VISITORS SURVEY 2008
BULLETIN
RESEARCH AND MANAGEMENT INFORMATION NOVEMBER 2008
NATIONAL VISITORS SURVEY 2008 Executive Summary The main findings of the 2008 National Visitors Survey are set out below. TYPE OF VISIT Visitors were asked a number of questions regarding the type of visit session they attended. The majority of visits took place during the afternoon with six in ten attending (59%). Over one third of respondents attended evening visits (37%) and a small minority visited during the morning (4%). TRAVELLING TO THE PRISON Visitors were asked which method of transport they would normally use to visit the prison. The most common forms of transport used included the visitor’s own car (51%), bus (23%), another person’s car (19%), train (15%) and taxi (7%). Only one visitor reported using SACRO services to attend visits. ARRIVAL AT THE PRISON The majority of visitors rated the ‘availability of lockers’ and ‘helpfulness of staff on their arrival at visits’ in positive terms (97% and 96% respectively). Similarly ‘respect shown by staff’ on their arrival at the visit session was rated highly (94%), as was the cleanliness of the waiting room/toilets (87%) and baby changing facilities (84%). Facilities for disabled visitors were reported as being ‘poor’ of ‘very poor’ by a small minority of respondents (9% and 4% respectively). FAMILY CONTACT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER Six out of ten visitors (62%) did not know if the establishment which they were visiting had a Family Contact Development Officer. Just under one third (31%) stated that the prison had an FCDO and a small minority (7%) of visitors reported that the prison that they attended visits did not have an FCDO. WAITING TIMES One fifth of visitors (20%) reported that the visits they attended did not ‘usually start on time’. Almost half (48%) of those reporting delays, waited 10 minutes for the visit to start, three in ten (30%) 15 minutes, and fifteen percent 20 minutes. VISIT ROOM Visitors were asked a number of questions relating to the visit room. The majority (95%) reported positively in relation to ‘respect shown by staff in the visit room’. Almost nine in ten visitors were content with the ‘look of the visit room’ and the ‘facilities available in the visit room’ (89% and 87% respectively). Three quarters (74%) of respondents rated the amount of privacy they had during their visit as ‘ok’, ‘good’ or ‘very good’.
VISITING WITH CHILDREN Just over half (54%) had taken their children to the prison in the past and one third (32%) reported having children with them on the day of the survey. VISIT EXPERIENCE Nine in ten visitors reported positively in relation to ‘understanding the rules’, ‘present visit times’, and ‘displaying rules in the visit room’, (96%, 90% & 90% respectively). One fifth of those reporting (20%) rated the system of booking visits as ‘poor’ or ‘very poor’ and one quarter (26%) held similar views regarding the length of the visit session. VISITING PROBLEMS One quarter of visitors (25%) reported experiencing ‘visit problems’. The problem reported most frequently by visitors was the distance of the prison from their home (58%), followed by the cost involved in getting to the prison (52%). Three in ten visitors reported problems due to ‘stress of the visit’ and ‘lack of transport’ (30% and 28% respectively). INDUCTION DAY Just under half (48%) of those who participated in the visitors survey thought they would benefit from an induction day. There were a number of areas where visitors would like to receive more information. The most common areas reported by visitors were the prisoner’s progression (63%), followed by prison regime (58%) and family support (50%). Four in ten (41%) respondents expressed an interest in more information about relationship support.
INTRODUCTION This Report describes the key findings of the Scottish Prison Service’s (SPS) National Visitors Survey 2008 which was undertaken in each of the 15 Scottish establishments. Over several years, SPS Research has conducted a number of ad hoc Visitors Surveys in various establishments to ascertain the views of families and friends visiting prisoners. These surveys have included questions on visiting facilities, amenities for children and the disabled, waiting times, the attitudes and demeanour of staff, the quality and privacy of the visit experience, methods of travel utilised to attend, the distance covered and the costs involved. This was the first year that methodologically the exercise was consolidated, so it constitutes a ‘national pilot’ from which lessons can be learned in future years. The National Visitors Survey is designed to inform and support the Offender Outcome in respect to family contact and the maintenance of appropriate relationships. METHOD As visitors arrived at the prison prior to their scheduled visit, they were asked by visits staff if they wished to participate in the survey. Those visitors who agreed to take part were given questionnaires to complete. Questionnaires were made available to establishments based on the number of visits they anticipated and distributed to participating visitors over a one week period in April 2008. Take up rates were lower than expected and it would appear that with 840 questionnaires returned, around one in eight visitors took the opportunity to express a point of view. While each establishment provided an estimate of the number of visits it handled in the given time period, it has to be remembered that each visit appointment is not necessarily a separate questionnaire completion, as obviously the same families and friends can visit several times a week. Also the questionnaire, which had input from external partner agencies, may have been on the long side at 4 pages. There may have been reluctance on the part of visitors to engage with that level of detail or insufficient time for them to complete before the visit started. A number of jails were very proactive in distributing and encouraging voluntary completion, but visitors’ priorities were not unnaturally focused on prisoner contact. In an attempt to increase levels of participation in future, alternative methods for conducting research on visitors will be explored.
TYPE OF VISIT Visitors were asked a number of questions regarding the type of visit session they attended. Figure 1 below, illustrates that the majority of visits were held in the afternoon with six in ten attending (59%). Over one third of respondents attended evening visits (37%) and a minority visited during the morning (4%).
Nine in ten (90%) visitors stated that they attended ‘ordinary visits’, while one tenth (10%) availed of ‘parents and child’ visits. Seventy percent of visitors reported that their visit took place on a weekday and just over a quarter (28%) attended visit at the weekend. TRAVELLING TO THE PRISON Visitors were asked which method of transport they would normally use to visit the prison. The most common form of transport used was the visitor’s own car (51%), followed by the bus (23%), another person’s car (19%), train (15%) and taxi (7%). Only one visitor reported using SACRO services to attend visits (Figure 2).
In relation to ‘travelling time’, just over half of visitors (51%) reported that it took them ‘less than 1 hour’ to travel to the prison for their visit. One third (34%) stated a journey time of ‘more than 1 hour but less than 2 hours’. A minority of visitors travelling time exceeded two or three hours (8% & 7% respectively). Table 1 below, illustrates the average journey cost incurred by visitors travelling to and from the prison. While the majority of people (79%) reported costs of under £20, one fifth (21%) of visitors indicated that their journeys to the prison to visit their family/friend cost over twenty pounds, and one in ten (10%) reported a cost exceeding £30.
Table 1. Total cost of journey to and from the prison Under £10 Over £10 but under £20 Over £20 but under £30 Over £30 but under £40 Over £40 43% 36% 11% 5% 5%
Table 2, illustrates visitors experience of travelling to prison for visits. Three quarters of respondents rated ‘sign-posted directions to the prison’ as ‘ok’, ‘good’ or ‘very good’ (74%), and similar number were content with the ‘ease of finding the prison on their first visit (72%). One third (33%) of visitors were dissatisfied with the availability of public transport to and from the prison, but almost nine in ten (87%) rated car parking facilities at the prison positively.
Table 2. Visitors’ experiences travelling to prison visits?
Very good
Good
OK
Poor
Very poor
Sign-posted directions to the prison The ease of finding the prison on your first visit Availability of public transport to and from the prison The car parking facilities at the prison
17 16
27 24
30 35
15 15
11 9
10 24
21 34
36 29
19 8
14 5
ARRIVAL AT THE PRISON The majority of visitors rated the ‘availability of lockers’ and ‘helpfulness of staff on their arrival at visits’ in positive terms (97% and 96% respectively). Similarly ‘respect shown by staff’ on their arrival at the visit session was rated highly (94%), as was the cleanliness of the waiting room/toilets (87%) and ‘baby changing facilities (84%). Facilities for disabled visitors were reported as being ‘poor’ of ‘very poor’ by a minority of respondents (9% and 4% respectively). Table 3. How would you rate the following? The helpfulness of staff on your arrival Respect shown by staff on your arrival The cleanliness of the waiting room/toilets The disabled facilities (if required) Baby changing facilities Availability of lockers Very good Good OK Poor Very poor 1 2 4 6 6 1
39 38 25 22 17 34
35 36 36 36 33 41
22 22 26 31 34 22
3 4 9 6 10 2
FAMILY CONTACT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER Six out of ten visitors (62%) did not know if the establishment which they were visiting had a Family Contact Development Officer. Almost one third (31%) stated that the prison had an FCDO and a minority of visitors (7%) reported that the prison which they attended visits did not have an FCDO.
WAITING TIMES One fifth of visitors (20%) reported that the visits they attended did not usually start on time. Figure 3 below, illustrates the waiting times of this group. Almost half (48%) of those reporting delays, waited 10 minutes for the visit to start, three in ten (30%) waited 15 minutes, and fifteen percent waited 20 minutes. A small minority (8%) of those reporting delays stated that they had waited over 25 minutes for their visit to start.
Figure 3. Length of time visitors reporting delay had to wait for visit to start
2% 1% 4%
15% 10 mins 15 mins 48% 20 mins
25 mins
30 mins 30 mins + 30%
VISIT ROOM Visitors were asked a number of questions relating to the visit room. The majority (95%) reported positively in relation to ‘respect shown by staff in the visit room’. Almost nine in ten visitors were content with the ‘look of the visit room’ and the ‘facilities available in the visit room’ (89% and 87% respectively). Three quarters (74%) of respondents rated the amount of privacy they had during their visit as ‘ok’, ‘good’ or ‘very good’. The majority of visitors (87%) rated the atmosphere in the visit room in positive terms. However, four percent described it as ‘very tense’ and, just over one in ten (12%) rated the atmosphere as ‘tense’.
Table 4. How would you rate the following? Respect shown by staff in the visit room Facilities available in the visit room The look of the visit room The amount of privacy you had during the visit
Very good 38 25 22 16
Good 35 31 32 25
OK 22 31 35 33
Poor 3 8 7 16
Very poor 2 5 4 10
VISITING WITH CHILDREN The following section highlights the number of visitors who reported visiting the prison with children. Just over half (54%) had taken their children to the prison in the past and one third reported having children with them on the day of the survey.
VISIT EXPERIENCE Nine in ten visitors reported positively in relation to ‘understanding the rules’ (96%), ‘present visit times’ (90%), and ‘the displaying of rules in the visit room’, (90%) (Table 5). One fifth of those reporting (20%) rated the system of booking visits as ‘poor’ or ‘very poor’ and one quarter (26%) held similar views regarding the length of the visit session. Just under half (45%) of visitors reported being searched prior to entering the visit room.
Table 5. How would you rate the following? The present visit times The length of visit session Your understanding of the rules The displaying of the rules in the visit area The system of booking visits
Very good 18 14 22 21 15
Good 37 30 37 34 31
OK 35 30 34 36 33
Poor 7 18 4 8 10
Very poor 3 8 2 2 10
VISITING PROBLEMS One quarter of visitors (25%) reported experiencing ‘visit problems’. Those respondents who identified a problem were asked to specify the nature of the difficulty experienced (Table 6). The problem reported most frequently by visitors was the distance of the prison from their home (58%), followed by the cost involved in getting to the prison (52%). Three in ten visitors reported problems due to ‘stress of the visit’ and ‘lack of transport’ (30% & 28% respectively). A smaller number of visitors reported difficulties with staff attitudes (18%) and facilities for children (17%). Table 6. Types of visit problems experienced Distance Cost Time limits Stress of Visit No transport Location of prison Refreshment facilities Staff attitudes Facilities for children Difficulties of travelling with children Disabled access Other % of visitor reporting 58 52 39 30 28 20 20 18 17 10 4 4
INDUCTION DAY Some prisons provide an induction day for visitors which allows families and friend to understand better what happens within the prison and explains how this impacts on prisoners throughout their sentence. It also enables visitors to access information regarding help and support for themselves. Just under half (48%) of those who participated in the visitors survey thought they would benefit from an induction day. Table 7 below, highlights a number of areas where visitors would like to receive more information. The most common area of interest reported by visitors was the prisoner’s progression (63%), followed by prison regime (58%) and family
support (50%). Four in ten (41%) respondents were interested in more information about relationship support.
Table 7. Areas of interest in finding out information Prisoner progression Prison regime Family support Relationship support Assisted visits scheme Risk & needs assessment
% of visitors who would attend induction 63 58 50 41 28 27
COMMENT The vast majority of visitors reported positively on the visits experience with over nine in ten people appreciating the helpfulness of staff and the respect shown to them, a survey finding which obviously reflects well on SPS visits staff. Most visits started within 15 minutes and visitors did not express any concern about that length of time. The fabric of, and facilities within, the visit room were well rated with nearly 90% approval, but no doubt within this corporate figure there will be variation between establishments. Interestingly, three-quarters of visitors were content with the level of privacy which is a much higher proportion than the 40% of prisoners who reported in the 2008 Prisoner Survey satisfaction with privacy levels. A quarter of visitors identified problems when visiting, with distance and cost of travel being the biggest ones cited. Prisoners in the 2008 Prisoner Survey also identified these issues as problematic for their families. Six in ten visitors were unaware of the establishment Family Contact Development Officer which may suggest the need for improved oral and written information. Respondents also expressed an interest in more information about relationship support (41%).