Scottish Prisons Assessment and Review of Outcomes for Women (SPAROW): full report

Appendix 2. Research methods

Methods of data collection

We adopted a multi-method approach focused on capturing the experiences and views of women, SPS staff and delivery partners. The methods of data collection in each phase are summarised below.

Each method is described in more detail below:

• A review of SPS documentation (Phase 1) to provide background information on the aims and aspirations of the CCUs and the risk and progression processes for women. These documents, which included the SPS Strategy for Women in Custody 2021-2025; the SPS Risk Management, Progression and Temporary Release Guidance (2018); the SPS Risk Management Team - Adverse Circumstance Report; the Women’s Strategy Custodial Flow-Chart, and; the SPS Risk Management Team (RMT) Guidance Leaflet, informed the design of questions on these topics in the interview guides. We also reviewed the SPS Partnership Agreement for prison-based services (2018 version) which assisted in drafting questions for inclusion in the online survey of delivery partners. It should be noted however that much of this documentation precedes the establishment of the CCUs (Phase 1).
• Fieldnotes (Phases 1 and 2) were taken within CCUs either during or following each visit. Rather than deploying formal overt observation we gathered systematic field notes. We agreed with women and SPS staff in advance the kinds of features we might note. Fieldnotes paid particular attention to the ways in which the facilities were used. They focussed on the nature of women's interactions with each other and with staff, the types of activities engaged in and women's movements within the facility.
• Online semi-structured qualitative interviews with SPS senior managers (Phase 1) were conducted to gain insight into the policy perspective on the CCUs. These interviews explored both the strategic and operational aims of the CCUs, interviewees’ reflections on the identification and selection of women for the CCUs and; the overall functioning of the CCUs. Four interviews were conducted with SPS managers with a range of strategic and/or operational roles. These participants, all senior strategic managers, are referred to in the Report as SSM 1 – 4.
• Face-to-face semi-structured qualitative interviews with women living in CCUs (Phases 1 and 2) were undertaken to explore the key pre-determined research questions identified in the specification documents. Interviews also allowed for a narrative approach to more fully elicit participants’ views and experiences and any issues that were especially important to them. A bespoke approach to conducting interviews was used to ensure that the methods used were appropriate to the needs of individual participants rather than a rigid set and ordering of research questions.
• Following the ‘get to know you’ visits, all women resident in the CCUs during the periods of fieldwork were invited to participate in interviews. Posters outlining the research and what participation entailed were displayed in the Community Hub areas. Members of the research team visited the CCUs to answer any questions and engage the women in the research. In Phase 1 of the research, there was some marked hesitancy amongst women to participate in interviews. This was because they had recently participated in other research and some thought our research was the same as what they had participated in recently (see chapter 3 on Research hesitancy and research fatigue).
• Most interviews with women were conducted on a 1-to-1 basis, but some were conducted in twos or threes where this was the preference of the women. Interviews generally took around 60 minutes in duration, but some took considerably longer where women wished to carry on talking. A small number of interviews in each field work phase took place over two separate visits at the behest of the women who participated.

• Table 2 above summarises the numbers of women interviewed in each phase of fieldwork in both units. In total, 33 women were interviewed.
• In addition to these interviews, we also conducted four larger group discussions with women (two in each CCU) where images from the photo elicitation exercises were used to stimulate reflection and a range of views. Numbers of women in attendance in these larger discussion groups ranged from five to eleven.
• Throughout the report, women residents are referred to by the CCU in which they reside, an ‘R’ to denote they are residents, the fieldwork stage in which they were interviewed, and a number (e.g. BR2 005). Where women were interviewed in pairs, then they are distinguished as BR2 004:1 and BR2 004:2).
• Photo-elicitation with women in CCUs (Phase 2) was incorporated into group discussions as a means of evoking reflection and to enrich the interview experience. This method was chosen as a means of enabling women to articulate experiences that would, otherwise, have been difficult to articulate through talk-only interviews. SPS would not allow women to use cameras to photograph their own non-personal images of the CCUs. Therefore, photo-elicitation in this prison context involved members of the research team taking photographs in the units under the women’s direction. Cameras and photographed images were checked by prison staff before we left the units. The developed photographs were used mainly in group interviews as a means of producing data through negotiation and reflexivity and to explore the emotions and experiences that were evoked by the photographs.
• Arts-based workshops with women in CCUs (Phase 2) were used as a participatory approach with groups of women living in CCUs in order to enable creative agency in articulating their unique experiences. Like photo-elicitation, this method was chosen as a means of facilitating reflection and dialogue, and also to access knowledge which is not easily expressed in words (Bagnoli, 2009; Barone & Eisner, 2012; Leavy, 2009).
• Data and findings from Phase 1 of the research were used as the basis of the arts-based workshops. Findings from interviews and fieldnotes were fed back to the women but were also used to stimulate further dialogue on issues that had arisen, and to explore how things might have changed in the time between the fieldwork stages. Workshops involved an illustrator working directly with women in each CCU to 'visually minute' what women were saying in words, metaphors and drawings that evoked their experiences. Women attended in groups ranging from six to eleven in number; however, as each workshop lasted around two and a half hours, some women attended at different times. Three members of the research team and the graphic illustrator were present at all workshops.
• Three arts-based workshops took place in each CCU around 3-4 weeks apart. Large poster-style drawings were produced by the graphic illustrator in situ using pencil as the women were talking, reflecting and debating with each other and the research team about their views and experiences of the CCU. Some women actively added to the drawings, whilst others suggested changes and additions. The women were very engaged in the workshops, which provided a collective space for discussing, sharing and reinterpreting the lived experience of women in the CCUs. The workshops were then followed up with a subsequent visit in each unit to show the women a more worked-up colour version of each drawing and to allow them to check accuracy and make any final changes. Workshops became a strong thread running through the last two fieldwork stages, as we were able to both conduct the workshops, and to take back and discuss the drawings produced as a result. The finalised large colour images were printed and presented to each unit.
• Face-to-face semi-structured qualitative interviews with SPS staff in CCUs (Phases 1 and 2) were undertaken to explore staff experiences and views about working within the CCUs. Interviews also explored how the CCU model enables different relational, behavioural and cultural dynamics. They also covered the successes/good practice and challenges/barriers to implementing gender-specific and trauma-informed principles/approaches to care and support for women in custody. Information about the research and a call for participation were provided by the research team and circulated to SPS staff via CCU managers before the research commenced. All SPS staff in each unit were invited to participate. Members of the research team met with SPS staff at the ‘getting to know you’ visits and provided further verbal and written information.
• It was originally intended to conduct a series of focus groups with SPS staff in each CCU, with each focus group taking place at two points, during Phase 1 and Phase 2. However, it soon became apparent that this was not feasible given staff shift patterns, staff rotas, and marked levels of staff absence. We quickly pivoted to the use of semi-structured qualitative interviews as this method was considered more manageable by staff given their shift patterns. This was not without challenge, however. Focus groups were chosen for their benefits in facilitating interpersonal discussions between staff, and the observation of group dynamics and body language and also as they allow for the generation of data from a number of participants simultaneously. Interviews reflect a different dynamic and do not allow for discussions between staff but also, crucially are much more resource intensive than focus groups and take longer to arrange and conduct.
• Residential officers work closely with the women on a day-to-day basis to provide support and care; they have a role in case management, and sometimes also undertake a PO role to individual women. Operational officers are responsible for the overall security and functioning of the CCUs. They work in the reception and office areas, maintain CCTV surveillance in the CCUs and surrounds, and organise and oversee the visits of family members and other visitors to the CCUs. Whilst they do not have responsibility for direct care of the women, they do play a role in maintaining their safety and security. First line managers (FLM) have responsibility for the managing of resources, overseeing shift rosters, and supporting other staff. They can also act as a duty manager with responsibility for the running of the CCUs on a shift basis.
• After some initial hesitation (as described in Chapter 3), both operational and residential staff consented to take part in interviews, see Table 3 below for breakdown of staff and job roles. CCU SPS staff interviews were of between 45-60 minutes duration. Most were conducted 1:1, although some staff chose to be interviewed in pairs. A total of 40 officers were interviewed; five officers were interviewed twice, in both Phase 1 and Phase 2.

• Throughout the report, CCU staff are referred to by the CCU in which they work, an ‘S’ to denote they are staff, the fieldwork stage in which they were interviewed, and a number (e.g. LS2 002. Where officers were interviewed in pairs, then they are distinguished as, e.g., BS2 002:1 and BS2 002:2).
• Face-to-face semi-structured qualitative interviews with women in closed conditions in another prison establishment (Phase 2) were conducted in order to explore the key pre-determined research questions identified in the specification documents. The particular focus here was on women’s experiences of gender-specific and trauma-informed approaches in mainstream prison. There were considerable delays in SPS identifying another prison establishment wherein we were able to approach women for interview. This meant that we were only able to conduct interviews in Phase 2 of the research. Six women were eventually interviewed.
• Face-to-face semi-structured qualitative interviews with SPS staff working with women in closed conditions in another prison establishment (Phase 2). Interviews addressed how the CCU model is challenging working practice in other prison establishment(s) where women are detained, and in particular, how gender-specific and trauma-informed care and support of women is working in those other establishments. Four SPS staff members from the same prison as the six women were interviewed; three were operational officers and one was a Hall officer. Participants are referred to using the same protocol as women and officers in the CCUs, that is, GR 001 (for women) and GS 001 (for staff).
• Online survey with SPS delivery partners (Phases 1 and 2). The views of delivery partners were sought with the aim of supporting the ongoing improvement of partnership working with delivery partners to design and deliver appropriate services that are gender-specific and trauma-informed. The survey sought to gain: an understanding of how the partners are delivering gender-sensitive and trauma-informed care and support; documenting any changes partners may have made to align their services to the SPS strategy and partners’ experiences of successes and challenges to implementing gender-specific and trauma-informed care and support to women in custody.
• The first online survey, implemented in Phase 1, was developed and distributed to SPS delivery partners (from 9th – 30th November 2023). Survey questions were developed using Qualtrics, a web-based software that facilitates the construction, analysis and dissemination of online surveys. Research team members attended a meeting of the Criminal Justice Voluntary Sector Forum (CJVSF) on 13 September 2023 to discuss the evaluation and establish reflections and suggestions from Forum members. This assisted in identifying themes and issues to explore further in the study.
• Initial challenges were encountered in gaining a comprehensive and up-to-date listing of delivery partners in each CCU, and compiling this list took several months. In addition, delivery partners can change regularly, as they may provide a service for a number of weeks and then finish (before sometimes returning at a later date to run a course or activity again). Names of delivery partners were received from a range of sources: the Scottish Government, SPS and the CCUs. In Phase 1 the survey was initially distributed to 25 delivery partners, identified primarily via the CCUs. A wider invitation to the survey was also included in the CJVSF newsletter which was distributed to all member organisations. The Phase 1 survey resulted in 23 responses from a range of organisations. A second survey, using the same contact list, with distribution assisted by CJVSF, was implemented in Phase 2. This was also sent to other organisations that we were informed about during fieldwork, or who had recently become/were in the process of becoming SPS delivery partners. Despite ongoing requests and reminders, this survey, (opened between 3 July – 30 August 2024) had a much lower response rate, with just five organisational representatives completing it.
• Online focus groups and semi-structured qualitative interviews with SPS delivery partners (Phase 2). To elaborate on the survey results, all delivery partners who responded to the online survey were also invited to take part in an online focus group. This aimed to explore the factors that either facilitated/enhanced or limited their ability to engage directly with women. It also sought views on issues of community reintegration during sentence and support for transition at the end of sentences. The views of delivery partners were sought with the aim of supporting the ongoing improvement of partnership working with delivery partners to design and deliver appropriate services that are gender-specific and trauma-informed.
• Across Phase 2 (fieldwork stages 2 and 3) four focus groups took place with, respectively, two, four, five and six participants. Each lasted between 50 – 60 minutes and involved a range of delivery partners. Five individual interviews were also carried out with participants who were either unable to attend a scheduled focus group, or who requested an individual interview. Delivery partner participants are referred to in the Report as DP 001 where the quote came from an interview or DP FG 1 if from a focus group.