HMP Featherstone, Inspections

The prison was given a full inspection in  May 2022. The inspectors said in their report:

Featherstone is a category C training prison near Wolverhampton that contained 661 prisoners at the time of our inspection.

The impressive work leaders had undertaken to reduce the supply of drugs had led to large falls in violence, despite the regime being far more open with more prisoners in activities and work than we have seen in recent inspections of similar prisons.

The effective and well-respected governor had come into post at the beginning of the pandemic and had, alongside her strong and supportive deputy, taken on some of the challenges that had dogged this prison in recent years. In our survey, a far larger proportion of prisoners told us that they felt safe than at our 2018 inspection, and ambulance call outs and general alarms on the wings were becoming much rarer than in the past.

Senior leaders, however, had not paid enough attention to offender management and the unit was not operating effectively. There were examples of poor leadership in the unit and a staff group that lacked direction or support. As a result, prisoner progression was often limited and we received many complaints from men who were unable to get any response from offender managers. There was also a long backlog of prisoners waiting to get onto accredited programmes. Poor public protection arrangements meant that some higher-risk prisoners were not having their telephone calls monitored promptly, undermining the collection of timely risk information.

It was disappointing to find that some acutely mentally ill prisoners were ending up in the segregation unit, where staff did not have the training or the skills to create a therapeutically orientated environment. There were also unacceptable problems in getting these prisoners to the inpatient wing at HMP Birmingham, as well as delays in moving those in crisis to a secure hospital. Improvement in this area must be a priority for both local and regional leaders.

Despite competing with nearby prisons, leaders had worked hard to improve staff retention rates, which had been some of the worst in the area. Thought had gone into providing the newer and often younger officers with the support they needed to feel more comfortable and skilled in the role.

Education provision had reopened, but ongoing teacher shortages meant that it was not yet as effective as at our last inspection. Due to a new regime, prisoners were only in work or education for half of the day – this did not replicate working hours in the community and the ambition must be to run a full regime. Prisoners at Featherstone were getting out of their cells for longer than we have seen in most recent inspections and it was good to see association rooms open with pool, snooker and table tennis in use.

The governor had recognised that improvements were needed to the staff culture – in our survey prisoners reported victimisation and bullying from officers at a higher level than comparable prisons. This was disappointing, because we also saw some very skilled officers maintaining high standards and helping the men in their care. Officers often did not switch on their body-worn cameras and consequently, scrutiny and oversight of the use of force was lacking. Leaders had commissioned a staff climate report that was helping them to identify poor practice and attitudes.

As we said in our last two inspections, much of the accommodation at Featherstone was very run down, and some of the older house blocks were beyond repair and need replacing. High standards set by staff meant that the prison was, at least, generally clean.

There is much to be optimistic about Featherstone where, if the current senior leadership team remains in place and staff can be retained, there is every reason to believe that this prison can continue to improve.

Charlie Taylor
HM Chief Inspector of Prisons
July 2022

In addition, the inspectors provided a note of what they  believe need attention

“During this inspection we identified 11 key concerns, of which five should be treated as priorities. Priority concerns are those that are most important to improving outcomes for prisoners. They require immediate attention by leaders and managers. Leaders should make sure that all concerns identified here are addressed and that progress is tracked through a plan which sets out how and when the concerns will be resolved. The plan should be provided to HMI Prisons.

Priority concerns

  1. The older house units (1 to 4) were in a very poor condition and needed significant renovation or replacement.
  2. Despite a high level of need, no seriously mentally unwell prisoners had been transferred to the regional inpatient unit at HMP Birmingham. This left leaders trying to manage very disturbing behaviour, which often involved the use of the segregation unit, which was a far from therapeutic environment.
  3. Senior leaders did not have an effective strategy for improving prisoners’ skill levels in English and mathematics.
  4. Arrangements to protect the public from serious harm were poor and senior leaders did not have oversight of the potential risks.
  5. There were too few opportunities for prisoners to demonstrate progression or complete their sentence plan targets and some fundamental offender management processes had broken down.

Key concerns

  1. Oversight of and accountability for the use of force against prisoners was lacking. Despite a high rate of force being used, almost 80% of recent incidents had not been recorded by staff on body-worn video cameras.
  2. Some of the very basic aspects of prison life were poorly managed. Prisoners’ access to their personal property was fraught with difficulties. The applications system and the management of complaints were very weak. Prisoners reported a variety of problems with the quality and quantity of food, and that the range of products available from the prison shop was limited.
  3. Oversight of the management of medicines was limited, with no onsite pharmacist to provide regular supervision.
  4. There was insufficient support for prisoners who did not have English as their first language.
  5. The curriculum did not meet the needs of specific groups of prisoners. Prisoners waiting to go to an open prison or wanting to study at higher levels or become self-employed could not access learning or work activities that met their needs.
  6. Staff shortages meant that the curriculum delivered was too narrow. There were vacancies or staff absences in teaching information and communications technology (ICT), painting and decorating, bricklaying, warehousing and automotive technologies”

To read the full report go to the Ministry of justice web site or follow the links below:

This section contains the reports for Featherstone from 2000 until present

Return to Featherstone