22nd Asian and Pacific Conference
of Correctional Administrators
Bali Indonesia
October 2002
Agenda Item 2
Outsourcing of Correctional Services
AUSTRALIA
Prepared by
Department of Justice
Northern Territory Correctional Services
Darwin Australia
INDEX
DISCUSSION GUIDE............................................. 3
INTRODUCTION.............................................................................. 5
NEW SOUTH WALES........................................................................6
VICTORIA..........................................................................................11
QUEENSLAND.................................................................................. 13
SOUTH AUSTRALIA..........................................................................16
WESTERN AUSTRALIA.....................................................................17
1. Transport and Escorting of Prisoners...................................17
2. The Management of Acacia Prison.....................................18
2.1 Background Information.....................................................18
2.2 Industry and Employment Opportunities...............................19
2.3 Case Management.............................................................19
2.4 Health Services..................................................................20
2.5 Monitoring..........................................................................20
TASMANIA..........................................................................................21
NORTHERN TERRITORY...................................................................23
AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY..............................................25
SUMMARY......................................................................................28
This agenda item is intended to provide an opportunity for discussion of the various types of arrangements that may be made by correctional organisations for some aspects of the services they require to be supplied by other public or private agencies.
There are many different services which are possible targets for outsourcing, and these vary between such relatively small matters as the supply of foreign language interpreters, to very large matters, such as the management of complete correctional institutions.
Some jurisdictions have profound objections to the private management of prisons, as became apparent at the 17th APCCA in Kuala Lumpur in 1997 where private sector involvement in corrections was discussed. However, it is probably the case that some degree of outsourcing of correctional services occurs in all jurisdictions.
The words used to describe the process may not always be the same, but it is hard to imagine a correctional organisation that is so completely self-sufficient that it does not need to use the skills or services of other agencies to meet some of its needs.
The motivation for outsourcing may be:
· to maintain high standards, for example in relation to health care,
· to improve efficiency, perhaps in the management of prison workshops,
· to reduce costs, where it would be uneconomical for the correctional organisation itself to supply a service which was only rarely required, or
· to provide more options in education, work and treatment programs for prisoners.
(It is also possible, in some circumstances, that outsourcing might be pursued in order to ensure the integrity of staff. For example, where dishonesty is suspected and police officers or private detectives may be temporarily stationed in prisons "under cover" in order to locate corruption or other unlawful activity.)
Possibly the simplest form of outsourcing is found in very small institutions where it is more convenient and cost effective for meals to be provided for prisoners or detainees by a local shop or restaurant rather than arranging for cooking to be done inside the institution. Similarly, with the transport and escort of prisoners between institutions, and between institutions and the courts, even in large jurisdictions it has been found to be less expensive for this work to be done under contract by a security firm rather than by police or prison officers.
A major area of outsourcing is the provision of health services in correctional institutions. For example, it is understood that in the Peoples' Republic of China the regional or provincial health authorities, which provide the full range of medical and hospital services to the general community, are also responsible for the provision of these services to persons in prison in the same geographical area. This arrangement is intended to ensure that prisoners receive the same level of health care as do law-abiding citizens in the community.
In some other nations, it is common for prison doctors, nurses and other medical staff to be employed directly by the corrections authority, but the establishment of Corrections Health Boards, which supervise all prison issues, are becoming fairly common in some jurisdictions.
A similar, but perhaps radical development, is for all medical and pharmaceutical services required in prisons to be contracted out to private organisations. This has happened in recent years in some jurisdictions in Australia.
A similar development has occurred in some nations with the contracting out of education and training services to local colleges as an alternative to the prison itself employing teachers and trade instructors. This type of arrangement has the advantage of bringing new ideas into the prison, but it is essential that the performance of the visiting teachers is monitored to ensure that appropriate standards are being maintained. It is also necessary that security requirements are met, especially in maximum security institutions.
Another major area of outsourcing in corrections is that of prison workshops. In different jurisdictions many different types of arrangements have been made, including signing contracts for private businesses to employ prison labour, either inside or outside the prison, or simply to purchase prison-made products.
Singapore and a number of other nations have extensive experience of the integration of private business with prison industries. The conference will no doubt be very interested to learn more about such developments.
The ultimate level of outsourcing of correctional services is for the management of complete correctional institutions to be undertaken by private companies under contract with the relevant government.
As indicated above, this is a very controversial subject, with many jurisdictions being strongly opposed to the establishment of private prisons. This agenda item is intended to cover a much wider concept than private prisons, however, and it is therefore hoped that all participating nations at the conference will have something to contribute to the discussion of this topic regardless of their views on prison privatisation.
The issue of outsourcing in a Correctional Services’ environment will always be a matter for significant debate not only in an economic context but also is affected by political philosophy.
Where does the delineation line exist with respect to public and Government responsibility with respect to people that are imprisoned or are under the control or authority of legal systems?
How much does economic rationalism and cost play a part and where do Government’s draw the line in the provision of responsible Correctional Services to their respective communities?
This report from Australia includes the unaltered comments prepared by each of its eight State and Territory jurisdictions. The Federal (or National) Government of Australia does not have a operational role in Correctional Services except for immigration detention centres which is very different from some other countries where Federal Governments do supervise offenders.
The jurisdictional responses in this paper demonstrate a diverse range of outsourcing and full scale privatisation, which are two very different processes. Given that currently all Australian jurisdictions are Labor in a political sense the level of outsourcing is being constrained to efficiency rather than a philosophical shift to ‘growing the private sector’. This may change in Australia should political philosophies shift to liberalism.
The summary to this report aims to show how ‘cross fertilisation’ (a term created in this context by Professor Richard Harding) has resulted in better service delivery and corporatisation (in lieu of privatisation) in some jurisdictions to improve service delivery and efficiency.
Australian jurisdictional responses follow.
Public Private Partnerships (or PPP’s) are not a new concept for NSW Corrections. Public Private Partnerships (PPP’s) are essentially a suite of procurement options available to government in the provision of public infrastructure and services involving varying degrees of private sector participation. These procurement options differ only by the degree or extent of private sector involvement in the provision of services required by the client agency.
Public Private Partnerships currently provide the NSW Department of Corrective Services with a range of different procurement options related to correctional centre design, construction and operational services. The private sector’s involvement and expertise in the delivery of a wide range of services has greatly contributed to the Department’s knowledge base and improved operational efficiencies.
The NSW Department of Corrective Services acknowledges the many benefits and successes that Public Private Partnerships have delivered within the NSW correctional system.
The Department’s use of Public Private Partnerships has been established for a considerable period of time and in the main has produced successful outcomes.
The Department’s success with Public Private Partnerships has been primarily dependant on the successful definition of facility, service and operational outcomes. Other factors contributing to our success have included the identification of the risks, flexibility and benefits offered by different procurement forms and the successful management of these issues.
In some Public Private Partnerships forms of project capital/revenue can be raised from business opportunities that are developed alongside the facilities core operational use. These opportunities may include revenue from retail outlets, leasing facility space for other uses, car parking or realising the full market potential for part of the development site. In the corrective services environment the opportunity for the consortium to generate revenue from sources other than the Department’s nominated contract term payment is limited.
Education, Health, and some specialised services are currently provided by agencies outside of NSW Corrections. In some cases these services are contracted in the market, in others they are provided by mandated public providers and in others there is a mix of private provision.
1 Past Public Private Partnerships:
Lithgow Correctional Centre – The Lithgow Correctional Centre was completed and commissioned in December 1990. This facility was publicly designed & construction managed. The physical construction works were undertaken by private subcontract companies.
Junee Correctional Centre – The Junee Correctional Centre was completed and commissioned in March 1993. This facility used the services of the private sector in the facility design, construction, facility management including custodial operations. The facilities construction and operations have been publicly financed. The contract for the facilities management and custodial operations at the Junee Correctional Centre was for an initial fixed 5 + 3 year contract period commencing April 1993. At the end of this contract the Department re-tendered the management contract for a further 5 years + 3 year option.
Kempsey Correctional Centre – The Kempsey Correctional Centre is currently under construction and is programmed for completion in the later half of 2004. The procurement of this facility has utilised private sector expertise in the facility design and documentation and in the correctional centre’s construction and facilities management.
The facilities management aspect of this PPP is for a 12 year period and provides the Department with direct contract surety in that the contractor will initially deliver the facility to the very highest standard to minimise future maintenance problems. The Department also has surety in relation to the facilities maintenance budget for the initial 12 years of the correctional centres operations.
2 Current Guidelines:
The NSW Government has recently issued revised guidelines in relation to privately financed projects. These guidelines articulate the scope and process for PPP’s. In general the guidelines fully support the private sector involvement in ‘non core” service provision where it can be demonstrated that increased value for money is achievable. The guidelines emphasise that appropriately allocated risk greatly assists in the value for money determination.
Core services such as centre management and custodial operational costs are the largest component of the Department’s operating costs. As custodial operational costs are the largest cost at each correctional centre, it is probably fair to say that it is also the area in which most financial savings can be realised. It has been argued that the use of a private operator in the delivery of these services may result in reduced operational costs. At the same time, an analysis of service levels, equity in salaries paid, occupational health and safety matters and prisoner welfare issues must be undertaken to ensure a fair comparison is being made.
There is a line of argument that says even if core custodial operational services are eliminated from the PPP equation, financial savings can still be realised by grouping the design, construction, facility management and project financing into one contract package. The advantages of doing this are believed to be:
Innovation in combining design and construction services delivered by the one firm.
Operational rigour brought into the process via the definition of operational requirements obviated by the need to develop an output specification at project definition stage.
Defined maintenance budgets for the contract term.
The establishment of a defined and rigorous process to manage future operational requests for facility modifications. It is stated that the rigour in this process is delivered through the consortium’s project vehicle which will need to formally receive and respond to any future departmental operational requests for changes to facility requirements.
3 Future Directions:
NSW Corrections is currently considering two projects under the revised guidelines for PPP:
Western Correctional Centre – The Western Correctional Centre is currently in the planning phase. Seven short-listed sites in the central west of NSW are currently being evaluated for their suitability. The project procurement options available to DCS are also being assessed.
The procurement of the Western Correctional Centre may follow the procurement model developed for the Kempsey Correctional Centre or it may be delivered as a PPP project and package the design, documentation, construction, facilities management and project financing into the one contract. A decision on the procurement form is expected in late August 2002.
Long Bay Gaol Hospital – The Long Bay Gaol Hospital Redevelopment is currently in the concept stage. The redevelopment requirements and the procurement options for delivering the required services are currently being established by the Department in consultation with NSW Health. The project is linked to a new Forensic Hospital which is planned for the current Prison Hospital site.
Both Projects are suitable for PPP Procurement as stand alone projects however due to the interdependencies of each they are likely to be considered under the one contract.
4 Education & Vocational Training Provision:
The option to outsource education and vocational training service delivery was closely scrutinised over the period 1998 to 2000 by the Department and a review was subsequently commissioned.
There has been a strong emphasis on the vocational training agenda and a recommendation that TAFE NSW should provide the majority of this training. It was a short step from this recommendation to the view that outsourcing may be the best option.
There were a number of considerations that lent support to the outsourcing option:
(1) Questions regarding the method of employing contract teachers in terms of:
• expectations of permanency where a series of contracts continues over two or more years
• a perceived lack of flexibility of service delivery if teachers were entitled to apply for permanency after two years continuous service
• questions about the legal status of contracted staff within the provisions outlined in the NSW Public Sector Management Act
(2) A belief that the Department should not be involved in the recruitment and selection of teaching staff, when teaching provision is not its core business.
(3) A perception that the Department should not be constrained to a single source for the provision of educational services.
Over the past two years, the Department has reassessed the option to outsource education services. During the past six months, negotiations with the relevant union have proceeded with the aim of creating permanent teaching positions from the current contract teaching budget.
The negotiations have emphasised the need for flexible administrative and teaching positions that can provide both direct service delivery as well as a range of correctional-specific duties, including participation in case management meetings and working with both government and non- government agencies to facilitate inmates’ reintegration through work and study release programs and post-release employment and training initiatives.
The Department has indicated that having its own Registered Training Organisation offers great benefits in terms of assisting with strategies for reducing re-offending. A major consideration for taking the step of applying for registration in 1994 was that:
• it offers realistic Throughcare post-release options for offenders,
• it ensures conformity to quality assurance principles consistent with all education and vocational training providers nationally,
• it facilitates a whole of government approach to the Department’s corporate aim to reduce re-offending since there is a common language and common qualification structure.
The fear that the creation of a permanent teaching work force would engender a lack of flexibility has been offset by a philosophy of ‘upskilling’. While the majority of current contracted teaching staff are already highly skilled, the Department is making the offer of permanency contingent on the teacher being prepared to undertake further study. This means that teaching staff will be able to shift their teaching areas to suit the inevitable changes in offender focus.
Perhaps most significantly, the Department recognises the value of having a specialised teaching staff. There has been a recognition that will hopefully transfer to a tertiary education training level that teaching in a correctional environment is a specialised area, akin to special education within the school system.
6 Correctional Industries:
Private sector involvement in the management, operation and provision of business development opportunities is an important element in the overall development and operation of correctional industries in NSW.
The notion of private sector involvement in NSW correctional industries is predicated upon:
• reducing the scale of the public sector by providing the private sector opportunities to manage and operate traditional public sector functions.
• minimising infrastructure required to manage and operate correctional industries.
• more effectively fulfilling correctional industry policy objectives by providing improved real work environments to inmates as a basis to enhancing broad employability skills and post release employment opportunities.
• maximising the opportunity for correctional industries to contribute positively to reparation.
There is little doubt that private sector involvement in NSW correctional industries is one of the more positive initiatives taken over the last decade. Importing private sector disciplines into the correctional system have enhanced inmate program development. This has been achieved by more effectively creating work responsibilities and expectations, identical to that which would be expected in community based workplaces. This of course is imperative to ensure that inmates acquire skills which are relevant and important to the contemporary employment market.
However, gaining private sector involvement in correctional industries can be extremely difficult. Many private sector organisations might indicate their reason for seeking a partnership is a community benefit, in reality the only reason a private sector organisation would want to develop an association is because it might provide an environment to place that organisation on a more competitive footing. This places enormous expectations upon correctional industry managers to be able to develop commercial disciplines and an appropriate culture to be able to negotiate with hard bargaining private sector operators.
The development of such partnerships and their sensitivity upon private sector businesses is also a crucial step. The adoption of the various elements of the National Code of Practice for correctional industry business development is incredibly important in ensuring adverse representations from other businesses are not received and the partnership jeopardised.
There are also potentially deep seated industrial implications in seeking private sector involvement. However, in NSW the broad expansion of correctional industries in partnership with the private sector has actually enhanced career development opportunities for existing staff and provided through the expansion in operations of additional opportunities for new staff. This has had a significantly positive influence over the acceptance of private sector involvement from correctional unions.
Private sector involvement cannot be implemented without a friendly correctional interface and without a prior demonstration of commercialisation in practise.
Private sector involvement in correctional industry programs however provides an opportunity to significantly lift correctional industry performance and realise the infinite potential of correctional industries to contribute to inmate development, effective correctional centre management, contribution to providing cost effective programs.
The Government, through the Department of Justice (DoJ), is able to develop specifications for specific elements of service delivery which ensures that, through our contractual arrangements, we get the services we require as meeting our needs becomes the contracted responsibility of the provider.
The above is particularly pertinent given the geographical spread of our locations resulting in limited service providers in rural areas and potential difficulties in sourcing personnel for the various elements of service delivery.
Human Resource issues become the responsibility of the contractor who, because of the contractual relationship, is more responsive to our needs - recruitment, clinical supervision, performance management, etc. The Department of Justice does not currently have the infrastructure required to recruit for an in-house service delivery model for health services.
In relation to performance management specifically, there may be greater ability for a contractor to manage under-performing employees than would otherwise be the case under an in-house/ public sector model.
Contracting out health services facilitates regular benchmarking of health care costs (e.g. advances in medical technology, investigative technologies, information technology, pharmaceutical costs, etc). Financial / legal risks are subsumed within the cost of the contract, thereby limiting DoJ's risk during the terms of the contract.
Hidden costs, particularly in relation to equipment / administration etc. are more clearly defined in an outsourced model. In an in-house model, these costs may be subsumed by other bits of the organisation preventing a thorough understanding of actual service costs.
In some instances, the contractor absorbs costs.
Contractors collect the data required by DoJ (e.g. information about the prisoner population) rather than the Department having to undertake this data collection task.
Utilising community based health service providers has a number of benefits, including the standard and quality of clinical practice, purchasing economies of scale, established links with other community health service providers, maintenance of community standards, professional/ clinical supervision of staff and promotion of the correctional environment in a more positive way.
Some of the advantages mentioned above have significant cost implications in terms of the contract (e.g.: travel costs for providers to travel to rural locations etc.). Where multiple contractors are in place at a location providing different service elements, there is potential for co-ordination issues to arise in service provision.
Segregation can occur between health service providers and custodial staff, which may have implications in terms of communication, prioritizing of needs/ responses to prisoners and management of prisoners.
The tendering process, contract administration and monitoring processes can be very resource intensive.
Corrections in the Queensland jurisdiction has an extensive history in the outsourcing of correctional services dating back to the opening of the Borallon Correctional Centre under private management in 1989. At the time, Queensland was the first and only Australian State to outsource a correctional centre. This move was followed two years later when the Arthur Gorrie Correctional Centre became the second privately operated correctional centre in the state.
The initial motivation for adopting what was then a controversial policy direction was based on sound business principles and service delivery objectives. It was considered that indirect competition would allow for a comparison of performance between privately and publicly managed correctional centres. This comparison was expected to allow for an exchange of ideas across both the public and private systems and to improve performance in the management of prisoners. It was also expected that outsourcing would assist with a much-needed shift in the philosophy of prisons management, particularly by introducing work practices to support the rehabilitation function as well as the detention function.
The jurisdiction has also engaged community based organisations to operate centres within an innovative community custody program. This initiative sprang from the impetus provided by the Kennedy Review into the Queensland Prison Service in 1988 for greater involvement of the community in the correctional process. A further enhancement of community involvement through outsourcing has been achieved by the operation of remote community corrections centres under contract by aboriginal councils and organisations in Pompuraaw, Aurukun and Mt Isa.
The other significant example of outsourcing of prisoner services undertaken in the Queensland jurisdiction is the contracting of the delivery of vocational education and training for prisoners to TAFE colleges and other private providers.
Secure Custody Facilities
Based on the experience gained in the ongoing management of the initial operating contracts for Borallon and Arthur Gorrie Correctional Centres, new ground was broken in the contract with Management and Training Corporation, the successful tenderer for the Borallon contract in 2000. The new contract embraced a modernised contractual framework, incorporating plain English that clearly defined the rights and responsibilities of the service provider. The new contract provided for increased accountability and a greater transference of risk to the provider. A Risk Allocation element was included that clearly assigned responsibility for major areas to either the provider, the department, or a shared risk.
The Queensland Department of Corrective Services is seen as a leader in this respect, with the contract being an Australian first in that performance is linked to a bonus. The department is endeavouring to create an environment where the provider will strive to be innovative and to be a lead agent for change. It is expected that the provider will see a clear role in achieving the goals established in the department’s strategic plan.
The provider is given the opportunity to gain a financial bonus through the achievement of a breakthrough innovation that satisfies certain criteria that would ensure that it sets a standard of service in a particular area of operations that is considerably higher than the system’s current best practice.
Historically, contract management in corrections has been premised on a contractual focus, that is, the literal translation of the contract. The new contract shifts the focus from that literal translation to a partnering concept.
To continue with the evolution of the best practice in correctional facilities management, a similar contractual framework has been developed for the tender process for the Arthur Gorrie Correctional Centre. The call for tenders for the operation of that centre closed in June 2002. The successful provider will be announced in August 2002 and the new contract will be executed in December 2002.
Community Custody Centres
The department’s community custody program consists of the departmental operated Work Outreach Camps (WORC) program for male prisoners along with two departmental operated centres (one each for males and females), two privately operated centres in south east Queensland for male prisoners and three remote community corrections for indigenous prisoners that are operated either by a local aboriginal council or organisation.
Community Corrections Centres
The privately operated community corrections centres cater for prisoners released by community corrections boards on Release to Work Orders.
The purpose of the centres is to provide prisoners assessed as being suitably motivated with the opportunity to reintegrate gradually back into the community.
The two community based organisations which operate the centres are the St Vincent de Paul Society and the Shaftesbury Citizenship Centre. The purpose of engaging these longstanding operators has been to provide prisoners with access to reintegration assistance through the services and community networks to which these particular providers have privileged access.
Remote Community Custody Centres
The department outsources the operational management of three community corrections centres for indigenous prisoners in more remote parts of the state. These contracts are held with local aboriginal councils in two cases (Baa’s Yard at Pompuraaw and Wathiniin near Aurukun) and with an aboriginal organisation in the third instance (Kalkadoon Aboriginal Sobriety House –KASH, in Mt Isa).
The clear purpose in setting these centres up and contracting out the management in the manner described is to attempt to provide the opportunity for indigenous prisoners to be located as near as possible to their home communities. The establishment of the centres is a specific response to the recommendations of the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody and provides the opportunity for indigenous prisoners to serve part of their prison sentence in a situation where they can not only re-establish contacts with families and kin, but reside in an environment that is not as foreign to them as that of the major secure custody centres in the north of the state.
Vocational Education and Training
Besides the outsourcing of the overall management of correctional facilities, the Department of Corrective Services in Queensland, in partnership with the Department of Employment and Training, offers tenders for the provision of vocational education and training in the secure, open and community custody facilities. The department carries this function out by ascertaining the perceived needs of the various centres for prisoner vocational education and training on an annual basis and then going to the marketplace in a formal tender process to obtain interest from providers.
The successful providers are various TAFE colleges and private providers who then liaise with the department’s Manager, Adult Education and VET, and the education officers at the various centres to develop schedules of training delivery for a twelve month period. The process is structured to ensure that all successful tenderers are registered training organisations under the Australian Quality Training Framework and therefore, accredited to issue nationally recognised certificates for successful completion of training courses.
Grants to Community Organisations
The department also provides small grants to various community organisations who provide support programs for prisoners or their families. Examples of the recipients of these grants are the Prisoners Legal Service, the State-wide chaplaincy service and organisations that assist families with transport.
Summary
The Queensland Department of Corrective Services has gained significant experience in the outsourcing of correctional facility operations since the late 1980’s. The experience of the department is that this outsourcing has provided an opportunity to develop improved and more efficient processes and systems in the management of prisoners at various stages of their sentences. The process has allowed for benchmarking of performance in a correctional setting, and thorough evaluation of contract arrangements and subsequent enhancements of new contracts are providing the department with better opportunities to benefit from the outsourcing of services.
The South Australian Department for Correctional Services has had limited experience with out sourcing. The following summarises that experience:
The Mt Gambier Prison has been privately managed by Group 4 since 1995. One of the advantages of the private management concept has been the opportunity to develop new prisoner management practices for future use in the public sector prison system. There has been one escape from this prison since 1995.
Prisoner movements have been out sourced to Group 4 since 1996. The prisoner movement contract has been successfully negotiated between the private sector and multiple Public Sector Agencies. The agencies concerned include Courts, Police, Corrections and Youth Services. There have been 3 escapes under the prisoner movement contract since it's inception.
Prison Forensic Health Services are provided by the Department for Human Services in South Australia.
The present State Labor Government in South Australia has indicated that there will be no further privatisation of South Australian Prisons.
In September 1996, the Police/Justice Core Functions Project was established to assess the competitive market for prisoner transport and court security services. The objective was to substantially replace the non-core functions of court security and custody, lockup custody and prisoner transport services in both the Department of Justice and the Western Australia Police Service with a flexible, innovative, cost effective and integrated prisoner transport and court security service.
The major objectives of the project were to:
· Improve the quality of transport/escort services.
· Improve the cost effectiveness of the delivery of transport/escort services and thereby reduce costs to Government.
· Enable police officers, prison officers and juvenile justice officers currently performing these services to be returned to core duties.
· Improve accountability to the Government, courts and the community in the delivery of transport/escort services.
· Foster continuous improvement to enable benefits of best practice to be shared.
· Improve the safety of facilities for both prisoners and staff.
· Implement strategic service planning.
· Provide for court security services.
· Provide for ongoing improvement and performance.
For the purposes of this paper, further references to the court security aspect of this contract have not been made in view of them not normally being part of correctional services.
In May 1997, approval was given for the transfer of these non core functions from the WA Police Service to the Department of Justice and the continued development of an integrated contract for the outsourcing of these services. Expressions of interest were called for followed by the issue of a Request for Proposal to four short-listed companies. This resulted in Corrections Corporation of Australia Pty Ltd (CCA) being evaluated as the preferred Respondent. In September 1998, approval was given for the negotiation of a contract with CCA and contract negotiations were completed in December 1998.
The Court Security and Custodial Services Act 1999 and the Court Security and Custodial Services (Consequential Provisions) Act 1999 is the enabling legislation. This legislation places responsibility for prisoner transport and escort services under the CEO of the Department of Justice and gives powers and protection to persons carrying out their duties under the contract.
The contract commenced operation on 31 July 2000, and has enabled the transfer and redeployment of the equivalent of 100 FTE’s for the Western Australia Police Service and 40 FTE’s for the Department of Justice.
This initiative has enabled police officers to return to front-line policing and 40 prison officers and juvenile justice group workers to undertake core duties.
Services are generally being performed to a satisfactory standard and further negotiations over budgetary requirements for next year are currently being carried out. In addition, monitoring commenced in June 2002 with a dedicated monitoring team to ensure the services are being delivered to the required standard.
2. THE MANAGEMENT OF ACACIA PRISON
In July 1998, the Department of Justice commenced a tendering process in response to the Government’s decision to allow the delivery of custodial services in Western Australia by a private service contractor.
The Request for Proposal document sought to encourage private sector innovation in the design, construction, finance and operation of a male, medium security prison. The resultant evaluation of submissions recommended that private sector involvement should be limited to design, construct, operate and maintain a State owned facility.
The outcomes sought by the Department of Justice centred on one prison system incorporating the integration of a privately managed prison within the established State system to create a competitive environment for the delivery of prison services. The successful contractor needed to provide these services in a manner that improved the quality of prison services and at the same time reduce the unit cost per prisoner to Government.
In December 1999, the Director General of the Department of Justice, entered into a contract with Australian Integration Management Services Corporation Pty Ltd (AIMS) to provide prison services at Acacia Prison. Under the terms of the agreement, AIMS (formally known as Corrections Corporation of Australia Pty Ltd) provide for the management, control and security of Acacia Prison and the custody, care, well being and rehabilitation of prisoners at the prison. The term of the agreement is for five years from the commencement date of 16 May 2001.
The Prisons Act 1981, as amended in 1999 is the enabling legislation to allow private sector participation in WA prison operations.
Acacia Prison is a 750 bed, medium-security prison for male offenders. The facility is located at Wooroloo, approximately 60 kilometres east of Perth. The prison provides an open campus style environment that permits a high degree of freedom of movement. The Acacia prison population as of 8 July 2002, was 669.
As part of its contract, AIMS is required to provide adequate employment opportunities for all prisoners with the exception of those prisoners who are ill and those who are mentally or physically impaired and are therefore unable to be gainfully employed. AIMS is obliged to provide 6 hours of work per prisoner per day calculated on a monthly basis as part of their Performance Linked Fee. For the purpose of the contract, the definition of employment includes full time education and/or programme attendance.
Acacia Prison was designed around large and modern, well equipped workshops to accommodate the main trade areas of metalwork, woodwork, laundry and horticulture. Acacia Prison works closely with community employment reference groups and through this means has established several long-term contracts. This relationship has to date established a large vegetable preparation area offering employment to 64 prisoners which is currently preparing in excess of twenty tonnes of vegetables per week. Other contracts currently undertaken at Acacia Prison include the construction of wooden and metal pallets, vegetable production and horticulture seedling production.
AIMS is a registered training provider and as such has incorporated apprentice and trade traineeships in all industry areas, offering prisoners the opportunity to gain a trade qualification.
2.3 Case Management
Prior to being received at Acacia, all prisoners are assessed at Hakea Prison, which is the male metropolitan remand and receival prison, which has a specialised assessment unit. Upon arrival at Hakea, each prisoner has an Individual Management Plan (IMP) developed. The IMP provides each prisoner with a guideline as to how he/she can progress through the prison system and identifies matters that require attention through treatment programmes and/or educational /vocational training. On arrival at Acacia, prisoners are assigned a Case Manager who oversees their IMP during the term of their sentence. This new, individualised approach to prisoner management is also being gradually introduced into all WA prisons.
The programmes offered at Acacia Prison include:
· Education
· Substance Abuse Education
· Anger Management
· Cognitive Skills
· Ending Offending
· Violent Offender Programme
· Sex Offender Intervention Programme
· Indigenous Programmes.
All prisoners at Acacia are required to work and to address the causes of their offending behaviour, in line with the requirements of their Individual Management Plan. Poor conduct, failure to work or participate in rehabilitation programmes will result in restricted access to privileges including access to higher standards of accommodation. However, good conduct, a strong work ethic and commitment to rehabilitation bring access to greater privileges.
Acacia Prison provides health facilities and services at a level equal to those offered in the community.
Facilities include:
· An appropriately equipped health centre, an Accident and Emergency Department incorporating provision for assessment and treatment, consultation and necessary clinical support facilities adequate to meet the needs of the prisoner population.
· Sick bay facilities to allow 24-hour medical observation after discharge from hospital.
· Specific health services for geriatric prisoners.
· Crisis Care facilities for disturbed and vulnerable prisoners.
· Access to optometry, physiotherapy and dental treatment for prisoners.
· The provision of medical supplies and prescribed medication to prisoners.
· Administration of medication in accordance with prescriptions.
2.5 Monitoring
The Department of Justice has a dedicated team of people committed to the daily monitoring and management of the contract.
The on-site monitoring team at the prison has recently been presented with ISO 9001:2000 Quality Management Certification which recognises the team’s ability to fulfil the requirements of providing a Quality Management System for the monitoring of contractor performance in the provision of prison services.
The level of outsourcing within Tasmanian corrections is low, and to date there has been no large-scale privatisation of either the construction or operation of correctional facilities, or the delivery of community-based corrections.
On a less significant level, there is frequent outsourcing of activities such as program delivery within Corrective Services. The small size of the Tasmanian offender population means that to fund and deliver all programs and services from within would not be cost effective, so a balance must be maintained in this regard. For example, the Prison Service employs a Team Leader of Prisoner Education and Training, as well as administrative support in this area.
However, the majority of teachers and tutors attend from external agencies and groups. Similarly, a range of visiting service providers is coordinated by a team of staff in the Prisoner Support Unit (PSU) – e.g. drug/alcohol workers, parenting program delivery staff, chaplains, counsellors and so on. These services are in addition to the range of activities and services provided by the PSU.
Some staff training functions have been outsourced in recent times. For instance, basic computer literacy training, and specific training in the new Custodial Information System, are being delivered by external providers with relevant expertise. In addition, until recently the Prison Service was in itself a Registered Training Organisation – however this is no longer the case and, the Prison Service has entered into a partnership with TAFE Tasmania to provide nationally recognised qualifications.
Corrective Services has in recent times engaged the services of external consultants for short-term projects. For instance, an investigator was contracted to the Prison Service for a short period of time, and an organisational consultant has been conducting a staff survey in collaboration with the Prison Service. These engagements have preserved the objectivity of sensitive activities such as investigations and the canvassing of staff opinion and feedback.
Transport/escort, canteen and catering services are all managed from within (other than the provision of meals at the small inner-city Hobart Remand Centre, which receives meals from the nearby Royal Hobart Hospital).
Similarly, most security and investigation functions are performed from within, however urinalysis for the purpose of inmate drug testing is outsourced to an appropriately established laboratory.