Lowdham prison 'in a state of turmoil'

The prison is operated by the private contractor Sodexo who took over the running of the prison from another private operator, Serco

Today’s report from HM Inspectorate of Prisons said that when Inspectors visited HMP Lowdham Grange in May this year, they found a prison in a state of turmoil following the handover from one private provider to another, the first transition of its kind. The fallout from this was affecting almost every aspect of prison life, with significant staff shortages and rising levels of self-harm, violence and disruptive behaviour.

Lowdham Grange is a category B training prison in Nottinghamshire. Opened in 1998 on the site of an older institution, the prison is operated by the private contractor Sodexo who took over the running of the prison from another private operator, Serco, in February of this year. The prison’s campus comprises five house blocks, made up of 14 separate residential wings. Most of those held in the prison are serving very long sentences for serious offences. At the previous prison inspectorate visit in 2018, some 60% of men, for example, were serving sentences of 10 years or more and a further third were serving indeterminate sentences, mostly life. During the last year the population in the establishment averaged 860 prisoners, even though the prison has a certified normal accommodation of 894 and an operational capacity of 888. Prisoner numbers were reduced from June 2022 to January 2023 to accommodate the end of contract dilapidation works identified during the end of contract survey. These refurbishment works needed to be completed by February 2023 and they affected almost all structures and services in the prison. Extensive areas required scaffolding and large numbers of external contractors were on site every day for over eight months, affecting the safety and security of the site. The complexities of managing these works projects had a negative impact on the regime. For example, they affected the availability of out-of-cell activities and the amount of time that prisoners could access the exercise yards.

Findings

Tragically, fourteen prisoners had died since the last inspection in 2018, including six deaths which were self-inflicted. Three of the self-inflicted deaths had taken place in March, shortly after the transition, prompting speculation among staff and prisoners alike that uncertainty and change were causal factors. The evidence pointed to continuing high levels of self-harm and an indifferent approach to oversight and intervention that might help reduce such harm.

Inspectors did find that most communal areas were clean and well-maintained, but staff supervision of prisoners’ behaviour on the wings or when moving around the site was lacking. While the overall level of violence had fallen since the last inspection, it was now rising again. This was linked to the availability of drugs, associated debt and bullying, as well as gang-related violence. In response, some prisoners chose to isolate themselves in their cells, some for several months. This is doubly concerning because many of these men are serving long sentences and had already been restricted to their cells for many months on end during the COVID lockdown.

Inspectors were told repeatedly that some prison officers behaved in an unacceptable manner, such as making inappropriate comments to prisoners. Use of force in response to disruption was very poorly overseen, and health care staff had reported several instances of prisoners with serious injuries as a result of physical force being used against them. Inspectors also found that these assaults had not been investigated by leaders. 

The inspection also identified serious gaps in public protection. About 90% of the population were assessed as presenting a high risk of serious harm to others, but there were not enough places on the right accredited programmes. This was particularly acute for the 40% of prisoners serving indeterminate sentences. Most were likely to wait years before they could undertake an accredited programme because other prisoners were prioritised ahead of them.

We have seen from research into IPP sentences, that people having to serve additional years in prison through no fault of their own are particularly vulnerable to deteriorating mental health.

The inspection report does end on a positive note saying that the inspectorate had confidence in a new appointed, experienced director (the name for Governor in private prisons) to address many of these concerns.