Monitoring
PPS’s compliance with national systems is monitored as follows:
- PPS operates:
- An internal control process where prisons check and report compliance with all custodial systems
- Peer review processes where experienced custodial staff from other prison regions review compliance with core custodial systems
- All major incidents (suicides, escapes, major disturbances) are investigated by PPS. Serious incidents are also either investigated directly by the Inspectorate or Internal Audit, or the PPS investigation is overseen by them. In addition, the Ombudsman may oversee any investigation and may investigate directly. These will sometimes identify possible misconducts and lead to an Employment Investigation .
- Reports from peer reviews and incident investigations are circulated to the CE, Corporate Management, Internal Audit and the Inspectorate in their monitoring roles.
- Internal Audit conducts separate independent reviews of PPS’s compliance with core custodial systems. These are reported to the Department’s Assurance Board and areas of focus rotate annually based on risk and frequency of last review.
- All deaths in custody are investigated by the independent (of PPS) Inspectorate. An Ombudsman’s investigating officer in turn monitors these investigations, which are in turn reported to coronal proceedings.
- Employment investigations occur where allegations of misconduct are made against individual employees.
- Allegations of assault by an officer on an inmate are always referred to the Police and to the Inspectorate.
- In rare cases, the Department will invite an external agency to review a particular issue (e.g. the Controller and Auditor General).
- A Statutory Compliance process requires prisons to review compliance with all relevant legislation and report areas of risk or non-compliance.
- An “Internal Purchase Agreement” exists between the PPS General Manager and the Department’s Chief Executive. Performance against the agreement, and compliance with timeliness and process standards, is monitored and reported monthly to PPS’s senior management team group and quarterly to the Department’s Senior Management team.
Complaints Processes
Inmate complaints processes are essential for the safe and humane management of individuals deprived of their freedom and a great deal of emphasis is placed on ensuring these are accessible, fair and effective. Inmates have access to a number of avenues to raise issues of concern and/or complaints:
- The Ombudsman makes regular visits to prisons. These visits are advertised and are primarily focussed on providing time for inmates to raise issues and/or make complaints. The Ombudsman also operates a 0800 telephone line specifically for inmates to raise issues and/or make complaints directly and at no cost.
- The Inspectorate (an independent division of the Department) also makes regular (six weekly) visits to prisons. These visits are well advertised and include time for inmates to meet directly with the Inspector to raise issues of concern or make complaints. The Inspectorate also operates a 0800 line that allows inmates to raise issues or make complaints directly and at no cost. The Inspectorate reports to the CE and the Department’s Assurance Board on inmate complaints
- Inmates have access to complaints systems operated by the Human Rights Commission, Privacy Commissioner and Health and Disability Commissioner
- PPS operates a formal inmates complaints system, which is outlined in the Policy and Procedures Manual and a 0800 line.
Benchmarking
New Zealand Corrections seeks to evaluate its own performance against those of similar jurisdictions, notably Canada, Australia, England/Wales and Scotland. Each year our annual report records New Zealand performance over time, and our performance relative to those jurisdictions on a range of integrates comprising:
- Cost per inmate per day
- Inmate/staff ratios
- inmate on inmate and inmate on staff assault rates
- un-natural inmate deaths and suicides
- breakout escapes
- general random drug test results
- overall imprisonment rates
New Zealand consistently demonstrates performance at or near best practice against those jurisdictions - with the notable exception of drug use!
The People
New Zealand has recognised that it is not enough simply to develop systems, tools and interventions aspiring to world best practice. Our people are our most valuable asset and we cannot be fully effective in the delivery of effective prisons services if our management and staff, and the systems that support them, are not aligned with our strategic direction. We recognised a number of deficiencies in the management of our people:
- Traditionally, the PPS had valued and rewarded length of service over competence and alignment with departmental values.
- Work practices and rosters were inconsistent across the country
- We observed a deterioration in core custodial skills
- We experienced a climate often characterised by cynicism and mistrust
- We were not equitably allocating resources between prisons
- Earlier change efforts were often not understood or supported by officers
In summary, we needed to support our system changes by a shift in the internal culture characterised as follows:
The Changes
I will not pretend we have yet been completely successful in shifting the internal PPS culture as far as we need to. However, the following initiatives have brought about significant change:
- A radically simplified, less bureaucratic collective agreement governing terms and conditions of employment
- A revamped career structure for correction officers with progress linked to the achievement of new “Offender Management Qualifications”, formally linked to New Zealand’s national qualifications structure
- These qualifications are based on a framework of corrections competencies. Implementation of these new standards was supported by a national skills audit that assessed all existing corrections officers against the new competency standards.
- Nationally standardised practices, roster arrangements and the mix and numbers of staff (Workplace Development Project)
- Robust selection processes, which we have continually refined over time and which now incorporate personality testing.
- Performance management plans for all staff that clearly specify objectives and behaviours expected and provide for a regular feedback in monitoring
- An annually reviewed national training and development plan, recently enlarged through a successful business case to government
- A comprehensive Code of Conduct covering all departmental staff
- Guidelines for Safe Working Practices for men working in women’s facilities and vice versa.
- The Professional Ethics project. This award wining project was designed to engage staff and management in addressing:
- The issues in our culture, which work against our desire to reduce re-offending and undermine our vision and values.
- Management behaviours that undermine staff’s ability or willingness to fully contribute to the mission of PPS
- The quality of our internal communications at site, regional, and national levels
- Deficiencies in our recognition of good performance
- Implementation within PPS of the department’s “Pride“ campaign, to effectively focus managers and staff on the department’s vision, values: Professionalism, Responsivity, Integrity, Diversity, E ffectiveness/efficiency and “Kaupapa”
Participants can refer also to my presentation “Prison Staff Development” at the 2000 ICPA conference in Cape town, South Africa.
The Platform
I have just indicated that effective implementation within PPS of the Department’s strategies for reducing re-offending requires a supportive internal culture. It also requires a supportive infrastructure, a platform of systems and facilities that:
- Support the identification and management of risk
- Maintain the support of key stake holders – including Government Ministers, partner agencies, the general public
- Allocate resources in accordance with operational requirements and strategic priorities and ensure and effective budget control
- Effectively meets the information requirements of staff, management and other stakeholders.
- Provides a physical environment conducive to and supportive of the vision and values of the organisation.
In concluding, I would like to focus on three of these:
- Risk management framework
- Information technology platform
- Our approach to new facilities
Risk Management Framework
The Department of Corrections Risk Management Framework is based on the Australia/New Zealand Risk Management Standard 1999 (revised in 2004). The aim of the framework is to provide a methodology that ensures risks are managed in a way which is consistent, and recognises the unique nature of our business including the strategic, operational, financial and infrastructural, human resource, reputational and political risk areas.
Underpinning the framework is the understanding that risk management is a dynamic process that recognises change and moves to meet these new challenges as they arise.
In PPS we have enhanced this process through:
- Integrating risk management, compliance and health and safety roles into an Operational Risk function
- Ensuring that risks are identified and managed and reviewed at the most appropriate level
- Monitoring all incident investigations to ensure continual improvement and development of good practice
- An annual Peer Review process to provide additional assurance for high risk systems
Information Technology
Corrections’ business management software, the Integrated Offender Management System (IOMS) originated with purchased package software from a US supplier. It was substantially modified for the New Zealand environment and to support integration across the Services, each of which have their own unique and secure “view” of data relevant to their management of an offender.
IOMS is subject to continuous development and improvement. It captures, updates and reports data integral to offender management. Key features are:
- Direct access to sentencing and conviction history information via links with the Courts’ management information system
- Ready access to specified core offender data by Corrections Officers and management (with similar provision for Probation Officers, psychologists and other staff)
- Support of the new integrated sentence planning and management processes
- Support of all core operating processes including inmate assessment processes (At Risk, Immediate Needs, CNI etc), security classification, incident management, Parole Board reporting and decisions, release and visitor management
The New Facilities
The Department of Corrections has government approval for the commissioning of 4 new facilities between 2005 and 2007. These facilities:
- Are expected to cost almost NZ $700 million (USD $480m) to construct
- Will accommodate up to1600 inmates
- Will result in the employment of an additional 1000 staff.
- Are consistent with the longstanding “regional prisons” policy that seeks to foster re-integration by holding inmates as close as possible to their families and support networks.
Although the New Zealand prison system has grown by over 3000 inmates over the last 15 years, this growth has been accommodated almost entirely by the construction of additional prison wings or units within existing prison boundaries. The one exception is a 300-bed remand facility, opened in 2000 and under private management until July 2005.
The planned new construction therefore provides New Zealand with an opportunity to design and commission facilities more able to support its approach to reducing re-offending. We examined approaches to present construction around the world, considered our new approach to sentence planning and management and the need to more effectively deliver services to Maori. This has resulted in design of and planning for new facilities that:
- Provide an open environment within a secure external perimeter
- Manage inmates in single cells and in relatively small units - generally 88 divided into 2 pods.
- Involve “Kaitiaki” (the local Maori community) in the design, commissioning and, eventually, prison operations.
- “Normalise” the environment as much as possible, providing greater freedom of movement to inmates with less reliance on physical escorts and greater responsibility placed on the inmates themselves.
The ongoing challenge
Nothing in this presentation should be taken to indicate that New Zealand has solved its problems, has achieved 100% compliance with its operatinal practices or that we are yet operating as effectively as we need to. In particular, we continue to grapple with the following:
- many facilities, constructed in the 1920s or earlier, which are not compatible with modern corrections practice
- at 7000, current prison muster numbers are running considerably ahead of forecasts. As management and staff attention is diverted to the consequences, it is enviable that the quality of other services and the implementation of strategic initiatives is impacted.
- Our primary union has not showing it’s self-able to engage in a partnership approach to the extent that we would like.
- The state of the labour market in New Zealand is currently such that it is extremely difficult currently to attract new Officers. Currently we have nearly 300 (over 10%) vacancies and we know that both new facilities and attrition will require the recruitment of 1700 officers over the next four years.
- Improvements need to be made to our internal communication of systems changes
- A recent high court judgement has found aspects of our management of inmates under segregation unlawful. This decision is currently under appeal but if it stands, could present sufficient difficulties to our management of dangerous and violent inmates.
- Levels of drug use by inmates remain unacceptable, with general random results at 17% last year (2003/04).
