Lost your Password?
Click Here
Don't have an account?
Register Here
Welcome to the EuroPris Knowledge Management System. The table below shows questions and responses from European National Agencies. Select a question for more information or use the filters on the left to narrow down questions based on Agency or Category.
Want to ask a question? Please read our guidance information found here: Submitting a KMS Question
← Back Search KMSThis content is only available to registered members of EuroPris.
Introduction: The Department of Justice in Ireland has initiated a “Value for Money Review” of prisoner escorts in the criminal justice sector. Government Departments in Ireland are regularly required to undertake such reviews of different areas of public expenditure, as one of many standard procedures associated with the “Public Spending Code” that seeks to evaluate efficiency and effectiveness in public spending. The objectives of this review are to assess the way in which prisoner escort services are delivered in Ireland, whether alternative approaches have been considered and costed, the costs, outputs and cost-efficiency of the services, the extent to which service objectives are achieved, evaluate the degree to which the objectives warrant the allocation of public funding on a current and ongoing basis, consider international best practice, and examine the scope for alternative policy or organisational approaches to achieving these objectives on a more efficient and/or effective basis. It is in this respect that the review seeks to be informed by approaches and operational aspects of escorts services in other countries.
yes
Is there a public-sector agency responsible (separate from the main prison authorities)?no
Is a single authority responsible for transfers and escorts of prisoners (a) within the prison system/for convicted prisoners and (b) held in the prison system but not convicted (e.g. on remand) (c) held in police custody?SPS and a private contractor G4S provide a prisoner escorting service. 1.4.3.1 Prisoner Escorts (Service Provider) a Establishments must ensure that prisoners are strip searched prior to departure. b Prisoners must be ready for handover to the Service Provider at the time specified according to the Service Provider Routing and Scheduling information. c All prisoners must be accompanied by a Prisoner Escort Record and Prevention of Suicide documentation, where relevant. d Establishments must ensure that all relevant information is passed to the Service Provider to enable them to risk assess the escort arrangements. e The Personal Escort Record (PER) must be signed at the handover of responsibility for the prisoner between the establishment and the Service Provider to confirm who has taken over custody of the prisoner. f Prisoners' property should be handed to the escort in a sealed bag, with the seal number recorded on the PER. 1.4.3.2 Prisoner Escorts (SPS) a All external escorts must be carried out in accordance with SPS procedures. b Establishments are required to provide an escort service in situations where a prisoner requires to be escorted and held securely outside the prison in an emergency or at short notice until such times that Escort Contractor assumes formal responsibility for the prisoner. c A risk assessment must be carried out on all prisoners who are to be escorted outwith the secure perimeter. This assessment will determine the level of security of the escort. d Escort risk assessments must consider the nature of the prisoner's offence, outstanding charges and previous convictions. e Particular care must be taken when escorting prisoners subject to special security measures. f Staff carrying out escorts must be briefed prior to each escort's departure and be in possession of appropriate documentation. g Staff carrying out escorts must ensure they are in possession of the appropriate equipment, including but not limited to: • Handcuffs; • Escort chain; • Mobile phone; h All information available, including intelligence information must be utilised in determining the level of security for each escort.
Is any part of the service outsourced to private sector operators to deliver?G4S is the private contractor providing prisoner escort services.
Is the service tendered, with both private and public operators free to compete?Yes.
Is there any data that can be shared concerning: a. The volume of escort activity undertaken? b.The cost of or expenditure associated with escorting, either overall or specifically in relation to a specific volume of activity?Commercially confidential.
Is there any data concerning the use of video-link technology between prisons and courts that seeks to minimise the need for escorting prisoners in person from prison settings to court for court appearances?Video links between prisons and certain courts have been piloted.
Have there been any policy reviews or evaluations of the escort model provided, and/or any proposal made to change the model of delivery?A survey has been undertaken with prisoners regarding satisfaction levels with the G4S escorting service.
The majority of prisoner escorting in England and Wales has been outsourced to private-sector providers since 1994, under the Prisoner Escort and Custodial Services (PECS) contracts. The PECS contracts cover the movement of prisoners from Police Custody to Court, from Court to Prison, from Prison to Court and return and from Prison to Prison (excluding the movement of Category A prisoners). Prior to 1994 these PECS moves were conducted by Her Majesty’s Prison Service (HMPS). The PECS contracts cover adult male and female prisoners and young adults in young offender institutions. The PECS contractors also have responsibility for the care of prisoners in Court cells and for the security of the prisoner in the Court dock. The Youth Justice Board has a separate escorting contract in place for the movement of children and young people in Secure Care Homes (SCH) and Secure Training Centres (STC), which also includes Hospital Escorts and Bedwatches for this cohort. Category A prisoner moves and Hospital Escorts and Bedwatches for adults and YOIs continue to be conducted by HMPS. Moves to Secure Hospitals and escorts for compassionate events e.g. funerals are conducted by HMPS staff (or STC/SCH staff where applicable). There is not a public-sector agency responsible for moves/ escorts (separate from the main prison authorities). As above, all adult and YOI moves are conducted via the PECS contracts or via HMPS directly (STC/SCH moves would be via the YJB’s private-sector contractor or STC/SCH staff directly). Other public sector ‘involvement’ includes the additional provision of NHS staff (funded by the NHS) on some Secure Hospital moves when required. Overall management of the PECS contracts is conducted by Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) and the Ministry of Justice Commercial Directorate. The PECS contractors have the responsibility for the movement of Prisoners, both convicted and un-convicted, from Prison to Court and a responsibility for the movement of detainees in Police Custody to Court for remand hearings. The Police have the responsibility for moving detainees from the point of arrest to police custody.
Is any part of the service outsourced to private sector operators to deliver?Yes, as above, the PECS service covers the following moves (excluding Category A prisoners): • Police Custody to Court • Court to Prison • Prison to Court • Prison to Prison i.e. Inter-Prison Transfers excluding Category A prisoners
Is the service tendered, with both private and public operators free to compete?No, the service has only ever been tendered in the private sector.
Is there any data that can be shared concerning: a. The volume of escort activity undertaken? b.The cost of or expenditure associated with escorting, either overall or specifically in relation to a specific volume of activity?In 2015/16 PECS contractors undertook approximately 690,000 movements covering a distance of just over 11million miles; 82% of moves were for adult male prisoners. The cost of the PECS contracts in 2016/17 was £126.9m.
Is there any data concerning the use of video-link technology between prisons and courts that seeks to minimise the need for escorting prisoners in person from prison settings to court for court appearances?Currently HMPPS has a target of ensuring that 40% of video-link eligible cases are heard in this way. Present delivery is around 35% nationally, although there is great variability between prisons. The strategic vision for Prisons and Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunal Services is for 100% of eligible hearings to be done via video link in the future.
Have there been any policy reviews or evaluations of the escort model provided, and/or any proposal made to change the model of delivery?We are currently reviewing the model for PECS delivery for the next round of competitions. This includes whether future PECS contracts should cover hospital or other escorts, or other services such as the running of video suites in Police Custody and Prisons as well as alternative models for mobile courts. The future model for PECS will be heavily influenced by significant reforms currently underway across the Criminal Justice Sector (Prisons, Courts, the Youth Justice Service and the Police).
This content is only available to registered members of EuroPris.
yes
Is there a public-sector agency responsible (separate from the main prison authorities)?no
Is a single authority responsible for transfers and escorts of prisoners (a) within the prison system/for convicted prisoners and (b) held in the prison system but not convicted (e.g. on remand) (c) held in police custody?No
Is any part of the service outsourced to private sector operators to deliver?No
Is the service tendered, with both private and public operators free to compete? Is there any data that can be shared concerning: a. The volume of escort activity undertaken? b.The cost of or expenditure associated with escorting, either overall or specifically in relation to a specific volume of activity?No
Is there any data concerning the use of video-link technology between prisons and courts that seeks to minimise the need for escorting prisoners in person from prison settings to court for court appearances?No
Have there been any policy reviews or evaluations of the escort model provided, and/or any proposal made to change the model of delivery?No
yes
Is there a public-sector agency responsible (separate from the main prison authorities)?no
Is a single authority responsible for transfers and escorts of prisoners (a) within the prison system/for convicted prisoners and (b) held in the prison system but not convicted (e.g. on remand) (c) held in police custody?Service of investigated detainees, legally convicted prisoners, convicted persons and defendants who have been punished for misdemeanor is in charge of the criminal bodies where they are located, and Ministry of the Interior Affairs is in charge for detained persons.
Is any part of the service outsourced to private sector operators to deliver?No
Is the service tendered, with both private and public operators free to compete?No
Is there any data that can be shared concerning: a. The volume of escort activity undertaken? b.The cost of or expenditure associated with escorting, either overall or specifically in relation to a specific volume of activity?We don't posses such data.
Is there any data concerning the use of video-link technology between prisons and courts that seeks to minimise the need for escorting prisoners in person from prison settings to court for court appearances?Some prisons and penitentiaries use video links but for now it is in the beginning of use and is not widespread.
Have there been any policy reviews or evaluations of the escort model provided, and/or any proposal made to change the model of delivery?The experience and practice of European prison systems have been studied, but the same has been done only at the professional level.
yes
Is there a public-sector agency responsible (separate from the main prison authorities)?no
Is a single authority responsible for transfers and escorts of prisoners (a) within the prison system/for convicted prisoners and (b) held in the prison system but not convicted (e.g. on remand) (c) held in police custody?Yes, in both cases.
Is any part of the service outsourced to private sector operators to deliver?No, there is only public operator performing the service.
Is the service tendered, with both private and public operators free to compete?No.
Is there any data that can be shared concerning: a. The volume of escort activity undertaken? b.The cost of or expenditure associated with escorting, either overall or specifically in relation to a specific volume of activity?In 2016 there were 993 escorts with prison guards and additional 149 escorts with treatment prison staff. We have no data concerning cost associated with escorting.
Is there any data concerning the use of video-link technology between prisons and courts that seeks to minimise the need for escorting prisoners in person from prison settings to court for court appearances?We try to go in direction to use such video-link technology and we are in discussion about it with the court. In one of the prison we have already needed equipment but we it is not yet in operation.
Have there been any policy reviews or evaluations of the escort model provided, and/or any proposal made to change the model of delivery?All escorts are planned ahead and in planning findings from past reviews are included. There are no special evaluations made.
yes
Is there a public-sector agency responsible (separate from the main prison authorities)?yes
Is a single authority responsible for transfers and escorts of prisoners (a) within the prison system/for convicted prisoners and (b) held in the prison system but not convicted (e.g. on remand) (c) held in police custody?Based on Cabinet Regulation No.497, Adopted 25 August 2015 "Order in which inmate or detainee transfer and security is organized when visiting healthcare service outside imprisonment place" (hereinafter – Regulation). The Regulation states the order is which an imprisonment place official with special service rank (hereinafter ¬– Official) provides detainee, inmate or person to whom a fine or community service has been replaced with short-term imprisonment (hereinafter – Prisoner) transfer from an imprisonment place to a healthcare facility outside the imprisonment place with the purpose of receiving a healthcare service. The official also provides security of the prisoner during the healthcare service. Based on previously mentioned, it can be concluded that the officials of Latvian Prison Administration escort prisoners. According with Section 10 Part 1 Clause 8 of the law On Police: In accordance with the tasks set for the police, the basic duties of a police officer, in conformity with the competence of the service, are to guard, convey and keep in custody arrested and detained persons, and within the scope of his or her competence to execute criminal sentences and administrative sanctions, as well as to convey and guard persons sentenced to deprivation of liberty in the performance of investigatory activities in relation to the adjudication of matters in a court and between places of imprisonment. As well as, in conformity with the competence of the service, other State Government institutions, such as Security Police, State Border Guard, the State Revenue Service Finance Police, the State Revenue Service Customs Criminal Service etc. Thus, escort of a person (transfer) to whom the court has ordered a security measure – arrest, detainment or imprisonment (for convicted persons), within the scope of their competence, provides the State Police, Latvian Prison Administration as well as other State Government institutions.
Is any part of the service outsourced to private sector operators to deliver?No.
Is the service tendered, with both private and public operators free to compete?Escort services are not tendered. Only state government institutions provide prisoner escort services.
Is there any data that can be shared concerning: a. The volume of escort activity undertaken? b.The cost of or expenditure associated with escorting, either overall or specifically in relation to a specific volume of activity?No.
Is there any data concerning the use of video-link technology between prisons and courts that seeks to minimise the need for escorting prisoners in person from prison settings to court for court appearances?On 31st December 2013 the implementation of the Latvia – Switzerland cooperation programme project "Court modernization in Latvia" was finalised. Within the framework of the project all courts and 10 imprisonment places of Latvia, as well as the Latvian Prison Administration was equipped with video conference and sound recording devices. Contract about the implementation of the Project was signed on 17th August 2009 and ended at the end of 2013. The Court Administration implemented the Project. Project corporation partners were The Supreme Court of the Republic of Latvia, the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Latvia, Latvian Prison Administration and State Forensic Science Bureau. The total costs of the project were 9 411 765 Swiss francs or about 7.6 million Euros, Latvian State Budget co-financing (15%) and Swiss Government co-financing (85%).
Have there been any policy reviews or evaluations of the escort model provided, and/or any proposal made to change the model of delivery?According with Sub–section 4.1. of the Cabinet Order No.248, signed on 6th April 2016 "On State Police Development Concept" (hereinafter – Order), the Ministry of Justice together with the Ministry of the Interior was ordered to develop the necessary normative act projects and activity plans by 1st July 2017. This is necessary to ensure the transfer of the duty of detainee and inmate escort to the Latvian Prison Administration starting from 1st July 2019 – escort between the imprisonment places regarding the execution of imprisonment (imprisonment sentence or detainment as a security measure). Taking into account the previously mentioned, the Ministry of Justice together with the Ministry of the Interior has developed an informative report to ensure appropriate decision making in the Cabinet of Ministers, that would allow to provide partial detainee and inmate escort duty (escort between the imprisonment places regarding the execution of imprisonment (imprisonment sentence or detainment as a security measure) transfer to the Latvian Prison Administration starting 1st July 2017.
This content is only available to registered members of EuroPris.
(Also answer to question 1 and 2) Prisoner Escort is regulated through circular G-03/2005 from the Ministry of Justice and Public Security. Main principle The responsibility for escorting inmates is divided between the Police and the Correctional Service. The main principle for domestic escorts states that the Police is responsible for conducting escort for pre-trial inmates, while the Correctional Service is responsible for the transportation of convicted inmates. There is however one notable exception to the above-mentioned principle, concerning transportation of convicted inmates. When a convicted inmate is to transported on the grounds of a petition from the Police or the Prosecuting Authority (for example when the inmate is to appear before the court in connection with a court case), this will normally be conducted by the Police. International escorts: The police is responsible for transfers of inmates to other countries during and after execution of a prison sentence. The exception here is transfers to and from Norgerhaven prison in the Netherlands, which Norway currently rents. These transfers are conducted by the Correctional Service. Trial project A trial project is currently being undertaken in Norway, where the Correctional Service has been given the responsibility of transportation of pre-trial detainees. The trial project was initiated in the police districts of Nordre Buskerud, Søndre Buskerud, Telemark and Vestfold in August 2014. In June 2015, Asker and Bærum police district was also embedded into the project. A new transport unit within the Correctional Service was established to conduct the transports. In October 2015, Visa Analysis published an evaluation of the project. The conclusion was that the Correctional Service had delivered a high quality service, but that the cost efficacy was too low and that the arrangement was not economically viable in its current form. Adjustments were made to organization of the transport unit after the publication of the report, and the project will run until the end of 2018. The trial project will also be expanded to parts of Oslo police district, something which we are embrace.
Is any part of the service outsourced to private sector operators to deliver?No
Is the service tendered, with both private and public operators free to compete?No
Is there any data that can be shared concerning: a. The volume of escort activity undertaken? b.The cost of or expenditure associated with escorting, either overall or specifically in relation to a specific volume of activity? Is there any data concerning the use of video-link technology between prisons and courts that seeks to minimise the need for escorting prisoners in person from prison settings to court for court appearances?Video-link technology between prisons and courts is used to a limited extent in Norway. We do not, however, have any statistics on the matter. It is the Norwegian Courts Administration which is responsible for video-link technology in the court system.
Have there been any policy reviews or evaluations of the escort model provided, and/or any proposal made to change the model of delivery?See question 3