How can we use enterprise to get "real work" for prisoners?

ENGAGING WITH SOCIAL ENTERPRISE TO GENERATE “REAL WORK” FOR OFFENDERS IN PRISON

TLJ Occasional Paper, Dominic Murphy 4 April 2007

ENTERPRISE IN “NEXT STEPS”, CREATING REAL WORK

On Wednesday 13 December the government launched its new plan to reduce re-offending: "Reducing Re-Offending Through Skills & Employment: Next Steps".  (HMG 2006)

Alan Johnson, Secretary of State for Education and Skills stated that the order of a prisoner’s day will get more like a civilian working day, to help offenders acquire skills that will enable them to get and keep worthwhile jobs after release.  He wants to: “move the end of the rainbow closer to the prisoner.”

This theme was elaborated through statements from three other misters.  Phil Hope, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Skills, was particularly forthright about the need to encourage enterprising initiatives to create work for prisoners that will prepare them for holding down a job.

The need is twofold.  Firstly, regular work for offenders that gives them marketable experience and skills.  Secondly, projects that are self-sustaining.  Otherwise the work will depend on public or charitable funding, which does not last.  This paper looks at what can be done, and what we are doing, to be enterprising in prison to satisfy these needs. 

We conclude that there are valid institutional constraints on the Prison Service originating enterprise.  Partnership with social enterprise can overcome these constraints.   There are some path breaking success stories to learn from.

CAN THE PRISONS BE ENTERPRISING?   

Parliament votes public funds to NOMS to protect the public and reduce reoffending.  In return NOMS must account for that money and demonstrate its proper use.  There is increasing pressure to employ effective budgetary management and accountability at every level of operation.

Prisons are encouraged to generate revenue through Public Sector Prison Industries.  Their mission maps exactly onto the twofold need outlined above.  Prison industries seek to partner with outside organisations so that:

• “prisoners are better prepared and qualified to seek meaningful employment upon release from prison
• revenue generated by these partnerships contributes to the cost of running a prison and reduces the burden on the taxpayer”   (H M Prison Service 2007)

STRICT CONTROL OF PUBLIC MONEY

However, there are real and valid constraints that limit the capacity of NOMS to create real work for prisoners.  Transactions must be audited and controlled to avoid unfair practices, corruption and favouritism.  There are certain things that the Prison Service, as a public body, cannot do: 

• It cannot allow prisons to contract directly with outside organisations without accounting to higher authority and ultimately Parliament via H M Treasury
• It cannot use prisoners as cheep labour to undercut the prices of commercial enterprises
• Its staff cannot benefit personally from commercial deals with outside organisations
• It cannot pay prisoners a living wage and charge them for their keep.

Consequently, financial management in a prison is closely controlled and overseen from above and outside of the prison. Invoicing and payment processing takes place centrally.  There is an inevitable lack of flexibility in customer service from any commercial activity within a prison.   This may not be a problem where activity is business-to-business and internal to a production process.  But it is more of a problem where tasks change rapidly and there is a need for contact with the final consumer. 

PRESSURE FROM MARKET FORCES

There are further constraints to do with market forces.  Many legacy prison industries provide menial and low grade work.   It is increasingly the case that simple things can be bought more cheaply from abroad than they can be produced in a prison.

Inevitably in such circumstances, the skills learned and experience gained from jobs in prison are not marketable in the UK.   Further, the expansion of the labour market of the European Union has greatly increased the competition for non-skilled and semi-skilled work in the UK labour market. 

To achieve the objectives of reducing re-offending, prison workers need to be up-skilled.  This involves attracting new staff and adopting new practices.  The culture of the Prison Service will need to adapt to the challenge. 

Small wonder that a recent study concluded:

“…the research suggests that there is a general absence of work in most prisons, and where it does exist it is often mundane, repetitive and boring.  So too where an external employer wants to work with a prison, there are often a number of obstacles that have to be overcome…”  (Wilson and Wahidin 2006)

HERE ARE SOME SUCCESS STORIES TO LEARN FROM

However, this same study gives examples of successful provision of “real work”.   In particular, at HMP Coldingley The Howard League for Penal Reform has established Barbed. 

This is a graphic design studio which is run on commercial lines, but as a social enterprise to provide real work for offenders.   Barbed offers employment to offenders on the same terms offered to other Howard League staff.  (Howard League 2006)

Summit Media is another example of an enterprise with a relationship with the prison service that offers real work to offenders.  Summit advertises in Inside Time for “highly motivated individual[s] with the desire for a ‘new start’ on release”.  Successful candidates are offered real work in a commercial Internet marketing enterprise with media centres at HMP Wolds and HMP Rye Hill.  Summit has some impressive customers including Panasonic Europe, Team Bentley and Panasonic Toyota Racing.  (Summit Media 2006)

A third success story comes from HMP Askham Grange:

“Askham Grange is a women’s prison.  It offers work experience, both within and outside the prison, to prepare offenders for life after prison.  Two specific areas are conferencing and hospitality, using facilities within the prison.  During 2005, a feasibility study established that these services have the potential to evolve into a thriving, self-sustaining business within the prison.  The study concluded that the social enterprise offered an appropriate business model.  A business plan was produced, and a replicable model developed that lays down the key principles for a market-lead enterprise.  The business plan is now being implemented.”  (Cabinet Office 2006, p57)

The business plan and replicable model envisage the establishment of an Enterprise Manager to drive the business development.  The support of a prison governor committed to the project is a vital prerequisite.  (The Ideas Mine 2005)

The first two enterprises are based on participation between a commercial organisation that manages the business and a prison which has welcomed the job opportunities for their inmates.  The Askham Grange model appears to offer a different and totally internal option.

However, despite the report in the “Social enterprise action plan, Scaling new heights” (Cabinet Office 2006), the Askham Grange business plan is not being implemented as originally specified.  It has proved impossible for a prison governor to take responsibility for the inevitable commercial risk. 

The Ideas Mine and Askham Grange now have a modified business model.  This involves collaboration between a charitable organisation able to take that risk and a receptive prison. 

CONCLUSIONS

It is difficult for prisons to create enterprising, self-financing programmes that deliver “real work” for prisoners.  There may be successful enterprise where the offering is particularly relevant to the marketplace internal to the prison estate.  Laundry and industrial cleaning services are examples of this.

However, all of the enterprising projects found in this study needed the collaboration of an outside organisation able to manage the commercial aspects of the venture.  It is to be doubted that an alternative model will be successful.   Inevitably, all these projects depend on the encouragement and support of an enthusiastic prison governor.  There are important lessons to be learned from the work done at HMP Askham Grange.

REFERENCES

H M Government (Dec 2006) Reducing Re-Offending Through Skills and Employment: Next Steps. From Internet WWW site at URL:   www.dfes.gov.uk/offenderlearning (accessed 29-12-06).

H M Prison Service (2007) Prison Industries.  From Internet WWW site at URL: http://www.hmpenterprises.co.uk/index.htm (accessed 23//02/07)

David Wilson and Azrini Wahidin (2006) “Real Work” in Prison: Absences, Obstacles and Opportunities.  Centre for Criminal Justice Policy and Research, UCE in Birmingham.   From Internet WWW site at URL: http://www.lhds.uce.ac.uk/criminaljustice/docs/Real_Work_Report.pdf  (accessed 23/03/07)

The Howard League for Penal Reform (2006) Barbed Design.  From Internet WWW site at URL: http://www.howardleague.org/index.php?id=277 (accessed 23//02/07)

Summit Media Online (2006) Welcome to Summit Media Online. From Internet WWW site at URL: http://www.summit.co.uk/ (accessed 23//02/07)

Cabinet Office, Office of the Third Sector (Nov 2006) Social enterprise action plan Scaling new heights.  From Internet WWW site at URL:   http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/third_sector/documents/social_enterprise/se_action_plan_2006.pdf   (accessed 23-02-07).

The Ideas Mine (October 2005) Developing Enterprise in the Custodial System – a replicable model.  From Internet WWW site at URL:   http://www.theideasmine.co.uk/reports.html (accessed 23-02-07).