UNCLASSIFIED
INCENTIVES AND EARNED PRIVILEGE
This instruction applies to:
Reference :
Prisons
PSI 11 /2011
Issue Date
Effective Date
Expiry Date
Implementation Date
1 March 2011
1 April 2011
31 March 2015
Issued on the authority of
For action by
For information
Contact
NOMS Agency Board
Governors and Directors of Contracted Prisons
Associated documents
Residential Services Specification, PSI 28/2010 Custody
Compacts, PSI 30/2008 Prisoners Private Cash, PSO 4465
Prisoners Financial Affairs, PSO1700 Segregation, PSO 2000
Prison Discipline Manual, PSO 2205 Offender Assessment &
Sentence Management (OASys), PSO 2855 Prisoners with
Disabilities, PSO 4460 Prisoners Pay, PSI 28/2009 Care and
Management of Young People, PSI 01/2010 Licences for
DVD/Video Films, Music & TV in Prisons
All prison staff
Nina Revell, Offender Safety, Rights and
Responsibilities Group
Tel 0300 047 5688
Nina.revell@noms.gsi.gov.uk
Replaces the following documents which are hereby cancelled :PSO 4000 Incentives and Earned Privileges
PSI 32/2008 Restricting Prisoners’ Access to Games Consoles/Games
Audit/monitoring :
Compliance will be monitored in the operational management line.
UNCLASSIFIED
Page 1
CONTENTS
Section
1
Subject
Executive summary
2
Specification outcomes
3
Devising
local
IEP
schemes
including games consoles and
games
Management and operation of local
IEP schemes
In-cell television
4
Annex A
Annex B
Prison and YOI Rules relating to
Incentives and Earned Privileges
Annex C
National framework for incentives
and earned privileges for prisoners:
local scheme
Annex D
Check list for good process
Annex E
Annex F
Annex G
PSI 11/2011
Applies to
Governors, Directors of contracted
prisons and all prison staff
Governors, Directors and all prisonerfacing staff
Governors, Directors and prison
managers tasked with designing and
maintaining local IEP schemes
Governors, Directors and all prisonerfacing staff
Governors, Directors and all prisonerfacing staff
Governors, Directors and prison
managers tasked with designing and
maintaining local IEP schemes
Governors, Directors and prison
managers tasked with designing and
maintaining local IEP schemes
Governors, Directors and prison
managers tasked with designing and
maintaining local IEP schemes
Use of Compacts
Governors, Directors and prison
managers tasked with designing and
maintaining local IEP schemes
Model Compact for In-Cell TV
Governors, Directors and prison
managers tasked with designing and
maintaining local IEP schemes
Managing prisoners who are in Staff undertaking IEP reviews and OM’s
denial of their offence
UNCLASSIFIED
Issue date 01/03/11
UNCLASSIFIED
1.
Page 2
Executive Summary
Background
1.1
This Instruction sets out the operational framework for prison establishments in delivering
the Incentives and Earned Privileges Scheme (IEP), which is part of the Residential
Services Specification.
Overview
1.2
Prison Rule 8 and YOI Rule 6 require every prison and YOI to provide a system of
privileges which can be granted to prisoners or young offenders in addition to the minimum
entitlements under the Rules, subject to their reaching and maintaining specified standards
of conduct and performance. The National Policy Framework described below applies to all
prisons and YOIs, but Governors or Directors may exempt prisoners from the scheme who
have progressed onto a structured resettlement programme, for whom other forms of
incentive will apply (all subsequent references to Governors in this PSI should be taken to
include Directors). There is a separate scheme for young people (please see paragraph
2.8 of PSI 28/2009 ‘The Care and Management of Young People’). Establishments can
tailor their individual schemes by including incentives and privileges available locally which
are likely to prove attractive to their particular prisoners.
1.3
The national aims of the IEP Scheme are:




to encourage responsible behaviour by prisoners;
to encourage effort and achievement in work and other constructive activity by
prisoners;
to encourage sentenced prisoners to engage in sentence planning and benefit from
activities designed to reduce re-offending; and
to create a more disciplined, better-controlled and safer environment for prisoners
and staff.
These aims are to be achieved by ensuring that privileges above the statutory minimum are
earned by prisoners through good behaviour and performance and are removed if they fail
to maintain acceptable standards.
1.4
It is essential that IEP Schemes are inclusive and take account of equality considerations
relating to any of the Protected Characteristics which are; age, disability, gender
reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or
belief, sex and sexual orientation. Managers designing local schemes must ensure that
they offer a range of earnable privileges so that all prisoners can receive equal benefit in
return for good behaviour. For example, if additional gym sessions are offered as an
earnable privilege, there must be an alternative for prisoners who are physically unable to
benefit. The design of the scheme must also ensure equitable treatment for prisoners
located in particular units, for example for their own protection, or as part of a residential
programme such as RAPT.
1.5
It must also be possible for all prisoners to earn their way onto Enhanced level with a
similar degree of effort. So, for example, if taking part in work contributes to earning
Enhanced status, there must be comparable ways for older prisoners to earn that status.
1.6
Allocating prisoners to IEP levels, and moving them up or down, inevitably involves
individual members of staff exercising their judgement and discretion and to some extent
interpreting behaviour. Decisions that involve the exercise of discretion inevitably attract
attention with regard to equality and fairness, and the IEP Scheme has been a particular
PSI 11/2011
UNCLASSIFIED
Issue date 01/03/11
UNCLASSIFIED
Page 3
focus of equality concerns, with recent data revealing some disproportionality. Decisions
affecting IEP levels must be properly documented and evidenced and diversity outcomes
monitored.
Contact.
For further Information about this PSI contact:
Nina Revell, Offender Safety, Rights and Responsibilities Group
Tel 0300 047 5688
Nina.revell@noms.gsi.gov.uk
(signed)
Phil Copple
Director of Offender Management for the North East
PSI 11/2011
UNCLASSIFIED
Issue date 01/03/11
UNCLASSIFIED
Page 4
2.
Residential Services Specification Outcomes
2.1
This PSI deals solely with those outcomes in the Residential Services specification that
relate to IEP. For other outcomes, (see PSI 10/2010).
2.2
Good behaviour is incentivised and poor behaviour is challenged. Local incentive
arrangements operate on at least three levels: basic, standard and enhanced.
2.2.1
The IEP scheme rewards good behaviour and performance and removes privileges if
expected standards are not maintained. In addition to any local aims, it is intended to
encourage prisoners and YOs to behave responsibly, to participate in constructive activity,
and to progress through the system.
2.2.2
The IEP scheme must operate on at least three tiers: basic, standard and enhanced. Most
prisons will not have a sufficient range of privileges to provide more than three distinct
levels, but may do so with the agreement of their Deputy Director of Custody. Prisoners
move between levels according to their behaviour. The entitlements for each level consist
of key earnable privileges [paragraph 3.1 below lists the 6 key earnable privileges] which
apply to all prisons and additional privileges which vary according to local circumstances.
2.3
Incentives arrangements are fair, consistent and non-discriminatory, support the
requirements of the establishment and meet the needs of the population, where practicable.
2.3.1 On entering custody, all prisoners must be placed initially on the standard privilege level
and a review undertaken within the first month.
2.3.2 Governors must ensure that their IEP scheme is fair and consistent, and that published
procedures are in place for earning and losing privileges. Governors must also be satisfied
that the IEP scheme is open to all their prisoners and does not disadvantage particular
groups or individuals, for example because of their ethnic origin or disability, or those
transferred from other establishments.
All staff must be fully aware of how the local
scheme operates so they can contribute to the assessment process. The scheme must be
approved and signed by the Deputy Director of Custody.
2.3.3
There must be a system in place to ensure prisoners are given written warnings if their
behaviour is causing concern and does not meet the set criteria. Warnings must not be
used as a means of discouraging prisoners from making requests/complaints.
2.3.4
The pattern of declining behaviour or performance must be judged against the standards
specified in the establishment’s published criteria. Just as the granting of a particular
privilege or movement to a higher privilege level provide an incentive and reward for good
behaviour and performance, so the loss of an earned privilege or demotion to a lower level
should be seen as the normal consequence of a general deterioration in behaviour and/or
performance. A single incident of misbehaviour or short term failure of performance will not
automatically result in a change of status, but may be taken into account when considering
the prisoner’s general suitability to be granted or retain privileges.
2.3.5
Whenever possible, the local scheme must allow prisoners on progressive transfer to retain
their privilege level. As a minimum, they must be able to retain the national key privileges
wherever these are available. Prisoners who are returned from the resettlement estate
without a current IEP level must be treated as new receptions and placed on standard level
(see paragraph 2.3.1). Prisoners should be advised what is available at their new location
on arrival, or before transfer if requested. Prisoners who are recalled into custody will also
be treated as new receptions and placed on the standard level.
PSI 11/2011
UNCLASSIFIED
Issue date 01/03/11
UNCLASSIFIED
Page 5
2.3.6
A manager must carry out monthly checks of a sample of IEP review decisions to ensure
fairness and consistency. Figures relating to the IEP scheme must be produced quarterly
for the Senior Management Team and any apparent imbalance in the distribution of
privilege levels between people from groups who have protected characteristics must be
investigated. Establishments must review their IEP scheme annually to ensure it continues
to be relevant to their local aims and population, including different ethnic groups.
2.4
The basic level provides access to the minimum statutory and decent requirements of a
regime on normal location.
2.4.1 Prisoners on the basic level of the IEP scheme must continue to receive entitlements laid
down in Prison/YOI Rules and other instructions. Their position is different from those
prisoners who have been removed from association under Prison Rule 45/YOI Rule 49.
Paragraph 3.4 provides further detail about basic regimes.
2.5
Prisoner conduct and behaviour on the wing is managed. Privilege levels are determined by
patterns of behaviour, compliance with the regime or individual sentence plan targets, or
significant events. Decisions are recorded and the prisoner and other stakeholders are
notified.
2.5.1
The earning and retaining of privileges must relate to the standards of behaviour and
performance expected of prisoners. These standards may vary in fine detail between
establishments, but overall should be consistent across the whole estate.
2.5.2
Factors which must be taken into account when making decisions about privilege levels
and particular privileges include:



the prisoner’s approach to the sentence and their willingness to use their time in
custody constructively to reduce re-offending, e.g. through involvement in OASys
and sentence planning and the relationship with probation officer and other staff
who have had close dealings with the prisoner
the prisoner’s institutional behaviour, i.e. compliance with rules and routines, and
relationships with other prisoners and staff. Disciplinary offences (where proven)
may be taken into account when considering overall patterns of behaviour, and a
series of offences or a single major offence may lead to a review of a prisoner’s
privilege level
the prisoner’s attitude to people outside prison, including family, victims and others
they may come into contact with.
2.5.3
Decisions about the appropriate privilege level for each prisoner must be open, fair and
consistent. The procedures and the findings must be recorded and involve at least two
members of staff. Views must be sought from across the establishment, including education
and workshop staff, reports from any relevant treatment programmes and any other staff
who have close dealings with the prisoner. The decision must be endorsed by a manager.
2.5.4
The determination of a prisoner’s privilege level must be based on patterns of behaviour
rather than a single incident (unless it is especially serious and in this instance an urgent
review must take place), active engagement with the sentence planning process (where
applicable), be separate from the disciplinary system, and reviewed regularly. Prisoners
must be able to make prior representations. They must be recorded and any decisions
notified to the prisoner. Prisoners must be informed of the local appeal process, including
Request/Complaint procedures.
2.5.5. Reasons for decisions given to prisoners need not be lengthy or detailed, but must be
sufficient for the prisoner to understand what criteria he or she has failed to meet, the
PSI 11/2011
UNCLASSIFIED
Issue date 01/03/11
UNCLASSIFIED
Page 6
evidence to support this assertion, and why any representations by the prisoner (or by a
member of staff) have been rejected. Establishments may decide to do this through a
standard form, which also explains the local appeals procedure.
2.6
Prisoners and Residential Staff are aware of the establishment regime and other services
provided outside the normal regime, including the local IEP scheme and their
responsibilities under it.
2.6.1
Each scheme must include a written statement (an example is shown at annex C), which is
published and made freely available to all prisoners and staff, setting out:





which of the key earnable privileges, and other locally available privileges, will be
provided, for whom, and in which parts of the establishment
details of what is available for each of the three privilege levels
the criteria for earning, retaining and losing privileges – these should relate to
standards and patterns of behaviour and performance in regime activities
the procedures by which decisions will be made about earning, retaining and losing
privileges, including who will make and assess reports on prisoners, the frequency
of assessment meetings, opportunities for prisoners to challenge adverse reports,
and who will make final decisions
procedures for informing prisoners of decisions, reasons for adverse decisions, and
appeals.
2.6.2
New receptions must be informed of the scheme, and provision must be made for those
who have difficulty reading or understanding English. Detailed information on the scheme
must be conveyed to prisoners during the induction period, and staff should be prepared to
offer advice on it at any time. It is good practice to provide information in a variety of
languages and formats, e.g. large print,
3.
Devising local IEP Schemes
Key earnable privileges
3.1
The following are designated as key earnable privileges, and when available must be
included in local IEP schemes, to the extent deemed appropriate for each of the three
privilege levels:






extra and improved visits
eligibility to earn higher rates of pay
access to in-cell television
opportunity to wear own clothes
access to private cash
time out of cell for association
Release on temporary licence for the purpose of making local visits must not be offered as
an earnable privilege.
3.2
In denying the generality of convicted prisoners on basic and/or standard levels permission
to wear their own clothing under the local IEP scheme, prisons must ensure that adequate
provision is made for prisoners for whom standard prison issue clothing is unsuitable, for
example because of a disability, and must ensure that transsexual people have access to
the items needed to maintain their gender appearance.
PSI 11/2011
UNCLASSIFIED
Issue date 01/03/11
UNCLASSIFIED
Page 7
Privilege levels
3.3
The privileges available at each level should be sufficiently attractive to provide prisoners
with a genuine incentive to progress upwards.
Basic Level
3.4
Prisoners are placed on basic level because they have failed to meet local criteria for
admission to standard and enhanced levels. All prisoners on basic level will continue to
receive the entitlements laid down in Prison/YOI Rules and other instructions, in relation to
visits, letters, telephone calls, provision of food and clothing etc, and any other minimum
facilities provided locally for all prisoners, apart from those in segregation. They will
continue to participate in normal regime activities, including work, education, treatment
programmes and religious services, be allowed access to the prison shop, exercise and
association, and attend offending behaviour programmes as necessary.
Standard Level
3.5
Prisoners on standard level will be provided with a greater volume of the allowances and
facilities at basic level, plus such additional privileges as are available locally. Typically,
they will include more frequent visits, more time for association and the provision of in-cell
television. Standard level prisoners are also eligible for higher rates of pay for work, subject
to those on the enhanced level being considered first for particular jobs, and a higher
allowance of private cash.
Enhanced Level
3.6
Prisoners on enhanced level will receive at least the same privileges as those on standard
level but, again, in greater volume, with additional visits, if possible in better surroundings
and with more flexibility over times, additional time for association (subject to local
resources), more private cash, and priority consideration for higher rates of pay.
Further details of key earnable privileges
3.7
3.8
3.9
Access to private cash
Prisoners are allowed to spend from their earnings, and to supplement this with their private
cash (i.e., money that was in their possession on reception or received later from outside).
Further guidance is in PSO 4465 Prisoners Financial Affairs. Mandatory IEP cash limits
can be found in PSI 30/2008.
Extra and improved visits
The Prison and YOI Rules set out the minimum statutory entitlement to visits, which is
contained in PSI 16/2011. Providing visits and services to visitors, Output 1 and 3 refer.
Prisoners who are held a considerable distance from their immediate family, and foreign
national prisoners who may not have any close family members normally resident in the
United Kingdom should be made aware that where circumstances allow they may be able
to accrue and take accumulated visits.
Higher rates of pay
Detailed guidance on prisoners’ pay policy is set out in PSO 4460, which includes
mandatory minimum pay rates. Governors may set local pay rates above the minimum to
PSI 11/2011
UNCLASSIFIED
Issue date 01/03/11
UNCLASSIFIED
Page 8
reflect regime priorities, in particular to encourage and reward prisoners’ constructive
participation in the regime. Pay rates must not provide a disincentive to participation in
activities that are part of prisoners’ sentence or learning plans intended to reduce the risk of
re-offending. Prisoners on the standard or enhanced levels are eligible for higher pay
rates, with enhanced prisoners being considered first.
3.10
3.11
3.12
In-cell television
Prisoners on standard or enhanced level are eligible for access to in-cell television, in
establishments where in-cell electricity is available, or via battery operated sets. Prisoners
pay a weekly rental per set and must sign the in-cell TV compact. Access can be a strong
incentive to good behaviour and regime participation, and can aid order and control by
occupying prisoners’ time and reducing boredom and tension. It also helps to maintain
contact with the outside world. Annex A provides detailed policy relating to in-cell
television.
Wearing own clothes
The Prison Rules allow unconvicted prisoners (other than those on the Escape List) and
civil prisoners to wear their own clothes. Basic level prisoners are required to wear prisonissue clothing, but those on standard or enhanced level may be allowed to wear their own
clothes.
Time out of cell
The amount of time prisoners are allowed to spend outside their cells to engage in activities
(other than work, education, treatment programmes or religious services) or to associate
together will vary from one establishment to another, depending on the availability of
constructive activities and supervisory staff. But where there is scope to increase the
allowance, standard level prisoners may earn extra time out of cell in addition to the
establishment’s basic minimum, and then further time if they are on enhanced level.
Establishments may find this easier to manage where the privilege is location-based, rather
than mixing prisoners on different levels.
Additional Privileges
3.13
In addition to the key earnable privileges, establishments may make other privileges and
incentives available to suitable prisoners, according to local circumstances. There must be
sufficient difference between the levels to provide a genuine incentive to progress. The
privileges must also take account of the different statutory provisions for remand and
convicted prisoners, and for adults and young offenders. Prisons should also bear in mind
that difficulties may arise on transfer, particularly at the same level of security category, if
prisoners who have grown accustomed to particular privileges in one establishment find
that the same privileges are not available elsewhere.
3.14
Other criteria establishments must consider before allowing additional privileges are:




3.15
does the privilege meet the requirements of security, control and safety?
will it encourage prisoners to behave better in custody?
will it encourage prisoners to engage in OASys and sentence planning and therefore
discourage further offending and help their rehabilitation?
Is it likely to be acceptable to reasonable public opinion. To be justifiable if criticised,
and not likely to bring NOMS into disrepute.
The Scheme must include a range of earnable privileges to appropriately reward good
conduct by all prisoners, including those who are elderly, disabled or with other special
needs. However, it may be difficult to ensure that published schemes cover every situation
and it will be sufficient to indicate bespoke alternatives will be provided for special needs.
PSI 11/2011
UNCLASSIFIED
Issue date 01/03/11
UNCLASSIFIED
Page 9
Games Consoles and Games
Paragraphs 3.16 - 3.19 do not apply to young people as there are different arrangements in
place in the under 18 estate
3.16
If Games consoles and games are allowed as an additional privilege under the local IEP
scheme they must not be provided at public expense and only prisoners on the Enhanced
level of the IEP scheme may be allowed to have games consoles and games in
possession.
3.17
18-rated games are not permitted to any prisoner under any circumstances.
3.18
Some games consoles are wi-fi enabled, that is, they can be used to access the Internet
over any unprotected wireless network within range.
In addition, there are devices
available in the high street that allow any wi-fi enabled equipment to connect to mobile
broadband. These small units can be carried in the pocket or other part of the body and
connect wirelessly to other devices which will allow access to the internet from anywhere
there is a mobile phone signal.
3.19
All prisons have previously been made aware that “new-generation” games consoles which
have built in wireless access to the internet are not permitted. In possession. ICT Group
have constructed the following non-exhaustive list of the types of consoles that should not
be allowed for use by prisoners:











Microsoft XBox 360
Nintendo Wii
Nintendo DS
Nintendo DS Lite
Nintendo DSi
Sony PlayStation 3
Sony PlayStation Portable (PSP)
Sony PlayStation Portable Slim and Lite - 2000
Sony PlayStation Portable - 3000
Sony PlayStation Portable Go
Any other device with wi-fi capability such as the i-pod touch.
Obviously, this list is subject to frequent change as new products are released. The simple
rule is that no games console with wi-fi capability should be allowed in prison.
PSI 11/2011
UNCLASSIFIED
Issue date 01/03/11
UNCLASSIFIED
Page 10
4.
Management and operation of local IEP Schemes
4.1
When a prisoner has consistently achieved the type of behaviour and performance
specified in the local scheme, he or she may advance to the level above. If the prisoner’s
behaviour or lack of progress demonstrates that he or she cannot sustain his/her current
privilege level, he or she may be downgraded to the level below (as an administrative
measure, not as a punishment imposed at adjudication). The fast-tracking of prisoners
from enhanced to basic must be avoided except in the most serious cases of misconduct,
e.g. assault. In this instance, a review must take place and be endorsed by a member of
the local Senior Management Team.
Criteria for good behaviour and performance
4.2
Examples of good behaviour and performance that establishments may wish to include in
their local criteria are set out below.









Respect for establishment rules and routines, i.e. no unauthorised drugs or alcohol,
co-operation with mandatory drug tests, no selling, trading, taxing or gambling,
following reasonable written and posted procedures, staying within bounds,
compliance with rules during visits, compliance with ROTL, due regard for personal
hygiene and health, i.e. cleanliness and appearance, neatness and suitability of
clothing
Effort and achievement in work and other constructive activities, i.e. participating
fully in sentence planning (see PSO 2205 Offender Assessment and Sentence
Management (OASys))
effort and productivity at work, application and/or
achievement in education (including trade/vocational courses), constructive attitude
and willingness to explore the potential for benefit from relevant treatment
programmes eg, willing to meet with programme staff, discuss the relevance of
programmes to their needs, and consider the benefits for them of attending
treatment programmes if recommended as suitable
Supporting the efforts of other prisoners to engage with their sentence plans,
address their offending and live more constructive lives
Non-violence, i.e. no violent or threatening behaviour, no bullying or intimidation,
and no aggressive or offensive language
Non-discrimination, i.e. treating everyone with respect whatever their race, religion,
sexuality or personal circumstances. No racist, obscene or other offensive remarks
or gestures
Civility, i.e. keeping noise down to an acceptable level, no rudeness, appropriate
manners
Mutual respect, i.e. co-operation with staff in the performance of their duties,
compliance with staff’s reasonable expectations, no attempts to deceive or
manipulate staff, respect for other prisoners
Treating others fairly, i.e. willingness to build good relations with other prisoners and
offer them support, and not interfering with others’ property
Due regard for others’ health and safety, i.e. cleanliness and tidiness of cells and
other areas, proper use of equipment, materials and facilities, compliance with fire
safety procedures, including rules on smoking.
Reviews
4.3
Prisoners placed on basic level must be reviewed within seven days and informed of the
steps they need to take to return to standard level. This should include realistic targets to
PSI 11/2011
UNCLASSIFIED
Issue date 01/03/11
UNCLASSIFIED
Page 11
assist them to progress from the basic level. Adult prisoners that remain on basic level
must therefore be reviewed at least monthly and young offenders at least every 14 days.
For Young People (under 18s) please also refer to the section on promoting and
maintaining good behaviour (paragraphs 2.7 – 2.9) in PSI 28/2009 ‘Care and Management
of Young People’.
4.4
Prisoners on standard level may apply to be elevated to enhanced after three months, and
at three monthly intervals thereafter. Standard level prisoners who do not apply for
elevation, and all those on enhanced level, should be reviewed annually to ensure their
behaviour reflects their incentive level. An earlier review can take place if there is a change
in overall behaviour or performance.
4.5
IEP assessments should take account of prisoners’ progress in achieving OASys sentence
planning objectives. Objectives linked to offending behaviour programmes should initially
be based on the offender supervisor’s assessment of the prisoner, rather than the
prisoner’s attendance on a programme. Targets connected with attendance on a
programme should only be set on the offender supervisor’s advice, and should be reviewed
annually. These reviews should again take account of the views of the offender supervisor
and treatment manager. A prisoner’s suitability for offending behaviour programmes does
not depend on his or her IEP level, and no decisions about the suitability of a prisoner on
basic level should be made until the prisoner has been assessed by the programme’s
treatment manager.
Prisoners’ in denial of their offence
4.6
In determining IEP levels, the fact that someone is in denial of their offence should not be a
bar to attaining enhanced status. It is a prisoner’s approach to their sentence and
willingness to use their time in custody constructively to reduce re-offending eg; through
involvement with OASys and sentence planning which should determine whether they meet
required standards. Therefore it is important to ensure that relevant sentence plan targets
are set and reviewed where necessary. (Annex G provides further guidance).
Forfeiture of individual privileges under the prison disciplinary system
4.7
Loss of specified privileges for a defined period as a result of an adjudication is separate
from IEPS, which is an administrative system. Details of the disciplinary system are
contained in the Prison Discipline Manual PSO 2000, particularly chapter 7 on verdicts and
punishments
Forfeiture of privileges at Governor’s discretion
4.8
Some day to day operational decisions affect prisoners’ access to privileges ; for example
where lack of space means a prisoner cannot be accommodated on a wing where certain
facilities exist, or if a facility has to be temporarily withdrawn for security or other operational
reasons. However, Governors must not use their discretion to withdraw privileges from
individual prisoners on a punitive basis without going through the processes described in
this instruction, and must have regard to any safer custody implications of their decisions.
.
Double jeopardy
4.9
The disciplinary system and IEP scheme are two separate systems. Privilege levels are
determined by patterns of behaviour. The adjudication process helps maintain order and
discipline within a prison by awarding punishments for specific incidents. There may be
PSI 11/2011
UNCLASSIFIED
Issue date 01/03/11
UNCLASSIFIED
Page 12
occasions when behaviour results in both disciplinary proceedings for a specific act and a
review of privilege level because the prisoner’s behaviour falls below expected standards.
4.10
The loss of a particular privilege following an adjudication, or at the Governor’s discretion
should not automatically result in the loss of IEP status.
Review Boards
4.11
Decisions about the appropriate privilege level must be reached fairly and consistently and
be based on patterns of behaviour. Alongside behaviour, performance at work or with
meeting sentence plan targets should also be taken into consideration. Board members
should consider whether to investigate if a member of staff appears to be giving a
disproportionate number of warnings to an individual prisoner or to prisoners generally.
Retention of privilege level on transfer
4.12
When a prisoner is transferred P-NOMIS will automatically default a prisoner’s privilege
level to standard regardless of previous status. To ensure prisoners’ retain the privilege
level they were on at the sending establishment staff should check previous history and
amend the status field accordingly. This will apply to prisoners who were on the basic or
enhanced level. Transferred prisoners should be assessed within two weeks (wherever
possible) after arrival to ensure they have been placed on the appropriate privilege level.
4.13
Transferred prisoners may find that the actual privileges available at standard and
enhanced are different in some details from their previous establishment but access to the
six key earnable privileges should be made available. Prisoners can only receive what is
available in their current location, but as far as possible establishments should liaise with
each other to try to avoid significant differences between what is provided at each
establishment and to ensure consistency at each of the three levels to reduce resistance to
transfers. If a prisoner is on progressive transfer it is possible to argue that the move to a
lower category is compensation for the loss of particular privileges.
Special groups of prisoners
Unconvicted prisoners
4.14
Unconvicted (remand) prisoners must be included in IEP schemes and may move between
privilege levels, but with variations relating to their status. They are not required to work or
take part in activities, but should be encouraged to do so. If they decline to participate they
may be locked up while the activity is taking place, or if no work etc is available they may
be unlocked and allowed to associate as far as operationally possible. Where remand
prisoners do work or participate in activities, their performance and their behaviour will be
taken into account when deciding whether to move them from standard level to enhanced,
or back down to standard. But moves from standard down to basic should be decided on
an assessment of behaviour alone, ignoring performance at work or other activities.
4.15
Immigration detainees must be treated in the same way as unconvicted prisoners
4.16
Prisoners covered by Prison Rule 7(3) (contempt of court) are generally treated as
convicted prisoners, but as unconvicted prisoners in respect of clothing, letters and visits.
Foreign national prisoners
4.17
Foreign nationals whose friends and families are outside this country are likely to value
extra and more flexibly timed opportunities to make telephone calls (including long
distance), rather than visits. Staff must ensure that provision is made for those who have
PSI 11/2011
UNCLASSIFIED
Issue date 01/03/11
UNCLASSIFIED
Page 13
difficulty reading or speaking English to enable them to understand the operation of the
local IEP scheme. (See paragraph 4.15 for immigration detainees.)
Prisoners with disabilities/particular needs/older prisoners
4.18
Governors should ensure that the local scheme does not penalize behaviour which is the
direct consequence of a disability, particular needs or age. PSO 2855 Prisoners with
Disabilities provides guidance. Provision must be made for those with limited or no ability
to read English (not only foreign nationals), and the IEP scheme must be clearly explained
to such prisoners.
Prisoners in Segregation Units
4.19
Information on the management of prisoners in segregation units is contained in PSO 1700
– Section on Management of Segregation Units – Design and Construction.
Safer Custody
Prisoners who are at risk of suicide or self-harm
4.20
Governors should ensure that their local IEP scheme considers the needs of prisoners who
are at risk of suicide or self-harm. The decision to withdraw privileges should be
considered on a case by case basis alongside the ACCT process.
Violent behaviour
4.21
In order to manage violence, IEP levels should be reviewed in response to prisoners
displaying violent behaviour. To ensure a holistic approach is achieved, staff should
integrate the scheme with their violence reduction strategy.
Monitoring
4.22
The points to be considered when annually reviewing IEP schemes include:










PSI 11/2011
Is the scheme consistent with the national framework and IEP Standard, and
approved and signed by the Deputy Director of Custody?
Does the scheme meet local aims and address local problems (e.g. bullying,
drugs)? What impact has it had on prisoner behaviour, and on staff? Are any
changes necessary?
Are the methods of informing new receptions and prisoners on Induction of the
scheme effective, including for those who have difficulty reading or understanding
English?
Are the three privilege levels sufficiently differentiated?
How have prisoners’ views of the range and attractiveness of available incentives
and privileges been sought and taken into account?
Are the criteria for movements between privilege levels and the decision making
process fair, consistent, and clear to prisoners and staff? Are prisoners able to
make representations to the board? Are decisions properly recorded and reasons
given to prisoners? Are prisoners aware of the appeal process?
Do all relevant staff contribute to decision making, submitting reports that are
consistent with the scheme and make sound recommendations?
Does the scheme encompass the cultural and diverse needs of the local prisoner
population?
Are the figures provided by those responsible for ensuring equitable treatment for all
prisoners considered and acted upon?
Are the needs of disabled prisoners considered and monitored? (see PSO 2855)
UNCLASSIFIED
Issue date 01/03/11
UNCLASSIFIED




PSI 11/2011
Page 14
Is the scheme fully integrated into and compatible with the rest of the regime (e.g.,
OASys and sentence planning, compacts), but separate from the disciplinary
system?
Is there an auditable system in place and are management checks carried out and
recorded?
What is the role of Senior Management in monitoring the scheme?
Have all the points on the checklist at Annex D been considered?
UNCLASSIFIED
Issue date 01/03/11
UNCLASSIFIED
Page 15
ANNEX A
IN-CELL TELEVISION
This section applies to public sector prisons only.
1.1
NOMS will provide a standard basic colour TV with remote and manual controls.
Governors may withhold the issue of remote controls if they are considered inappropriate
for their establishment. Prisoners may rent these sets for a standard weekly charge and
are required to sign a compact which sets out the terms under which sets will be rented and
the consequences for the prisoner if the compact is breached. A model compact, which
can be adapted for local use is attached at Annex F. Each prisoner using the set must sign
the compact.
1.2
The policy framework set out in this chapter applies to all types of prisoners. Exceptionally,

severely disabled prisoners and those in healthcare facilities, either unable to reach
association rooms or judged to need the mental stimulus of TV, should be allowed
in-cell TV on a case by case basis irrespective of privilege level, and where
appropriate free of charge.

All prisoners considered to be at risk from self-harm/suicide may be considered for
in-cell TV irrespective of privilege level on a case-by-case basis.

Prisoners in reception/induction/first night units may have access to in-cell television
free of charge.
Censorship
1.3
Governors have discretion to prohibit the showing of any material they consider unsuitable,
taking account of the age of the prisoner and any other local factors. Governors also have
the authority to remove sets in individual cases if in-cell TV appears to be damaging a
prisoner’s treatment or increasing the risk to the public on release. Control over noise levels
is a matter for local decision.
1.4
Methods of restricting viewing will depend on local circumstances, but ways of achieving
this include denying reception through controls on aerials or by having TV sets on a central
or separate circuit breaker than that used for lighting.
Charging
1.5
All TVs are to be Prison Service owned and their costs will be recovered from prisoners.
No other charges are to be made to cover other expenditure, e.g. electricity, or
administration. Establishments are required to recover from prisoners a £1 per week, or
part week, rental charge for each set. The charge, which includes VAT, is per set, not per
prisoner, and should be recovered from the prisoner’s spend account. Prisoners in multioccupancy cells will normally be expected to contribute equally to the cost of renting the
set. This charge may be varied from time to time by issue of an instruction from NOMS.
1.6
Receipts from prisoners are to be included as a separate A in A baseline built into
establishments’ budget so receipts can be offset against expenditure and retained.
PSI 11/2011
UNCLASSIFIED
Issue date 01/03/11
UNCLASSIFIED
Page 16
Licensing
1.7
Due to Crown exemption television licences are not required for televisions in-cell.
1.8
Information on the licensing requirements for televisions outside cells are set out in PSI
01/2010
Forfeiture of TV’s
1.9
In-cell TV is a forfeitable privilege and can therefore be withdrawn for any of the following
reasons:

if a prisoner is demoted to a privilege level where TV is not available.

where loss of the privilege of TV has been imposed as a punishment following an
adjudication.

for breach of the compact governing the rental of a TV.

for security reasons and reasons of good order and discipline.

for administrative reasons e.g. where the presence of a TV is considered to be
detrimental to a prisoner’s behaviour or treatment in the establishment or their
eventual release into the community.
Channel selection
1.10
The system provided for digital broadcasting provides prisoners with nine free-to-view
channels. The standard package of nine channels provided at installation is BBC1, BBC2,
ITV1, Channel 4, Channel 5, Sky News Sport (E4 in female prisons), ITV3, VIVA and Film
4.
1.11
Governors may change this selection locally but will; be responsible for any costs incurred.
Only free-to-view channels may be provided.
Public sector prisons must not provide
subscription channels.
PSI 11/2011
UNCLASSIFIED
Issue date 01/03/11
UNCLASSIFIED
Page 17
ANNEX B
PRISON AND YOI RULES RELATING TO INCENTIVES AND EARNED PRIVILEGES:
The Rules providing for a system of privileges are:
Prison Rule 8
“8 (1) There shall be established at every prison systems of privileges approved by the Secretary
of State and appropriate to the classes of prisoners there, which shall include arrangements under
which money earned by prisoners in prison may be spent by them within the prison.
(2) Systems of privileges approved under paragraph (1) may include arrangements under which
prisoners may be allowed time outside their cells and in association with one another, in excess of
the minimum time which, subject to the other provisions of these Rules apart from this rule, is
otherwise allowed to prisoners at the prison for this purpose.
(3) Systems of privileges approved under paragraph (1) may include arrangements under which
privileges may be granted to prisoners only in so far as they have met, and for so long as they
continue to meet, specified standards in their behaviour and their performance in work or other
activities.
(4) Systems of privileges which include arrangements of the kind referred to in paragraph (3) shall
include procedures to be followed in determining whether or not any of the privileges concerned
shall be granted, or shall continue to be granted, to a prisoner; such procedures shall include a
requirement that the prisoner be given reasons for any decision adverse to him together with a
statement of the means by which he may appeal against it.
(5) Nothing in this rule shall be taken to confer on a prisoner any entitlement to any privilege or to
affect any provision in these Rules other than this rule as a result of which any privilege may be
forfeited or otherwise lost or a prisoner deprived of association with other prisoners.”
YOI Rule 6
“6 (1) There shall be established at every young offender institution systems of privileges
approved by the Secretary of State and appropriate to the classes of inmates thereof and their
ages, characters and circumstances, which shall include arrangements under which money earned
by inmates may be spent by them within the young offender institution.
(2) Systems of privileges approved under paragraph (1) may include arrangements under which
inmates may be allowed time outside the cells and in association with one another, in excess of the
minimum time which, subject to the other provisions of these Rules apart from this rule, is
otherwise allowed to inmates at the young offender institution for this purpose.
(3) Systems of privileges approved under paragraph (1) may include arrangements under which
privileges may be granted to inmates only in so far as they have met, and for so long as they
continue to meet, specified standards in their behaviour and their performance in work or other
activities.
(4) Systems of privileges which include arrangements of the kind referred to in paragraph (3) shall
include procedures to be followed in determining whether or not any of the privileges concerned
shall be granted, or shall continue to be granted, to an inmate; such procedures shall include a
requirement that the inmate be given reasons for any decision adverse to him together with a
statement of the means by which he may appeal against it.
PSI 11/2011
UNCLASSIFIED
Issue date 01/03/11
UNCLASSIFIED
Page 18
(5) Nothing in this rule shall be taken to confer on an inmate any entitlement to any privilege or to
affect any provision in these Rules other than this rule as a result of which any privilege may be
forfeited or otherwise lost or an inmate deprived of association with other inmates.”
_________________________________
Other Rules referring to privileges:
Letters and visits
Prison Rule 34
“34 (1) Without prejudice to sections 6 and 19 of the Prison Act 1952 and except as provided by
these Rules, a prisoner shall not be permitted to communicate with any person outside the prison,
or such person with him, except with the leave of the Secretary of State or as a privilege under rule
8.”
Prison Rule 35
“35 (3) The governor may allow a prisoner an additional letter or visit as a privilege under rule 8 or
where necessary for his welfare or that of his family.”
YOI Rule 9
“9 (1) Without prejudice to sections 6 and 19 of the Prison Act 1952 and except as provided by
these Rules, an inmate shall not be permitted to communicate with any person outside the young
offender institution, or such person with him, except with the leave of the Secretary of State or as a
privilege under rule 6” [the Intranet version of the Rules actually says “rule 7”]
YOI Rule 10
“10 (2) The governor may allow an inmate an additional letter or visit as a privilege under rule 6
when necessary for his welfare or that of his family.”
PSI 11/2011
UNCLASSIFIED
Issue date 01/03/11
UNCLASSIFIED
Page 19
ANNEX C
From: Establishment………………………….
To:
Area……………………
Deputy Director of Custody ………………………….
NATIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR INCENTIVES AND EARNED PRIVILEGES FOR PRISONERS:
LOCAL SCHEME
Please complete in accordance with the guidance notes below and paragraph 2.6.1 of this PSI
AIMS
1.
Local aims (note 1)
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
EARNED PRIVILEGES AND INCENTIVES
2.
Key earnable privileges for convicted prisoners (note 2)
Basic
Standard
Enhanced
Available
Available
(a)
Private cash £ per week
(bi)
Extra visits (number)
NA
(bii)
Improved visits (quality)
NA
(c)
Eligibility for higher rates
of pay
NA
(d)
In-cell television
NA
3.
Location-based key earnable privileges for convicted prisoners (note 3)
Basic
(e)
Own clothes
NA
(f)
Time out of cell
(association)
Local
Minimum
PSI 11/2011
UNCLASSIFIED
Standard
Enhanced
Issue date 01/03/11
UNCLASSIFIED
4.
Page 20
Other acceptable privileges available to convicted prisoners (note 4)
Basic
Standard
Enhanced
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
5.
Key earnable privileges for unconvicted prisoners (note 2)
Basic
Standard
Enhanced
NA
Available
Available
(a)
Private cash £ per week
(bi)
Extra visits (number)
(bii)
Improved visits (quality)
(c)
Eligibility for higher
rates of pay
(d)
In-cell television
6.
Location-based earnable privileges for unconvicted prisoners (note 3)
NA
Basic
Entitled
Standard
Entitled
Enhanced
(e)
Own clothes
(f)
Time out of cell
(association)
7.
Other acceptable privileges available to unconvicted prisoners (note 4)
Basic
Entitled
Standard
Enhanced
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
PSI 11/2011
UNCLASSIFIED
Issue date 01/03/11
UNCLASSIFIED
8.
Page 21
Other incentives (note 5)
Specify here any other incentives to good behaviour and performance that relate to your
scheme.
9.
Applicability of scheme
Specify here, with reasons, any groups of prisoners to whom your scheme does not apply
and where they are located.
PROCESS
10.
Criteria and rules in operation for defining and measuring behaviour, and for movements
between privilege levels. Please attach copy of your proposed statement for prisoners and
staff and bring out key points here.
11.
Details of your establishment’s IEP board or panel (note 6).
12.
Details of your appeals system (note 7).
13.
Explain here how your scheme will operate in connection with:
(a)
Prisoner compacts (please attach a copy of your proposed compact)
(b)
OASys and sentence planning
PSI 11/2011
UNCLASSIFIED
Issue date 01/03/11
UNCLASSIFIED
Page 22
NOTES ON COMPLETING LOCAL IEP SCHEME PROFORMA
Note 1
You should include the national aims, adding any relevant and compatible local
aims.
Note 2
Set out here which of the six key earnable privileges will be provided. All schemes
must include private cash and, if available, extra and improved visits, eligibility for
higher pay rates, and in-cell TV.
Note 3
Where available as a privilege the wearing of own clothes, and time out of cell, must
be included. These privileges are normally location based, and may be best
managed where prisoners on different privilege levels are held in separate parts of
the establishment.
Note 4
Schemes must include other acceptable privileges considered likely to help motivate
prisoners in local circumstances.
Note 5
Some prisoners are more motivated by non-material incentives, and Governors may
choose to offer some of the following (for example) or other locally valued
opportunities:







responsibility, eg membership of committees, or Listener schemes
trust, eg employment on an in-house magazine, or as a red-band
relationships, eg meetings with staff, or joint prisoner/staff committees
environment, eg location on a unit with other well-motivated prisoners
mix of prisoners, eg being held with similar sentence prisoners (lifers, for
example)
community work, eg opportunity to contribute to the community, by work
inside or outside the establishment
choice, eg timing and frequency of visits to prison shop, or opportunity to
prepare own meals
Note 6
Schemes must provide for a board or panel to decide on the gaining or losing of
privileges and movements between privilege levels. Describe here your plans for
the board’s composition and way of operating, how prisoners’ views will be taken
into account, and how decisions and reasons will be communicated and recorded.
Note 7
Explain here how your appeals system will operate.
Note 8
Explain here how your scheme will be monitored against agreed aims, and specify
the targets and indicators you will use.
PSI 11/2011
UNCLASSIFIED
Issue date 01/03/11
UNCLASSIFIED
Page 23
ANNEX D
CHECK LIST FOR GOOD PROCESS
(a)
It must be clear to prisoners which privileges are earnable and losable, how these are
applied to the three privilege levels, and what level of behaviour and/or performance is
necessary to earn and retain them

(b)
(c)
An assessment of overall behaviour and performance is required to
reach a balanced decision

Do all relevant staff including workshop, education staff, instructors and
others involved in helping the prisoner meet OASys sentence planning
targets, have an input?

Applications made by prisoners who feel they meet the criteria for promotion
to the next level should be acknowledged and the prisoner advised of when
the application will be considered
Although establishments have discretion to decide the format in which
information about the prisoner is to be presented this should be done in
a consistent way so that all prisoners are assessed equally

(d)
(e)
Is this information clearly explained to prisoners and accessible to them in
written form either as a notice and/or in a compact?
A tick box format could be used, perhaps incorporating a list of questions
addressing aspects of behaviour and performance with several possible
responses. Whatever format is used it is important to ensure that positive as
well as negative aspects are included.
In the interests of natural justice the prisoner must be involved
throughout the decision making process

If the prisoner does not appear before the IEP board are his/her views taken
into account before a decision is made – e.g. by recording responses to verbal
and/or written warnings?

Are decisions and the reasons for them properly recorded and conveyed to
the prisoner together with details of the avenues of appeal against adverse
decisions?
The decision making mechanism must operate consistently and fairly

Ideally this will be a formal board which includes a member of the
management team and any other staff who have had close dealings with the
prisoner with the prisoner present

If a prisoner is to be placed or retained on the basic regime has the decision
been endorsed at least at Senior Officer level (unless derogation has been
agreed by the Deputy Director of Custody.

In the interests of fairness and consistent decision making does a member of
the management team at least one grade higher than the Board chairperson
monitor the scheme?
PSI 11/2011
UNCLASSIFIED
Issue date 01/03/11
UNCLASSIFIED

PSI 11/2011
Page 24
Does the process take full account of diversity issues within the
establishment and more widely, and is its application to all groups and
individuals monitored to ensure fairness, with action taken to investigate and
address any apparent bias?
UNCLASSIFIED
Issue date 01/03/11
UNCLASSIFIED
Page 25
ANNEX E
USE OF COMPACTS
1.1
Compacts can be a useful method of ensuring that prisoners are clear as to what is
expected of them during their time in custody. A compact also outlines what the prisoner
can expect to receive from the Service. The standard Custody Compact must be used at
initial reception/induction and explained to the prisoner. (PSI 28/2010 refers).
1.2
Compacts are not legal documents enforceable by the courts, but they should clearly state
the criteria by which a prisoner will succeed or fail to meet his side of the agreement, and
the prison should promise only those facilities it is confident it can deliver. Prisoners must
be encouraged to sign a compact, but unwillingness to sign must not affect a prisoner’s
eligibility to move to a higher privilege level, which must be based on actual compliance
with expected standards of behaviour and progress. Failure to comply with the terms of a
compact does not constitute a disciplinary offence, unless it stems from behaviour that is in
itself a breach of discipline.
1.3
In addition to the close links with IEP and sentence planning, compacts may also connect
with other regime initiatives such as incentive based drug testing and can be an effective
tool in managing violent behaviour so that all parts of the regime become integrated
together.
PSI 11/2011
UNCLASSIFIED
Issue date 01/03/11
UNCLASSIFIED
Page 26
ANNEX F
MODEL COMPACT FOR PRISONERS
IN-CELL TV COMPACT
You are only eligible to apply for a television in your cell if you are

on the enhanced or [ standard] level of the incentives and earned privileges scheme and/or:

located on...............[e.g. drug free wing]
If you are on the basic privilege level you will be ineligible
If you are permitted a TV in your cell ...............(establishment) will:

supply you with a 14” colour set [with remote control and battery] [and a wall bracket to
hold the TV];

arrange for replacement or repair of the set as soon as possible in the event of mechanical
breakdown.
In return you must:

recognise that the set [and remote control] is, and will remain at all times, the property of
HM Prison Service and will not accompany your stored property on transfer;

pay the weekly rental charge of £1.00 per week, or part thereof, which must be paid from
your spend account. [In shared accommodation the rental will be split equally between
each prisoner occupying the cell.];

not allow the set [and/or remote control] to be moved from your cell or lend it to any other
prisoners [not covered by this compact];

turn the set off while you are out of your cell for long periods of time e.g.
education, exercise;

keep the volume to a level that will not disturb others, particularly at night, [or to wear
headphones if available];
at
work,
[replace the batteries for the remote control at your own expense when necessary].
Removal of TV
You shall be liable to forfeit the privilege of in-cell TV and/or be subject to a disciplinary charge, if
you are found to have tampered with or damaged your set, or security seals, or [remote control] or
[brackets].
You may also forfeit the set if:

there are insufficient funds in your spend account to cover the weekly charge;
PSI 11/2011
UNCLASSIFIED
Issue date 01/03/11
UNCLASSIFIED
Page 27
OR

you have breached this compact in any way;
OR

you are demoted to the basic privilege level;
OR

if the system of incentives and earned privileges at HMP.........……………………….. is
modified;
OR

you are subject to a disciplinary punishment of forfeiture of privileges which the
adjudicator specifies shall include loss of in-cell television
OR

if you are moved to other accommodation or to another establishment;
OR

removed for reasons of security, good order and discipline, health and safety, and other
administrative reasons;
OR

in any other circumstances where the Governor thinks fit in the regulation and management
of the establishment;
PSI 11/2011
UNCLASSIFIED
Issue date 01/03/11
UNCLASSIFIED
Page 28
PRISONER’S AGREEMENT
I hereby agree to the above terms and conditions relating to this compact and authorise the
deduction of [£1.00] per week, or part thereof, from my spend account until I give 7 days notice that
this should cease. I understand that if I break the conditions of this compact this may result in the
removal of the TV set from my cell.
Name(s)
Prison number(s)
Location
Incentives level
(*delete as appropriate) I have read*/I have had the above read to me* and I understand the
content
Signed......................................................
For identification purposes only
TV seal number (1 seal)...........................(staff use only)
Remote Control seal number....................(staff use only)
PSI 11/2011
UNCLASSIFIED
Issue date 01/03/11
UNCLASSIFIED
Page 29
Annex G
Managing Prisoners who deny their offence – IEP and Sentence Planning
Background
1.
The Prison Service must accept the verdicts of the courts and hence it follows that
convicted prisoners have to be treated for all purposes as being guilty of the offence (with
some allowances made for those who are appealing – see paragraph 4 below).
2.
It is reasonable for the Prison Service to expect prisoners to address their offending and to
offer incentives for them to do so.
3.
It is right to encourage prisoners to undertake offending behaviour programmes and to
recognise that in certain circumstances this can be an arduous experience for them.
4.
Although the guidance below is specific to sex offenders, the same principles can be
applied to all sentenced prisoners who are in denial of their offence and are involved in the
sentence planning process.
Definition of Appellant status
5
An appellant can be defined as someone whose conviction is the subject of review by a
higher court. In most cases, since the conviction would be by a Crown Court, the appeal
would be heard by the Court of Appeal. An appeal can reach the Court of Appeal by two
means. First an appeal against the finding of guilt immediately following the conviction
itself or second, having had that appeal dismissed, then by having their case referred to the
Court of Appeal via the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC). In order to prove
appellant status, the offender must be able to produce evidence from the Criminal Appeals
Office showing that his case is pending before the court. This should normally be in the
form of a criminal appeal number. An appeal can be taken after this process to the House
of Lords and therefore any prisoner at that stage would also need to be treated as an
appellant. However simply by having the CCRC examine their conviction a prisoner does
not become an appellant. This is because the CCRC has no power to overturn or modify
any conviction.
Reviews
6
Prisoners should have their IEP status reviewed on an annual basis to ensure that they are
meeting required standards with regards to compliance with sentence plan targets.
Sex Offenders in denial of their offence
7
The following differentials can be made between three types of sex offender in terms of
their stance on their guilt. There are (1) those who accept guilt; (2) those who deny guilt
and are appealing; and (3) those who deny their guilt but are not appealing (including those
who have had an appeal refused).
8
A distinction can be made between suitability for SOTP – which applies to those sex
offenders who have the risk and need factors that SOTP addresses; and readiness for
SOTP – recognising there are needs to work on and are willing to do so via the Prison
Service’s accredited programme. A convicted sexual offender who denies his offence is
technically suitable for SOTP but is not ready for SOTP. This is because SOTP requires
analysis of the lead up to offences.
PSI 11/2011
UNCLASSIFIED
Issue date 01/03/11
UNCLASSIFIED
Page 30
Setting Initial Sentence Planning Objectives
9
It is recommended that all sex offenders, with the exception of appellants, be set an initial
sentence plan target “To be assessed for SOTP, and if suitable, to undertake the
recommended programme”.
10
If the offender is already in an SOTP site, he would then be referred to the SOTP
Treatment Manager. If the offender is not in an SOTP site, he should be listed for transfer
to an SOTP Site in the area as soon as possible, in line with each Area’s sex offender
strategy. It may be necessary to re-set SOTP assessment to a future objective (see
paragraph 14 below) in the sentence plan while the transfer is arranged.
Assessment of suitability and readiness
11
The SOTP Treatment Manager will assess the offender and will provide feedback to the
sentence planning team on the offender’s suitability and readiness for SOTP.
12
At that point, if an offender is judged to be suitable and ready, the Treatment Manager will
advise the sentence planning team that SOTP should be listed as a target.
13
If an offender is judged to be suitable but not ready, the Treatment Manager will advise the
sentence planning team of the reasons why he is not ready. If the offender is not ready for
reasons other than denial (e.g. insufficient competence with the English language), the
Treatment Manager and Offender Supervisor can decide together to set interim objectives
to help the offender get ready, and while doing so, the sentence planning target to
undertake SOTP is re-set as a future objective.
14
A future objective is one which remains on the sentence plan but is ignored for a specified
period, while the focus shifts to addressing particular barriers or other relevant issues. The
objective to attend SOTP is not removed entirely from the Sentence Plan, as it must remain
clear that this is still a future objective.
15
In some cases (e.g. a low risk sex offender who refuses SOTP), objectives other than
SOTP are apparent which could assist him in an equally important way to prepare for an
offence-free life on release (e.g. employment training). In these cases, the Treatment
Manager and the Offender Supervisor could agree together to deactivate the sentence
planning target to undertake SOTP.
16
However, where the unreadiness is due to denial and no other objectives are more
relevant, the SOTP target should remain. In this case, the prisoner’s refusal to undertake
SOTP could bar him from obtaining Enhanced regime status.
When SOTP cannot be made available
17
There may be occasions where a prisoner is temporarily unable to move into an SOTP site
for operational reasons e.g. because of overcrowding or other restrictions. In such an
event, the sentence planning target to undertake SOTP can be re-set as a future objective
until such time as SOTP can be made available. The important issue here is that the target
is only re-set as a future objective when the cause of lack of access to the SOTP lies with
the Prison Service rather than the prisoner.
Communicating with prisoners
18
When talking to sex offenders about SOTP as a sentence plan target, the Offender
Supervisor should be mindful of the importance of explaining the process clearly, and
setting expectations from the start.
PSI 11/2011
UNCLASSIFIED
Issue date 01/03/11
UNCLASSIFIED
EIA
Page 1
HQ policy
Equality Impact Assessment – Annex A
Incentives and Earned Privileges
Policy
Policy lead
Group
Directorate
Nina Revell
OSRRG
DSD
What is an Equality Impact Assessment (EIA)? ............................................................................................... 2
Your Equalities team ........................................................................................................................................ 2
The EIA process .............................................................................................................................................. 2
Stage 1 – initial screening ................................................................................................................................ 3
Aims ................................................................................................................................................................. 3
Effects .............................................................................................................................................................. 3
Evidence .......................................................................................................................................................... 4
Stakeholders and feedback ............................................................................................................................. 4
Impact .............................................................................................................................................................. 4
Local discretion ................................................................................................................................................ 4
Summary of relevance to equalities issues ...................................................................................................... 5
Monitoring and review arrangements ............................................................................................................... 5
PSI 11/2011
UNCLASSIFIED
Issue date 01/03/11
UNCLASSIFIED
EIA
Page 2
What is an Equality Impact Assessment (EIA)?
An EIA is a systematic appraisal of the (actual or potential) effects of a function or policy on
different groups of people. It is conducted to ensure compliance with public duties on equality
issues (which in some areas go beyond a requirement to eliminate discrimination and encompass
a duty to promote equality), but more importantly to ensure effective policy making that meets the
needs of all groups.
Like all other public bodies, the National Offender Management Service is required by law to
conduct impact assessments of all functions and policies that are considered relevant to the public
duties and to publish the results.
An Equality Impact Assessment must be completed when developing a new function, policy or
practice, or when revising an existing one.
In this context a function is any activity of the Prison Service, a policy is any prescription about how
such a function is carried out, for instance an order, instruction or manual, and a practice is the way in
which something is done, including key decisions and common practice in areas not covered by formal
policy.
If you are completing this document as part of the OPG process, you must complete and return it
together with the final Business case for OPG approval and publication alongside the PSI/PI
Your Equalities team
It is important that all policies are informed by the knowledge of the impact of equalities issues
accumulated across the organisation. Early in the policy development process, and before
commencing the EIA, please contact the relevant equalities team to discuss the issues arising in
your policy area.

HR issues – Staff Diversity and Equality Team – 020 7217 6090 or
frank.colyer@noms.gsi.gov.uk

Service delivery issues relating to gender and younger offenders – Women and Young
People’s Group – 020 7217 5048 or matthew.armer@noms.gsi.gov.uk

All other service delivery issues – Race and Equalities Action Group – 020 7217 2521 or
REAG@noms.gsi.gov.uk
The EIA process
The EIA has been constructed as a two-stage process in order to reduce the amount of work
involved where a policy proves not to be relevant to any of the equalities issues.
The initial screening tool should be completed in all cases, but duplication of material between it
and the full EIA should be avoided. For instance, where relevance to an equalities issue is selfevident or quickly identified this can be briefly noted on the initial screening and detailed
consideration of that issue reserved for the full EIA.
Further guidance on this will be given by the relevant equalities team.
PSI 11/2011
UNCLASSIFIED
Issue date 01/03/11
UNCLASSIFIED
EIA
Page 3
Stage 1 – initial screening
The first stage of conducting an EIA is to screen the policy to determine its relevance
to the various equalities issues. This will indicate whether or not a full impact
assessment is required and which issues should be considered in it. The equalities
issues that you should consider in completing this screening are:







Race
Gender
Gender identity
Disability
Religion or belief
Sexual orientation
Age (including younger and older offenders).
Aims
What are the aims of the policy?
The national aims of the IEP Scheme are:




to encourage responsible behaviour by prisoners;
to encourage effort and achievement in work and other constructive
activity by prisoners;
to encourage sentenced prisoners to engage in sentence planning and
benefit from activities designed to reduce re-offending; and
to create a more disciplined, better-controlled and safer environment
for prisoners and staff.
These aims are to be achieved by ensuring that privileges above the
minimum are earned by prisoners through good behaviour and performance
and are removed if they fail to maintain acceptable standards.
Effects
What effects will the policy have on staff, offenders or other stakeholders?
Prisoners will move up and down the levels of the IEP Scheme, and consequently
gain or lose privileges, according to their behaviour and the extent to which they
engage with their sentence plan.
PSI 11/2011
UNCLASSIFIED
Issue date 01/03/11
UNCLASSIFIED
EIA
Page 4
Evidence
Is there any existing evidence of this policy area being relevant to any equalities
issue?
Identify existing sources of information about the operation and outcomes of the policy, such
as operational feedback (including local monitoring and impact assessments)/Inspectorate
and other relevant reports/complaints and litigation/relevant research publications etc. Does
any of this evidence point towards relevance to any of the equalities issues?
Inspection reports and monitoring data indicate a disproportionate number of BME
prisoners on the lower levels of IEP schemes
Stakeholders and feedback
Describe the target group for the policy and list any other interested parties. What
contact have you had with these groups?
Prisoners and those groups who purport to speak for their interests.
Do you have any feedback from stakeholders, particularly from groups
representative of the various issues, that this policy is relevant to them?
[No – but Equalities group might]
Impact
Could the policy have a differential impact on staff, prisoners, visitors or other
stakeholders on the basis of any of the equalities issues?
Yes. Decisions are made locally at a relatively low level and taking account of the
views of a wide range of staff. They may be based on staff perceptions of behaviour
as well as factors that are measurable objectively.
Local discretion
Does the policy allow local discretion in the way in which it is implemented? If so,
what safeguards are there to prevent inconsistent outcomes and/or differential
treatment of different groups of people?
Decisions on the allocation of prisoners to privilege levels are taken in line with a
local, written policy, but some of the factors affecting the decision may be subjective.
In mitigation, decisions should be taken by a Board rather than individuals and data,
including that relating to Protective Characteristics, monitored by the Senior
Management Team, and the Instruction draws attention to the equality issues.
PSI 11/2011
UNCLASSIFIED
Issue date 01/03/11
UNCLASSIFIED
EIA
Page 5
Summary of relevance to equalities issues
Strand
Race
Gender (including
gender identity)
Disability
Religion or belief
Sexual orientation
Age (younger offenders)
Age (older offenders)
Yes/No
Rationale
Yes
As described above
Yes
As described above
Yes
As described above
Yes
As described above
Yes
As described above
Yes
As described above
Yes
As described above
If you have answered ‘Yes’ to any of the equalities issues, a full impact assessment must be
completed. Please proceed to STAGE 2 of the document.
If you have answered ‘No’ to all of the equalities issues, a full impact assessment will not be
required, and this assessment can be signed off at this stage. You will, however, need to put in
place monitoring arrangements to ensure that any future impact on any of the equalities issues
is identified.
Monitoring and review arrangements
Describe the systems that you are putting in place to manage the policy and to
monitor its operation and outcomes in terms of the various equalities issues.
Senior operational managers are required to monitor its operation and outcomes in
terms of equalities issues.
State when a review will take place and how it will be conducted.
Ongoing
Name and signature
Policy lead
Head of group
PSI 11/2011
Date
Nina Revell
Tony Watson
UNCLASSIFIED
Issue date 01/03/11