www.matterarchitecture.uk/research

Syste

m design (top-down)

Plac

e-based design (middle-out)

Evidenced-based vision of justice and consistent

political leadership

Reduce the prison populationImprove staffing

Invest in alternatives & preventionChange commissioning

Consult with prison usersSupport good practice

Reaching outDelegated decision-making

Integrating with local services, economies and stakeholders

Asset-based approachSharing knowledge

Monitoring

Ever

y day design (bottom-up)Co-design solutions with

staff and prisonersSource local initiativesSweat the small stuff

Find the 'pinch points'

supporting

intelligence

devolving

delivering

enablingcreating change

Framework

Project team

Roland KarthausDirector, Matter Architecture Ltd

Roland Karthaus co-founded Matter with Jonathan McDowell in 2016. The practice is working on a wide range of projects including masterplanning,housing, education, commercial and bridge projects and is committed to creating places and buildings that improve people’s lives through the energetic pursuit of excellent design.

Roland has been a registered Architect since 2002, a Member of the Royal Institute of British Architects and an RIBA Client Adviser. He is a Fellow ofthe Royal Society of Arts and a Design Council Built Environment Expert.Roland will lead the project with the assistance of a project architect and architectural assistant.

Lily Bernheimer Director, Space Works Consulting

Lily is an environmental psychology consultant, researcher and writer. She is the Founding Director of Space Works Consulting where she consults on making human environments work better for the people and purposes they serve. Her first book, The Shaping of Us: How Everyday Spaces Structure our Lives, Behaviour, and Well-Being, will be published by Little Brown in 2017.Lily was a Research Fellow at the University of Surrey, where she obtained her MSc. in Environmental Psychology. At Space Works, Lily has specialised in developing evidence-based design strategy and metrics for workplaces and other complex environments.

Rachel O’BrienFreelance, including the RSA

Rachel is an acknowledged expert in the field of prison reform. Author of the Learning Prison (RSA) lead for the RSA Transitions project and the Future Prison project, she is currently leading the development work for the New Futures Network at the RSA with Pamela Dow. Rachel will provide expertise on the current reform landscape and links across the sector.

Richard BarnesDirector, Richard P Barnes Associates

Richard is currently a justice consultant and social entrepreneur. He is working to create new employment and social inclusion opportunities for prisoners and people with convictions in the community. His current interests range from prison design conducive rehabilitation environments,creating a whole system rehabilitation culture and effective partnership working. Richard will provide expertise in through the gate service provision and wider networks.

Innovate UK Competition - Design Foundations - Application Feb 2017

Appendix I p.3Application 91980-553373Design tools for healthy prison environments

Roland KarthausArchitect, MA Regen. RIBA, FRSADirector, Matter ArchitectureSenior Lecturer, University of East London

Roland Karthaus co-founded Matter with Jonathan McDowell in 2016. Currently he leads on specialist housing, education and regeneration projects within the practice as well as research and teaching at the University of East London. Roland has been a registered Architect since 2002. He is a Design Council CABE Built Environment Expert, a member of the RIBA Planning Advisory Group and an RIBA Client Adviser. In 2018 he won an RIBA President’s award for research for his work with the Ministry of Justice to improve prison design for health and wellbeing. He is currently leading a grant-funded research project into intergenerational housing.

Rachel O’Brien BA (Hons.) FRSAIndependent consultant on Justice PolicyRachel has over 30 years experience working in policy and communications and for the last 10 years has established a body of work on prison reform. This includes leading on the RSA’s prison agenda including the Prison Learning Network, the Transitions programme (RSA 2011-2015) and the Future Prison Programme (A Matter of Conviction, 2016). With Pamela Dow, she led on the design and development of the New Futures Network, which has been rolled out by the Ministry of Justice within the English and Welsh prison service this year. Rachel worked with Roland on the Transitions programme’s co-design work with HMP Humber (Building a Rehabilitation Culture, 2014) and on Matter’s Wellbeing and Prison Design project (2017). She is commissioning editor of the RSA Journal, works on a pro bono basis with individual prisoners/ex-prisoners and involved in an ESRC project on social enterprise in the English prison system (forthcoming).

A design approach to transforming prison: top-down, middle-out, bottom-upR. O’Brien and R. Karthaus

Abstract— Over the past decade the authors have undertaken applied research aimed at improving conditions and outcomes for those living, working and visiting in prisons in the UK. Top-down governmental policies to transform the prison service have mainly been ineffectual and in some cases counter-productive. The service is characterized by hierarchical organization and the research has applied design thinking at multiple levels to challenge and precipitate change within both the commissioning and operational areas:

• System Design (top-down) - working at national policylevel to advance the rehabilitative role of prison;

• Place-based Design (middle-out) - working with individual prison establishments in different places and contexts to explore what this means on the ground;

• Everyday Design (bottom-up) - working with individualsin the system to reveal their capacity to enable and support change.

Presented at the European Society of Criminologists Annual Conference Eurocrim, Ghent, Belgium, Sept 2019

Racobrien@gmail.com Karthaus@uel.ac.uk

• Persistently falling crim

e

• Social trend, not result of increasing sentencing

Crime trends

The UK prison population

8 U

K Prison Population Statistics

Source: M

oJ, Offender M

anagement C

aseload Statistics 2010 Tables; Offender M

anagement Statistics

Quarterly, V

arious Years

Notes: D

ata at end of June in 2005, September in 2010 and 2015, and M

arch in 2019. Excludes those w

here sentence length was not recorded.

Prisoners in custody for violence against the person (VA

TP) offences accounted for the highest proportion of prisoners at the end of M

arch 2019 (26%).

Sexual, theft and drug offences each accounted for between 12%

and 18%

of the reason offenders were in prison.

As show

n in the chart below, V

ATP accounted for the largest share of adult

and juvenile offenders in custody. How

ever, a smaller proportion of juvenile

offenders were in prison for sexual offences and a larger proportion w

ere in for drug offences, robbery, and possession of w

eapons.

Source: M

oJ, Offender M

anagement Statistics Q

uarterly, October to D

ecember 2018, table 1.2b

Notes: O

nly includes offenders sentenced to imm

ediate custody. ‘Miscellaneous crim

es…’ =

miscellaneous

crimes against society.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Less than one

year1 - 4 years

Over 4 years

determinate

Indeterm

inateRecall

20052010

20152019

PRISON

POPU

LATION

BY SENTEN

CE LENG

THEngland and W

ales, prisoners sentencedto im

mediate custody

0%10%

20%30%

40%50%

Violence against the personSexual offences

Drug offences

Theft Offences

RobberyM

iscellaneous crimes…

Possession of weapons

Summ

ary Non-M

otoringFraud O

ffencesPublic order offences

Criminal dam

age and arsonSum

mary m

otoringO

ffence not recorded

Adults (18+)

Juveniles (15-17)

VIOLEN

CE AGAIN

ST THE PERSO

N IS TH

E LARGEST O

FFENCE

CATEGO

RYAll prisoners, by age, at M

arch 2019

3 C

omm

ons Library Briefing, 23 July 2019

Sum

mary

This briefing paper explores data on the UK

prison population, including the population size and change over tim

e, the demographic profile of prisoners,

safety in prisons, and the cost per prisoner.

Prisons are a devolved, so UK

prison statistics are published separately for England and W

ales (the Ministry of Justice), Scotland (the Scottish

Governm

ent), and Northern Ireland (the D

epartment of Justice). This briefing

also compares the U

K w

ith other countries.

Weekly prison population data are available for England, W

ales and Scotland and quarterly data are available for N

orthern Ireland. The latest available data show

a curren

t priso

n p

op

ulatio

n o

f app

roxim

ately 92,400, comprising

• 82,676 in England and W

ales1,

• 8,205 in Scotland

2, and •

1,487 in Northern Ireland (these all at the end of June 2019). 3

In addition to these snapshots, all jurisdictions publish the average annual prison population, w

hich was approxim

ately 82,295 in England and Wales in

2018, and 7,464 in Scotland and 1,439 in Northern Ireland for the financial

year 2017/18.

There is a general underlying, increasing trend in the number of people held

in prison. The graph below show

s prison population change relative to 1900 (and relative to 2000 for N

orthern Ireland).

So

urce: M

oJ (England and Wales) O

ffender Managem

ent Statistics Quarterly, various years; Scottish

Governm

ent, Prison statistics and population projections; DoJ (N

orthern Ireland) The Northern Ireland Prison

Population 2017/18.

The prison population of England & W

ales quadrupled in size between 1900

and 2018, with around half of this increase taking place since 1990. The

Scottish prison population almost doubled in size since 1900 and rose 60%

since 1990.

1 M

inistry of Justice Offender M

anagement statistics quarterly: O

ctober to Decem

ber 2018 2 Scottish Prison Service Prison Population 3 D

epartment of Justice W

eekly Situation Reports 2018-19

-100% 0%

+100%

+200%

+300%

+400%

19001920

19401960

19802000

2020

CHAN

GE

IN TH

E PRISON

POPU

LATION

OF G

REAT BRITAIN SIN

CE 1900

England andW

ales

Scotland

Northern Ireland

8 U

K Prison Population Statistics

Source: M

oJ, Offender M

anagement C

aseload Statistics 2010 Tables; Offender M

anagement Statistics

Quarterly, V

arious Years

Notes: D

ata at end of June in 2005, September in 2010 and 2015, and M

arch in 2019. Excludes those w

here sentence length was not recorded.

Prisoners in custody for violence against the person (VA

TP) offences accounted for the highest proportion of prisoners at the end of M

arch 2019 (26%).

Sexual, theft and drug offences each accounted for between 12%

and 18%

of the reason offenders were in prison.

As show

n in the chart below, V

ATP accounted for the largest share of adult

and juvenile offenders in custody. How

ever, a smaller proportion of juvenile

offenders were in prison for sexual offences and a larger proportion w

ere in for drug offences, robbery, and possession of w

eapons.

Source: M

oJ, Offender M

anagement Statistics Q

uarterly, October to D

ecember 2018, table 1.2b

Notes: O

nly includes offenders sentenced to imm

ediate custody. ‘Miscellaneous crim

es…’ =

miscellaneous

crimes against society.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Less than one

year1 - 4 years

Over 4 years

determinate

Indeterm

inateRecall

20052010

20152019

PRISON

POPU

LATION

BY SENTEN

CE LENG

THEngland and W

ales, prisoners sentencedto im

mediate custody

0%10%

20%30%

40%50%

Violence against the personSexual offences

Drug offences

Theft Offences

RobberyM

iscellaneous crimes…

Possession of weapons

Summ

ary Non-M

otoringFraud O

ffencesPublic order offences

Criminal dam

age and arsonSum

mary m

otoringO

ffence not recorded

Adults (18+)

Juveniles (15-17)

VIOLEN

CE AGAIN

ST THE PERSO

N IS TH

E LARGEST O

FFENCE

CATEGO

RYAll prisoners, by age, at M

arch 2019

• Dram

atic rise in prison population

• Highest proportion in

Western Europe

A design approach to transforming prison:

top-down, m

iddle-out, bottom-up

Rachel O’Brien

Justice and prisons consultant

Roland KarthausD

irector, Matter Architecture & Senior Lecturer, the U

niversity of East London

• Highly centralised system

• Her M

ajesty’s Prison and Probation Service (H

MPPS) sits w

ithin the Ministry

of Justice

• There have been eight Secretaries of State for Justice since 2009, five since 2015, w

hile the head of HM

PPS has changed once in the last 10 years.

04/09/2019S

ecretary of State for Justice - W

ikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/w

iki/Secretary_of_S

tate_for_Justice2/3

p://ww

w.justice.gov.uk)

For Lord Chancellors before 2003, see List of Lord C

hancellors and LordK

eepers

For Secretaries between 2003 and 2007, see Secretary of State for C

onstitutional Affairs

Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor

Labour

C

onservative

PortraitN

ame

Honorifics &

Constituency

Term of office

PoliticalParty

Governm

ent

The Right H

onourableC

harlie FalconerThe Lord Falconer of

ThorotonP

C Q

C(born 1951)

9 May

200727 June2007

LabourB

lair II & III

The Right H

onourableJack Straw

[2]

MP

for Blackburn

(born 1946)

28 June2007

11 May

2010Labour

Brow

n

The Right H

onourableK

enneth Clarke

QC

MP

for Rushcliffe

(born 1940)

12 May

2010

4S

eptember

2012C

onservative

Cam

eron–Clegg

(Con.-L.D

.)The R

ight Honourable

Chris G

raylingM

P for E

psom and E

well

(born 1962)

4S

eptember

20129 M

ay2015

Conservative

The Right H

onourableM

ichael Gove

MP

for Surrey H

eath(born 1967)

9 May

201514 July2016

Conservative

Cam

eron II

The Right H

onourableLiz Truss

MP

for South W

est Norfolk

(born 1975)

14 July2016

11 June2017

Conservative

May I

The Right H

onourableD

avid LidingtonC

BE

[3]

MP

for Aylesbury(born 1956)

11 June2017

8 January2018

Conservative

May II

The Right H

onourableD

avid Gauke

MP

for South W

estH

ertfordshire(born 1971)

8 January2018

24 July2019

Conservative

The Right H

onourableR

obert Buckland

QC

MP

for South S

windon

(born 1968)

24 July2019

Incumbent

Conservative

Johnson

Centralisation and leadership?

Prison reform: creating a self-im

proving system?

• Consensus for necessary changes:

• Tackle overcrowding

• Reduce the prison population• Im

prove staff to prisoner ratios• Invest in com

munity alternatives and

prevention

but not sufficient

Our take:

Simplifying system

s and com

plicating content

• Devolving pow

er • Rethinking leadership and skills required• C

hanging comm

issioning (including of buildings)

• Taking an asset-based approach• Engaging w

ider, local stakeholders• C

hanging what w

e measure

Worth pursuing even w

hilst necessary changes are not m

ade

• Nearly half of adults are reconvicted

of another offence within one year of

release from prison

• Self-inflicted deaths are six times

more likely in prison than the general

population.

• Assaults on staff have tripled in recent years

• Drug m

isuse is increasing after years of decline.

• Just two in five prisons (43%

) received a positive rating from

inspectors in 2017–18 for purposeful activity w

ork.

Governm

ent policy

- Punishment

- Protection of the public

- Rehabilitation

HM

Inspector of Prisons ‘healthy prison’ tests

- Safety

- Respect

- Purposeful activity

- Rehabilitation

Stated aims vs reality

• Multi/inter-disciplinary

• Applied with practitioners

• Facilitators/convenors of change• Proposition through dem

onstration

Institutional:

HM

P Hum

ber

Hyde Bank YO

I

Social enterprise and the Road Ahead

New

Futures Netw

ork

Policy impact:

Wellbeing in prison design

The Future Prison

Justice 2030

Methodology and m

ethods: research through action

Our projects and initiatives:

Collaborative design process with over

200 stakeholder groups, including: Prison m

anagement, officers and prisoners, local

comm

unity, employers, N

ational, regional and local authorities, etc.

Emergent social enterprise m

odel making use

of latent assets

Co-designLand and com

munity

as asset-base for rehabilitation culture

HM

P Hum

berPolicySuite of docum

ents:

Policy: Building a rehabilitation culturew

ith supporting policy papers

Plan: Masterplan for site, w

ith illustrated m

ethodology for policy

Available atw

ww

.matterarchitecture.uk/research/

• Fieldwork in H

MP Berw

yn

• Structured user interviews (officers,

staff, prisoners

• Online survey - 305 responses

• Design factors affecting health and

wellbeing

• Acoustics

• Ability to move around

• Heating and ventilation

Fieldwork

Wellbeing in prison design

Evidence to improve design of new

prisons

Intervening meanw

hile

Symplifying the system

, complexifying the content

Methodology and m

ethods: research through action

Future work: Justice 2030

System design (top-down)

Place-based design (middle-out)

Evidenced-based vision of justice and consistent

political leadership

Reduce the prison populationIm

prove staffingInvest in alternatives &

preventionC

hange comm

issioningC

onsult with prison users

Support good practice

Reaching outD

elegated decision-making

Integrating with local services,

economies and stakeholders

Asset-based approachSharing know

ledgeM

onitoring

Every day design (bottom-up)

Co-design solutions w

ith staff and prisoners

Source local initiativesSw

eat the small stuff

Find the 'pinch points'

supportingintelligence

devolving

delivering

enablingcreating change

Framew

ork

Spring 20149

RSA

TR

AN

SIT

ION

S EV

ER

TH

OR

PE . R

EP

OR

T 1: AN

ALY

SIS. J

ULY 20

13

RO

LAN

D KA

RT

HA

US A

RC

HIT

EC

T35

Key O

pp

ortunities

INIT

IAL R

ES

PO

NS

ES

The greatest p

otential is fo

r the who

le of the site,

outsid

e of the p

rison w

alls and resid

ential plo

ts to

be co

nsidered

for the Transitio

ns pro

ject. This wo

uld

mo

st likely require a transfer o

f the land o

r long

leaseho

ld to

som

e form

of o

rganisatio

n with a rem

it to

manag

e the land fo

r Transitions o

bjectives. There

is likely to b

e a technical and leg

al pro

cess to arrive

at this po

int, which w

ill need to

carefully consid

er the o

peratio

nal and security req

uirements o

f the future co

nsolid

ated p

rison, as w

ell as being

sensitive to

local resid

ents. The yellow area rig

ht indicates this

po

tential in outline o

nly and d

etails of land

ownership

w

ill be req

uired as a starting

po

int to refine any such

bo

undary.

There is great p

otential fo

r the pro

ject to create a new

‘hub

’ which b

rings to

gether the to

urism and

nature p

otential, w

ith the o�

ender rehab

ilitation services.

Much w

ork is still req

uired to

develo

p a p

rog

ramm

e o

f functions and

a business p

lan, but to

meet the

Transitions o

bjectives, w

ill mo

st likely require m

any d

i�erent kind

s of activities and

so a central ‘hub

’ will

help to

weld

these functions to

gether and

create a co

herent sense of p

lace. Evertho

rpe H

all provid

es an im

po

rtant landm

ark for this hub

, which m

ay be an

external space, w

ith build

lings accessed

from

it, rather than necessarily b

eing a b

uilding

itself.

In terms o

f access, it seems likely there w

ill need to

b

e an alternative app

roach to

Beck R

oad

. There is a p

ossib

le op

po

rtunity to b

uild a new

road

around

the w

estern edg

e of the W

old

s current perim

eter. This m

ay require so

me lo

ss of w

oo

dland

, which sho

uld b

e m

itigated

by new p

lanting. A

lternatively, or as w

ell as, access sho

uld b

e po

ssible via M

ires Lane, thoug

h the access fro

m the m

ain road

, Sand

Lane, is som

ewhat

remo

te. There are also p

ossib

le access routes alo

ng

the southern p

erimeter o

f HM

P E

verthorp

e and

from

the A63 via the service statio

n site, thoug

h this w

ould

require 3rd

party land

. Further w

ork sho

uld b

e und

ertaken to exp

lore these o

ptio

ns once a clearer

brief has b

een develo

ped

. Walking

/ cycling trails

could

be laid

out to

explo

re the beck and

wo

od

lands

and co

nnect with the w

ider netw

orks and

natural assets.

So

me fo

rm o

f com

munity transp

ort p

rovision w

ill be

essential to the success o

f any pro

ject on this site.

sand lane

Co

nnection to

north cave

and w

etlands

Co

nnection to

south

cave and the W

old

s Way

Natio

nal Trail

Co

nnection to

long

-d

istance cycle route

Co

nnection to

north cave,

wetland

s and d

isused

railway

‘Hub

’

greenho

uses

walking

/ cycling trails

transitions

facilities

sustainable land

m

anagem

ent

connectio

n to ho

tel

Co

nnection to

foo

tpaths

car park m

ay be includ

edif p

rison entrance m

oved

Initial response to the site conditions

Connected hub to release assetsLocally connected hub on M

inistry land, adjacent to prison

Design recom

mendations

12

34

56

78

910

1112

1314

1516

www.matterarchitecture.uk/research

A design approach to transforming prison: top-down, middle-out, bottom-upR. Karthaus and R. O’Brien, September 2019(slides on accompanying sheet shown in brackets)

ContextThe UK has seen a drastic rise in the use of incarceration over the last 10 years (2) with a doubling of the population over the last 30 years. There has been a decrease in use of custody for children and young people and an increase of those serving long sentences. Yet about one in every two people who go to prison go for under 6 months. If we look forward, the current political leadership looks set to see further rises, cancelling plans to address short-term sentences with greater emphasis on community alternatives and promising sentence reform, which would see the end of ‘good behaviour’ tariffs for those who have committed serious violent offences.Over the same period, the UK has seen a persistent trend of falling crime (3), not as some would have it, linked to the increasing prison population, but a wider social trend. Within that trend has been localized increases in violent crime, which continues to drive public perception that crime is a problem needing tough justice.There is a contradiction at the heart of the current approach to prison and probation. (4) On the one hand we have seen a fairly consistent emphasis on rehabilitation over the last five years (this has not always been the case). But on the other we have seen almost continuously changing political leadership, which has disrupted progress. There has been little change of civil service leadership at HMPPS, which – we would argue – has had a similar effect but for the opposite reason of inertia. There has also been a significant reduction in prison staffing levels since 2013 and a loss of many experienced officers and a failed restructuring of probation services which split the service in two (privatizing the service for those considered lower risk, adding some 50,000 people on licence post-custody while underfunding and neglecting ‘through the gate’ support).The purposes of prisonDespite changes in leadership there is a broad consensus that prison has three primary functions. (5) In the words of our last Justice Secretary:“First, protection of the public – prison protects the public from the most dangerous and violent individuals. Second, punishment – prison deprives offenders of their liberty and certain freedoms enjoyed by the rest of society and acts as a deterrent. It is not the only sanction available, but it is an important one. And third, rehabilitation – prison provides offenders with the opportunity to reflect on, and take responsibility for, their crimes and prepare them for a law-abiding life when they are released.”Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons, now has the ability to deliver urgent notifications if they identify significant concerns, works against four ‘healthy prison’ tests:• Safety: Prisoners, particularly the most vulnerable, are

held safely.• Respect (Care for YOIs): Prisoners are treated with

respect for their human dignity.• Purposeful activity: Prisoners are able, and expected,

to engage in activity that is likely to benefit them.• Rehabilitation: Prisoners are supported to maintain

and develop release planning relationships with their family and friends. Prisoners are helped to reduce their likelihood of reoffending

The need for reformAll the current indicators are that rehabilitation, safety and purposeful activity are not being delivered and that these undermine the protection of the public. A critical argument is that the absolute prioritization of punishment (which should be the sentence and not the prison) whilst cutting resources is the root cause of current failings. As there is a tension in government policy, so there is within the reform movement in the UK (6). On the one hand, there is a view that prison can never succeed in its rehabilitative function. That what is needed is:• To reduce the prison population, particularly the

number of people serving short sentences, investing in effective community alternatives.

• To improve the ratio of staff to prisoners and improve training, support and work conditions.

• To change the debate about crime and punishment within the UK (which is seen as being ill-informed and punitive compared to some other countries)

We agree with all of the above. However, it would be wrong to suggest that the UK prison system was functioning well before the recent cuts and it would be a mistake to think that it does not need to learn some of the lessons and adopt some of the thinking of other public services. In the face of some of the problems we see now, we would argue that if we are to create a self improving system, change is needed at all levels that: • Devolves power to Prison Governors• Reconstitutes the leadership model and reconsiders

skills needed in the workforce.• Changes commissioning (including of buildings) to

effectively support rehabilitation.• Takes an asset-based approach to infrastructure,

communities and individuals.• Simplifies systems and complicates content to create

a more human scale (and humane) system.• Engages prisoners, staff and the community in

contextual analysis and in shaping reform.• Measures wellbeing and public attitudes as well as

reoffending.Our argument is that we need to see prison reform as an active process at all levels. Each level has a role to play and the system needs to facilitate and empower each of those roles at every level (7)Methodology and case studiesThis starts with us working not just bottom up but in partnership with those who have a range of expertise to bring to the table. (8-16) We are not academics but work in interdisciplinary teams ensuring we base our work on the best evidence available and embed evaluation and impact models. We are not practitioners but work with those who are, drawing on their expertise and experience. We are not service users but work with those who have first hand experience in co-designing new approaches. We are unapologetic in insisting that the expertise and contextual considerations are not confined to us. Part of the reason that people feel disempowered is that decisions are not only made centrally but without any explanation or consideration of local/institutional context.

www.matterarchitecture.uk/research

RSA Transitions: building a rehabilitation culture (2014) was a grant-funded research and development project from 2010 - 2015. It began with a desire to be able to think creatively and ambitiously about the UK prison system at a time when rehabilitation was not high on the policy agena. Its starting point was to match the contemporary state of prisons with the broader consensus about their purposes: to protect the public, to punish and to rehabilitate. Our aim was to begin to close the gap between purpose and reality in a short vision of an asset-based approach, embedded in locality.Using this as a basis for more detailed work, we secured funding to undertake a pilot feasibility study working on site with a prison in East Yorkshire. The focus was on how 45-acres of unused Ministry of Justice land around the prison could be turned into a ‘transition’ space that supported rehabilitation while benefiting staff and the local community. This involved becoming embedded within the prison (a newly merged male ‘resettlement’ establishment with capacity to hold 1200) and locality, working across three strands of work:Top-downContextual analysis, engaging with policy makers and an understanding of the (changing) commissioning frameworks around justice services. This both gave the project credibility and a way of ensuring stakeholders were aware of context, as well as shaping research inputs and our final communication outputs. Our aim was to both influence national policy and identify what could be achieved locally in the meantime.Middle-outA significant part of our work involved mapping the local and regional stakeholders within this field, focusing on the kinds of innovations that would both benefit a more integrated approach and help to meet aims and performance targets. For example, our advisory board included the Prison Governor, representatives of the Police and Crime Commissioner’s office and the local authority substance misuse commissioner. Much of our work involved engaging with key agencies such as the Local Enterprise Partnership, NGOs and community. Bottom-upFrom the outset, the project engaged with frontline staff and prisoners to collaboratively explore the potential of the site for physical development and a new prisoner-led consultation forum was established to provide a platform for co-designing solutions. This approach was intended to demonstrate the latent potential of existing assets: both the land/buildings and the people.OutcomeWhile Transitions successfully achieved buy-in of local stakeholders and a legacy in terms of innovations still in place, a change of Governor resulted in a diminished interest. However, the project did influence the broader policy debate, particularly around employment and social enterprise and has shaped Turnaround, a project in Northern Ireland, which is taking a very similar approach.

Wellbeing in prison design (2017) was a grant funded research and development project undertaken in partnership with the Ministry of Justice Prison Estate Transformation Programme team (PETP), commissioners of new prisons to replace existing outdated facilities. Following 2015, the rehabilitation role of prison had risen up the policy agenda and was a key priority for the PETP. We assembled a small team, including an environmental psychologist, to develop practically applicable design guidance based in evidence. The aim was to adjust existing prison design practices according to parameters affecting the health and wellbeing of all prison users. The logical argument was that healthier staff, prisoners and visitors would enable two important pathways to resettlement: through more effective engagement with work, training and support programmes in prison; and through greater self-efficacy, independence and health on release. Our work followed the same three strands:Top-downWorking with PETP to interrogate existing design and commissioning practices and to introduce ‘disruptive’ thinking into the process. A key finding was that the commissioning process itself was linear, hierarchical and lacking critical intelligence from post-occupancy evaluation. Whilst operational expertise was applied at the early stages of the process, later decision-making was heavily weighted to reducing construction cost risk without a means to evaluate the significant potential resulting operational costs. Whilst PETP commissioners were committed to innovation through learning, the overall system of commissioning, procuring and operating new prisons did little to enable such learning. Middle-outWorking alongside the PETP’s professional consultant team and operational experts, we were able to integrate evidence into the design process for two new prisons to stimulate original thinking and generate new design responses The MOJ’s prison design standards were used as a starting point for interrogating both the explicit and ulterior motives for individual standards and to rebalance them towards supporting health and wellbeing. Bottom-upWe undertook fieldwork in HMP Berwyn, a new prison at the time and the UK’s largest with capacity for over 2,000 prisoners. We carried out structured interviews and ‘walking audits’ with staff and prisoners which in turn informed an online interview that was distributed to the whole prison population. 305 completed responses were received and analysed which clearly identified consensus on key areas of current prison design impacting on health and wellbeing. These were used to inform the design guidance measures. OutcomeAs the new buildings are not yet built, we do not know the final influence on the building designs. The procurement process tends to heavily prioritise construction cost risk over long-term costs and so we are not optimistic. One of our recommendations was that the commissioning process itself needed improvements in order to deliver on its objectives, including: setting up an independent design review for prisons and; systematising the user-based research we conducted as part of a learning commissioning culture. In this respect the project was unsuccessful, but it has precipitated great interest nationally and internationally and demonstrated the practical application of evidence in design.

Contact: Racobrien@gmail.com Karthaus@uel.ac.uk RK@matterarchitecture.uk

Case studies available to download at https://www.matterarchitecture.uk/research