completed. The management of this group of

offenders must be in line with the Prison Service Public Protection Standard

(see para xxx below). OASys provides the triggers for referrals to Multi

Agency Public Protection Panels and provides a structure for the

management plan for such offenders. The Prison Service Dangerous

Offender Strategy may also inform the management of this group of

offenders. MAPPA and the Dangerous Offender Strategy is described in

more detail below.

5.44 Where prisoners are assessed as presenting a high or very high risk in

custody, and/or the community, consideration must be given to whether any

action needs to be taken immediately to minimise the risk in the prison

environment. The risk of harm assessment must inform assessments and

decisions about the management of the prisoner, for example, allocation,

67

work allocation, re-categorisation, release on temporary licence etc.

Sentence plans must be developed which work to minimise the risk.

OASys and mentally disordered offenders

5.45 Risk assessment of mentally disordered offenders is covered in Section 14.

OASys can record initial information about mental health problems although

assessment by health care staff will be necessary and a care plan drawn up

by health care staff rather than through the sentence planning part of OASys.

5.46 Section 10 of the OASys assessment (emotional well-being) has questions to

indicate if there are current psychological problems or depression (10.2), self

harm, attempted suicide, or suicidal thoughts or feelings (10.5) and current

psychiatric problems (10.6). There are tick boxes at 10.7 including 'history of

psychiatric treatment' and 'ever been on medication for mental health

problems in past'. The OASys Manual and 'OASys Help' on the OASys

website on the Intranet state that severe problems in this section indicate a

need for specialist psychiatric or psychological assessments.

5.47 Section 11 of the OASys assessment (thinking and behaviour) covers

aggressive or controlling behaviour (11.3) and temper control (11.4). Section

13 (health and other considerations) contains a question on general health

and the opportunity to specify if the offender has any physical or mental

health conditions that need to be taken into account.

5.48 The Request for Information (RFI) system, through contributions from health

care staff, may also provide information about mental health to inform the

OASys assessment.

OASys and DSPD

5.49 OASys provides an initial screening to indicate the need for consideration for

referral for further specialist assessment for Dangerous and Severe

Personality Disorder (DSPD) to a DSPD unit. (This is done through a prompt

on screen when the sentence planning part of OASys is completed.)

68

OASys and racially motivated offending

5.50 OASys can record information on racist attitudes. Section12 of the OASys

assessment (attitudes) covers discriminatory attitudes and behaviour (12.2)

and attitude to community or society (12.5). In the risk of harm screening at

R1.2 there is a box for 'racially motivated/racially aggravated offence' and at

R1.3 a box for hate-based behaviour.

Asset

5.51 The Youth Justice Board (YJB) has developed ASSET, a structured

assessment tool for Youth Offending Teams (YOTs) to use for juvenile

offenders. An assessment using ASSET should be undertaken for all

juveniles in custody regardless of length of sentence and should be

completed by the YOT before arrival at the establishment. National

Standards for Youth Justice state that, where an ASSET is not received with

the juvenile, the establishment must follow this up with the YOT within one

hour and the YOT must provide the completed ASSET form within one

working day.

5.52 The core ASSET profile (document 26) contains a section called 'indicators of

serious harm to others' and this should be completed on all juveniles

assessed using ASSET. If any of these indicators are ticked, the practitioner

must then complete a more detailed 'risk of serious harm to others'

assessment form. This requires analysis of the juvenile's past and current

behaviour patterns, attitudes, circumstances and significant life events. There

will be some juveniles who display behaviour which may present a serious

risk to others but who do not - because of their age - have many previous

convictions. ASSET therefore encourages practitioners to look at all aspects

of a juvenile's behaviour which might indicate a risk of harm to others (e.g.

violence towards family members that may not have come to public notice or

resulted in any statutory intervention). The full 'risk of serious harm to others'

assessment form was revised in spring 2005. The Risk of Serious Harm

Guidance is supplied as document 27. When making a judgement about

future harmful behaviour, practitioners are asked to specify the people who

might be most at risk from the juvenile e.g. younger children, peers or

staff/people in authority. The four risk classifications used (low to very high)

69

are the same as those found in OASys in order to promote consistency of

approach and facilitate referrals to MAPPA where required. A new 'risk

management plan' has been issued to YOT staff to improve the process of

planning interventions to manage the risks that a juvenile person might

present to others.In contrast to OASys, prison staff do not complete ASSET.

YOT workers should liaise closely with prison service staff when completing

or updating ASSET (for example, at the point of release for a young person

serving a Detention and Training Order (DTO)) but responsibility for

completing and updating ASSET remains with the YOT at all times.

5.53 Most juveniles remain in the juvenile estate when they became 18, to serve

out their Detention and Training Orders (DTOs). The maximum DTO is two

years, with one year spent in custody and one year outside under YOT

supervision. Juvenile offenders convicted of more serious offences are

sentenced to detention under section 90 or 91 of the Powers of Criminal

Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000. Section 92 of that Act (which replaced section

53 of an earlier Act) provides for their placement and they will transfer to the

adult estate on reaching 18. The sentence planning file for these offenders,

including a copy of the original ASSET assessment, will transfer across to the

Young Offender Institution in the adult estate and be available to the OASys

assessor. The importance of exploring the link between OASys and ASSET is

recognised although they are separate tools because the assessment needs

of juveniles and adults are different. The OASys Data Evaluation and

Analysis Team (O-DEAT) in the NOMS OASys Unit has recently met with the

YJB and started work on mapping the question areas in both tools and

looking at the compatibility of the two databases.

Other Forms of Risk Assessment

5.54 Another form of risk assessment is that of categorisation & allocation which is

governed by Function 1 (Categorisation & Assessment) of the National

Security Framework. The NSF requires that establishments ensure that

prisoners are accommodated in conditions of safety and security. The

requirements under Function 1 in relation to risk assessments on reception is

dealt with at para xxx of Section 1.

70

5.55 Following sentence, all prisoners are categorised on the basis of risk of

escape/abscond and risk to the public should they do so. Category A is

reserved for those prisoners whose escape would be highly dangerous to the

public or the police or the security of the State and for whom the aim must be

to make escape impossible. A prisoner's security category is largely

determined by the nature and circumstances of their index offence, sentence

length, previous offending, previous escapes/absconds or breaches of trust.

Other circumstances, such as whether the prisoner poses a significant control

problem, may also be taken into account. Allocation is to a prison of the

appropriate category which best meets the prisoner's personal needs -as far

as limitations on the estate permit.

5.56 Establishments are required to ensure that initial categorisation takes place

within 2 working days of receipt of all essential documents. The documents

required as a minimum for the categorisation process are details of current

offence, previous convictions, PER, OASys were available and immigration

form for foreign nationals. Current procedures require ACR prisoners to have

their categorisation reviewed every 6 months and DCR prisoners every 12

months. Earlier reviews take place in response to any significant change in

circumstances. The re-categorisation process assesses whether the risk

posed by the prisoner (in terms of escape and/or to the public) has reduced

sufficiently to warrant allocation to a prison of a lower security category.

The Manaqement of Danqerous Prisoners: the development and use of risk

mana,qement models

5.57 NOMS is developing a strategy for the beginning to end management of

offenders who have been assessed as presenting a high or very high risk of

serious harm which is explained at paragraph xxx below.

5.58 The new strategy will supersede the existing Prison Service strategy; the

current strategy is encapsulated in a document produced in August 2004

(document 28) The strategy sets out how dangerous offenders are identified

and managed within prisons with reference to the requirements for

information sharing with external agencies, conducting risk assessments,

managing risk in the context of MAPPA and the Prison Service National

Security Framework, risk management plans and the various interventions

71

and programmes available to address the needs of dangerous offenders to

reduce the risk of re-offending and aid resettlement. Risk Management plans

are covered below. The various interventions and programmes available are

covered in the section addressing the identification and management of

mentally disordered prisoners.

5.59 Prisoners who are assessed as potentially dangerous are likely to be subject

to MAPPA as described in Phil Wheatley's second statement at paragraphs

6.53 to 6.57. The relevant PSO is PSO 4745 (document 29). The Criminal

Justice Act 2003 applies MAPPA to "relevant sexual and violent offenders" as

defined by section 327 of the Act and "other persons who, by reason of

offences committed by them (wherever committed), are considered by the

responsible authority to be persons who may cause serious harm to the

public" (section 325 CJA 2003). The focus of MAPPA is upon multi-agency

information sharing which helps in the formulation of risk management plans

for the release of offenders back into the community. The focus, is therefore,

public protection, not the risk that the offender may pose to staff or other

prisoners during their sentence.

5.60 However PSO 4745 on MAPPA contains a risk management model that is

capable of being used to manage a range of risk issues, not just those

covered by MAPPA. It is at present being adopted by establishments as they

work towards putting MAPPA procedures in place. This model is Annex C of

PSO 4745 and suggests an Interdepartmental Risk Management Team with

responsibility for providing regular assessments for this group of prisoners.

5.61 The inter departmental risk management team was initially developed in

relation to the management of sex offenders subject to PSO 4400, chapter 1

who were a risk to children and was adopted as an example of good practice

in PSO 4745 to enable establishments to manage risk in relation to prisoners

subject to MAPPA. It is now incorporated into the Public Protection Standard.

The current Standard (document 30) issued in January 2005 provides that:

"The risks posed by high and very high risk (of serious harm - OASys)

prisoners subject to MAPPA, and other prisoners considered to be

high risk because of their antecedent history and/or current behaviour

are assessed through risk management meetings attended by key

72

staff such as seconded Probation staff, Police Liaison Officers and

nominated risk management staff. Such assessments are formally

recorded (it is sufficient to record Action Points" (Key audit baseline

19).

5.62 It provides a holistic model which is applicable to the management of a range

of risks, which may include risks to other prisoners and staff. It provides a

mechanism for agreeing upon appropriate measures to manage that risk

which may include the monitoring of correspondence and phone calls and

that those measure are proportionate, as well as agreeing upon interventions

to address the needs of those prisoners to reduce the risk of offending. Now

that it is an auditable baseline the expectation is that more establishments will

develop this model.

5.63 In addition there is a Public Protection Manual (supplied to the Inquiry on CD

Rom - document 31), an intranet based document, which provides advice

and guidance on a range of measures to enable establishments to manage

the risks posed by high risk prisoners to the public, children and victims in

general.

Whether prisoners who pose a risk to other staff or inmates should have their

correspondence and telephone calls routinely monitored?

5.64 The criteria for commencing monitoring is dealt with at paragraph 3.8 of the

section addressing monitoring correspondence and telephone calls.

Prisoners who pose a risk to other staff or prisoners may be targeted as

"nominals", that is those who pose (or may in the future pose) a threat to

order and control either generally or by way of a threat to specific prisoner(s)

or staff. However there would be a resource issue if there were to be a

significant extension beyond statutory monitoring (sex offenders and

Protection from Harrassment) outside the high security estate.

Managing risks arising from behaviour in prison

5.65 The Inter departmental risk management team model will focus on those

whose risk has been previously identified by one of the risk assessment tools.

73

Their purpose is to direct resources to where they are most effective. A

critical function is to identify risks not previously identified, for example where

a child sex offender is found to be writing to single parents or where a

member of staff has overheard a conversation in which an offender has

indicated a desire to rape a child. However the model can be used to

manage other risks, for example intentions to bully, racial abuse or self harm.

Generally this model will not currently be in use for managing these kind of

risks so there would be an impact on resources and other activities were its

use to be extended.

The "Hindley Model"

5.66 The Hindley Public Protection Department has moved on considerably from

the arrangements which were in place in 1999. The current model not only

identifies high level MAPPA cases but also schedule 1 offenders, potentially

dangerous offenders (PDOs) prolific and other priority offenders (PPOs),

street crime initiative offenders, and those subject to harassment orders.

Management of such cases includes vetting of visitors, monitoring of mail and

telephone calls where required. All such cases are reviewed by the Public

Protection Panel upon which there is representation from a number of

agencies from both inside and outside the establishment. Information

provided at the reviews includes OASys assessments, Probation

Assessments, Field probation assessments, YOT assessments, Security

Intelligence, Police liaison intelligence, and mental health assessments which

inform agreed decisions about how to manage the young people under

review. In addition they have developed a Risk Management Unit in the

custody office which maintains a risk register. Potentially Dangerous

Offenders, PPOs, schedule 1 offenders, harassment cases and MAPPA

cases are all managed and monitored. Hindley has its own definition of

Potentially Dangerous Offender and manage such young men very closely.

NOMS High Risk Offenders Strategy

5.67 NOMS is presently developing a High Risk Offenders strategy to take

account of the indeterminate and extended sentences under the CJA 2003

(sections 224 to 228) and the new model for offender management under

74

NOMS. These sentences may be imposed in respect of offences committed

on or after 4 April 2005 for offenders who commit sexual or violent offences,

and who are assessed by the Court as posing a significant risk to the public

from further sexual or violent offending. Those convicted of a sexual or

violent offence carrying a maximum penalty of 10 years or more are liable to

an indeterminate sentence. Those convicted of an offence carrying a penalty

of less than 10 years will be liable to a determinate sentence with an

extended period of supervision.

5.68 The strategy is for the "end to end" management of high risk offenders - those

assessed as high or very high risk under OASys, and will include a risk

management model, the assessments which should be carried out and the

appropriate timescales through to preparation for release including

arrangements for recall. It is hoped that by late summer/early autumn 2005

the High Risk Offender Strategy Group will be able to approve a high level

statement setting out the strategy and that the NOMS Executive Board can

approve the risk management model. There will then be a number of

implementation issues to address which will include alignment of the high risk

offender strategy with the National Offender Management Model. The

National Offender Management Model will provide for end to end offender

management and, in particular, the allocation to every offender of an

"offender manager".For the majority of prisoners the designated Offender

Manager will be based in the community, but for long-term prisoners/lifers it is

likely that the designated Offender manager will be based within the Prison.

In addition to the designated Offender Manger, "Offender Supervisors' will be

identified to co-ordinate and support the delivery to the sentence plan which

flows from the OASys Risk Assessment. A pathfinder project to trial the

Offender Mangement Model is currently operating within the North West.

Monitoring

5.69 With regard to OASys, a performance Standard with key audit baselines,

based on the mandatory requirements in the PSO, was issued in May 2004.

A slightly revised version was introduced in April 2005. The Standard states

that:

75

'All eligible prisoners have assessments completed in a timely and open

manner, using the Offender Assessment System. Sentence plans are based

on the outcome of these assessments, are developed in consultation with the

relevant parties and set realistic targets for addressing offending behaviour in

custody and in the community following release.'

5.70 The Public Protection Standard provides for key audit baselines in relation to

the identification of potentially dangerous offenders, to ensure that

appropriate action is taken whilst in custody to reduce the risk of serious

harm posed by these prisoners, in relation to planning for their release and as

regards to information sharing and contributing to inter-agency work.

Classification

5.71 The current security categories indicate the general level of physical and

procedural security required to address an individual's risk of escape, risk to

the public and control issues. The vital issue where risk of harm to others

within the prison environment is concerned is that the specific risk is not only

identified, but that a strategy is put in place to manage that risk. It may not be

helpful simply to apply a generic identification marker to all prisoners who are

assessed as posing a risk to others without also flagging up the exact nature

of the risk or the likely target and establishing a plan to manage these risks.

5.72 There are a number of risk assessments currently in use designed to identify

those prisoners who pose a risk to others. Function 1 of the National Security

Framework requires that all prisoners are held in conditions of safety and

security in line with the levels of risk posed in terms of escape or abscond;

risk to the public in the event of an escape or abscond; to the state; to

himself/herself or others within the prison or from other prisoners.

Compliance with the requirements of Function 1 is audited in each prison as

part of the security audit (see Section 1 and paragraphs xx above).

5.73 The risk assessments required by Function 1 are;

76

• The cell sharing risk assessment which must be completed on

reception and which seeks to identify those who would present a

risk to others

• The initial categorisation assessment which assesses risk of

escape, risk to the public and control issues that indicate the need

for greater supervision. It also takes account of issues that might

affect the prisoner's allocation including risk of harm to others.

The assessment is based on details of the current offence,

previous convictions, the OASys where this has been started as

part of the pre sentence report, the PER form and reports from the

security department, medical officer, psychologist and probation

department as necessary.

• Recategorisation which is a review of the initial categorisation

assessment that takes place either every 6 months after the initial

categorisation for ACR prisoners or annually for DCR prisoners.

Categorisation should also be reviewed whenever there has been

a change in the prisoner's circumstances or behaviour that

impacts on his security needs.

5.74 Depending on how closely the cell sharing risk assessment reflects the

OASys risk of harm section it may be useful if the latter could be available

from the beginning of the prisoner's time in custody. The OASys provides an

assessment of the level of risk (low, medium, high or very high) the prisoner

poses to others which is flagged up on LIDS and which requires a

comprehensive management plan for all prisoners assessed as presenting a

medium to very high risk and an immediate strategy for managing those

presenting a high or very high risk. At present this is only available for those

remand prisoners whose OASys has been started as part of the pre-sentence

report. Alternatively, the OASys is completed 8 weeks after sentencing for all

prisoners sentenced to 12 months or over and can then instigate a review of

the prisoner's security category. There is a danger that risks presented by

those either on remand or serving less than 12 months may be missed.

77