Detention timescales
Lack of clear and consistent instructions and guidance regarding timescales for detention, impacting risk management.
18 items
1 source
2 inquiries
Source spread
Where this theme appears
Detention timescales has been flagged across 1 independent accountability source:
18 inquiry recs
This theme has been identified in one data source. As more data is added, cross-references may emerge.
Browse by source
Source-grouped records are useful for tracing where a concern came from. Large sections show the 50 strongest matches for that source; counts still show the full theme total.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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