THORN Cross Prison at Appleton Thorn, Warrington is a successful institution – but has work to do to limit the ingress of illicit items such as drugs.
It is overwhelmingly safe and violence and delinquency are rare, with the number of prisoners absconding lower than in nearly all comparable prisons.
These are among the findings of an unannounced inspection carried out in May by HM Inspectorate of Prisons
Thorn Cross is an open prison with a capacity of 429 adult men. It has consistently been a successful institution, and this continues to be the case, according to the report of chief inspector of prisons Charlie Taylor.
He says: “When we last inspected in 2016, we found that outcomes for prisoners were good in
all four of our healthy prison tests. At this inspection, outcomes remained good in three tests, but had declined marginally to reasonably good in our healthy prison area of respect.
“The prison was overwhelmingly safe. Violence and delinquency were rare and absconds were lower than nearly all comparator prisons. Prisoners reported
that they felt safe, both when they arrived and throughout their stay. There hadbeen some increase in the use of force, but this mainly concerned recording the
use of handcuffs in circumstances where a prisoner had to return to closed conditions.
“That said, decisions to return prisoners were proportionate and second chances were afforded to many. Self-harm was similarly uncommon, although the prison had more work to do to limit the ingress of illicit items, such as drugs.”
Mr Taylor said the phe prison remained a respectful place. Relationships were positive, although greater efforts were needed to ensure a more open and supportive stance from some offender management staff. The external environment was excellent which, when combined with good accommodation and very good communal facilities, was conducive to the support of well-being generally. Consultation and procedures for redress were reasonable and access to health care was good.
The promotion of equality had lapsed, however, and leaders had only recently begun to re-energise initiatives. Despite this, outcomes and perceptions among
those with protected characteristics were generally proportionate.
As an open prison, prisoners were not locked up and good efforts were made to promote family ties, especially the use of temporary release (ROTL) for home
visits. ROTL was also used extensively to support other regime and resettlement activity, including the many prisoners who worked in paid employment outside the prison each day.
The prison had developed plans to extend real work opportunities on ROTL still further and Ofsted judged the overall effectiveness of education, work and skills to be “good”. Offender management and services for those being resettled were similarly effective, with prisoners receiving generally good support.
But many prisoners said a small number of staff were rude and unhelpful.
Leadership at the prison was visible and strong. The central mission – to provide activity, allow prisoners to progress through their sentence, and eventually to support resettlement – was being delivered. The governor provided energy, direction and a leadership vision, and was well respected by enthusiastic staff
