Detention timescales
26 items
2 sources
Lack of clear and consistent instructions and guidance regarding timescales for detention, impacting risk management.
Cross-Source Insight
Detention timescales has been flagged across 2 independent accountability sources:
18 inquiry recs
8 PFD reports
This issue has been identified by multiple independent accountability bodies, suggesting it is a recurring systemic concern.
Inquiry Recommendations (18)
BAHA-35 — Detention Timescales Consistency
Recommendation: Theatre level detention instructions and guidance should be reviewed to ensure that references to timescales for detention are clear and consistent. Timescales for detention are an important aspect of managing the risk of abuse.
Gov response: Accepted. Detention timescales have been reviewed and made consistent across instructions.
Accepted
Delivered
10 — Clarify authorisation for Rule 40 and Rule 42 segregation
Recommendation: The Home Office must amend, as a matter of urgency, Detention Services Order 02/2017: Removal from Association (Detention Centre Rule 40) and Temporary Confinement (Detention Centre Rule 42) and, if necessary, the Detention Services Operating Standards Manual for Immigration Service …
Gov response: An interim Detention Services Order has been published clarifying Rule 40 (removal from association) and Rule 42 (temporary confinement) authorisation protocols. A substantive DSO revision is underway examining assurance mechanisms, staff training, and compliance auditing.
Response Unclear
No update 2+ yrs
11 — Review E Wing suitability for vulnerable detainees
Recommendation: The Home Office and the current operator of Brook House must keep under review the appropriateness of the multi-purpose use of E Wing, particularly in relation to its suitability as a location to detain vulnerable people.
Gov response: The government stated the multi-purpose use of Eden Wing at Brook House is under consideration, and learning would be applied across the estate.
Accepted in Part
Delivered
12 — Annual training on Rule 40 and Rule 42 segregation powers
Recommendation: The Home Office and contractors operating immigration removal centres must provide regular training, at least annually, on the operation of Rule 40 and Rule 42 of the Detention Centre Rules 2001, which must include: that Rules 40 and 42 are …
Gov response: The substantive DSO revision on Rule 40/42 includes examination of staff training requirements and compliance auditing.
Accepted in Part
No update 2+ yrs
13 — Quarterly auditing of Rule 40 and Rule 42 use
Recommendation: The Home Office must regularly (and at least quarterly) audit the use of Rule 40 and Rule 42 across the immigration detention estate, in order to identify trends, any training needs and required improvements. In addition, HM Inspectorate of Prisons …
Gov response: The DSO revision includes compliance auditing across the detention estate. This recommendation was also directed at HMIP and the IMB Management Board.
Accepted in Part
No update 2+ yrs
14 — Prohibit handcuffing behind back while seated
Recommendation: The Home Office and contractors operating immigration removal centres must ensure that all staff are aware that the technique of handcuffing detained people with their hands behind their back while seated is not permitted, given its association with positional asphyxia.
Gov response: The government has communicated to all IRC and contracted service provider staff that the technique of handcuffing behind backs whilst seated is not permitted.
Accepted
Delivered
15 — New comprehensive use of force detention services order
Recommendation: The Home Office must introduce, as a matter of urgency, a new and comprehensive detention services order to address use of force in immigration removal centres. The detention services order must include the following issues: the permissible justifications for the …
Gov response: A new Detention Services Order on use of force is being developed in consultation with experts, alongside an overhaul of assurance processes and a new escalation system.
Accepted in Part
No update 2+ yrs
16 — Independent review of use of force on mentally ill detainees
Recommendation: The Home Office must urgently commission an independent review (with the power to make recommendations) of use of force on detained people with mental ill health within immigration removal centres. The review must consider: how, when and whether to use …
Gov response: The government stated it is working with HMPPS, NHS England and DHSC to develop new operational standards for use of force on detained people with mental ill health.
Accepted in Part
No update 2+ yrs
17 — Mandatory use of force debrief training and multi-level review process
Recommendation: The Home Office must ensure, as a matter of urgency, that training is delivered on how to conduct an effective use of force incident debrief, ensuring that issues of detained person and staff welfare, as well as training needs, are …
Gov response: Training and escalation systems for use of force incidents are referenced in the government response. The Service Improvement Plan references use of force monthly meetings and formal review processes.
Accepted in Part
No update 2+ yrs
18 — Update DSO on food and fluid refusal management and reporting
Recommendation: The Home Office must, as a matter of urgency, update Detention Services Order 03/2017: Care and Management of Detained Individuals Refusing Food and/or Fluid, to ensure that it deals with: food and fluid refusal being clearly and directly linked to …
Gov response: An updated Detention Services Order on food and fluid refusal has been published, linking food and fluid refusal to consideration of the Rule 35 process and the Adults at Risk policy.
Accepted in Part
Delivered
19 — Healthcare staff guidance and training on use of force incidents
Recommendation: The Home Office must ensure that guidance is issued to healthcare staff in immigration removal centres clarifying their role in use of force incidents. It must liaise as necessary with NHS England and any relevant medical regulators. The Home Office …
Gov response: The government does not accept this recommendation. The government stated that NHS England commissions healthcare services and it is their responsibility, alongside the Care Quality Commission, to assure the quality of health service provision within …
Not Accepted
20 — Update guidance on fit to fly and fit for detention medical assessments
Recommendation: The Home Office must review and update Detention Services Order 01/2016: The Protection, Use and Sharing of Medical Information Relating to People Detained Under Immigration Powers, to ensure that guidance given to GPs working in the immigration detention estate in …
Gov response: The government acknowledged NHS England's commissioning responsibility. The government stated that fit to fly letters are 'a medico-legal practice' and outside the responsibility of NHS England.
Accepted in Part
No update 2+ yrs
21 — Update mental vulnerability and mental capacity DSO guidance
Recommendation: The Home Office must review and update Detention Services Order 04/2020: Mental Vulnerability and Immigration Detention: Non-Clinical Guidance to set out comprehensive guidance for detention and healthcare staff where there are concerns that a detained person is suffering mental ill …
Gov response: The government stated it is considering policy on detained people with mental ill health as part of wider work on vulnerable adults, scoping requirements with NHS England.
Accepted in Part
In progress
22 — Update healthcare complaints handling guidance
Recommendation: The Home Office must review and update Detention Services Order 03/2015: Handling of Complaints to ensure that appropriate guidance is given to healthcare providers on the investigation and handling of complaints specific to the provision of healthcare in an immigration …
Gov response: A comprehensive review of complaints processes, including medical complaints, is underway. Detention Services Orders are to be updated on completion.
Accepted in Part
Delivered
23 — Quarterly assessment of staffing levels against population needs
Recommendation: The Home Office and contractors operating immigration removal centres must ensure that there is ongoing assessment of staffing levels (at least on a quarterly basis), so that the level of staff present within each centre is appropriate for the size …
Gov response: A new staffing model has been implemented delivering a 'considerably healthier ratio of custodial staff per detained individual to nearly double what it was in 2017'. Contract reviews address safe staffing policies.
Accepted in Part
Delivered
24 — Mandatory staff training on mental health and trauma-informed approaches
Recommendation: The Home Office, in conjunction with contractors, must ensure that all relevant immigration removal centre staff receive mandatory introductory and annual training on: mental health; race and diversity; a trauma-informed approach; their own resilience; drug awareness; and the purpose of …
Gov response: The Initial Training Course for all new contractor staff is undergoing a full review covering 'AaR, mental health awareness, racial awareness and safeguarding children', with a mentorship phase and annual refresher training.
Accepted in Part
Delivered
25 — Ensure senior manager presence and accessibility to staff
Recommendation: Contractors operating immigration removal centres must ensure that senior managers are regularly present and visible within the immigration removal centre and are accessible to more junior detention staff.
Gov response: The government response addressed this under staffing and culture, with contractors required to ensure senior managers are regularly present and visible.
Accepted in Part
Delivered
9 — Ensure effective operation and auditing of all Rule 35 limbs
Recommendation: The Home Office must, across the immigration detention estate, assure itself that all three limbs of Rule 35 of the Detention Centre Rules 2001 (reports by a medical practitioner where: (i) it is likely that a detained person's health would …
Gov response: The detention gatekeeper system reviews suitability for detention. The Adults at Risk in immigration detention policy is in place. A review of the AaR policy and Rules 34 and 35 is underway.
Response Unclear
In progress
PFD Reports (8)
Owen Donnelly
Concerns: Easy online access to information for constructing weapons, currently not illegal to possess, creates a real risk due to the proliferation of unlicensed weapons while legislation is pending.
Response: The Home Office confirms that the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill, expected to achieve Royal Assent by December, will make it a criminal offence to import, make, adapt, supply, …
Responded
Morgan-Rose Hart
Concerns: The Trust's investigation was incomplete and delayed, failing to address critical issues like inadequate staff observations and security breaches on a locked mental health ward. A dispute over permitted items and failure to escalate risk were also concerns.
Responded
Anthony Fitzpatrick
Concerns: Healthcare professionals used inconsistent and subjective criteria for assessing suicide risk, not following training materials, leading to inaccurate risk grading and no plan to rectify this critical issue.
Overdue
Mark Culverhouse
Concerns: A prisoner was unlawfully detained due to a system failure where release dates were calculated after recall decisions, leading to unnecessary imprisonment, particularly over bank holidays.
Responded
Aram Mustafa
Concerns: Critical details regarding urgent medical needs and safeguarding concerns were not sufficiently shared between immigration and accommodation providers. Furthermore, safeguarding matters were not logged when individuals were subject to deportation.
Responded
Sarah Reed
Concerns: Prolonged custody awaiting psychiatric reports led to significant deterioration of the deceased's mental health in a prison assessment unit, resulting in her self-inflicted death.
Overdue
Rubel Ahmed
Concerns: Detainees were locked in rooms overnight against recommendations, staff lacked robust detention awareness and refresher training, and crucial information like removal directions was not shared.
Overdue
Billy Paul Thomas Salton
Concerns: GMP policy of not staffing the Prisoner Processing Unit overnight leads to unnecessary and prolonged custody times for individuals awaiting interview.
Response: Medacs has introduced a new requirement for all new healthcare staff to sign off on policy awareness and has replaced handwritten assessment forms with an electronic record system. They are …
Response: Greater Manchester Police explains their policy for Prisoner Processing Units not being staffed overnight, citing limited suitability of detainees for night interviews and the availability of other agencies. They also …
Responded