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

2. The wider context of women’s imprisonment in Scotland

Women in custody in Scotland

Whilst the overwhelming majority of those convicted and imprisoned in Scotland are men – accounting for 83 per cent of all convictions in 2022-3, a similar proportion as each year in the past ten years (Scottish Government 2024), there has been concern about the rate of female imprisonment and the impact of imprisonment on criminalised women in Scotland for over 30 years. Scotland saw a steady rise throughout the 1990s in the average daily female sentenced and remand prison population and an increase in sentence length amongst sentenced prisoners. This was attributable largely to an increase in sentences from six months up to two years (McIvor & Burman 2011).

Despite most of women’s convictions being for relatively minor offences, the average daily female prison population almost doubled between 1999/2000 and 2008/9, from 210 to 413 (Scottish Government 2010). Over this period the sentence length for women received into prison under direct sentence increased and, at the same time, there was an 83 per cent increase in the numbers of women received into prison on remand between 1997/8 and 2006/7 (McIvor & Burman 2011). There was no evidence of an increase in women’s criminality during this period. Indeed, the number of women convicted per 100,000 population was identical in 1995/6 and 2004/5 (Scottish Executive 2006). Yet the increases in sentence length suggest that some women who were convicted were being treated more harshly by the courts (McIvor 2007).

While the size of the female prison population in Scotland continued to increase throughout the 2000s, it has seen fluctuation since then. Between 2012-13 and 2016-17 the average daily female prison population decreased to 368 but rose to around 403 in 2019-2020. During the Covid-19 period, the numbers dropped again to 300 in 2020-21 and to 283 in 2021-22 (Scottish Government 2024a)^[1]. Overall, in 2023-2024 women represented 6.5 per cent of the prison population in Scotland with a daily prison population of 318. The daily population represents a 12.8 per cent increase over the previous year, but it is still lower than pre-pandemic levels. Whilst a number of these women were on remand or awaiting deportation, the statistics suggest an increase in non-sexual crimes of violence, this being the largest offence group, with crimes of dishonesty and crimes against society following (Scottish Government 2024b).

Women in custody face unique challenges compared to their male counterparts and risk factors associated with criminal offending are different. Their offences are generally less serious than men’s; they are less likely to have a prior offence history, and they generally recidivate less often than men. International research documenting the characteristics of women in custody has revealed backgrounds of violent and sexual victimisation (Chesney-Lind & Pasko 2012), unmet needs and interrelated problems. These include poor physical health, presenting specific health issues from eating disorders to pregnancy (Plugge et al. 2006); addiction problems (Malloch 2000); backgrounds of poverty (Carlen 1988; Brown & Gelsthorpe 2022), and housing and employment difficulties (Sheehan et al. 2007).

Researchers studying women in custodial settings have highlighted the vulnerabilities related to the troubled and distinct characteristics, life histories, and circumstances that imprisoned women frequently report. These challenges are well documented in the international literature (Baldwin 2017; 2021; Corston 2007; Masson et al. 2021; Quinlan 2003; Quinlan et al. 2022; Wright 2017). In addition, levels of self-harm (Fitzpatrick et al 2022), suicidal ideation and suicide attempts for women in prison are significantly higher than for those outside prison (Ludlow et al. 2015). Women in custody also report a significantly greater incidence of mental health problems and higher rates of drug use than males do (Plugge et al. 2006).

The picture in Scotland is no different to the wider international profile. In their 2012 Report, the Commission on Women Offenders (CWO) highlighted that, compared to the general population, women in prison in Scotland have significantly greater levels of underlying health needs. They also have greater rates of poor mental health; higher lifetime instances of trauma, which includes greater physical and sexual victimisation, and rates of substance misuse which are higher than that of male prisoners (CWO 2012). One fifth of the 213 women surveyed as part of the 2017 SPS Prisoner Survey reported that they had used drugs in the last month whilst in prison, and one third were being prescribed methadone (SPS 2018). Over half (59 per cent) of the women felt that drug taking was a problem for them in the community, up from 38 per cent in 2015. Thirty-eight per cent reported being drunk at the time of their offence and 53 per cent were under the influence of drugs (SPS 2018).

For some women, structural factors, combined with gendered life experiences lead to extremely difficult lives. At the point of coming into prison, women may be dealing with multiple issues, such as homelessness, involvement in prostitution or sexual exploitation, mental health problems, domestic abuse, and addiction. A cross-sectional study of 109 women across four prisons in Scotland revealed high levels of poor mental health, in particular anxiety, depression, or both. Additionally, 78 per cent of women assessed reported a history of Significant Head Injury (SHI), of whom 40 per cent had an associated disability (McMillan et al. 2021). Literacy and numeracy levels can be low. Twenty-three per cent of the women who were assessed in the same study lacked functional literacy. Sixty-one per cent of women were assessed as requiring significant literacy support. The high levels of learning need and brain injury demonstrate a requirement for access to appropriate specialist supports to enable the women to have better life chances.

Housing, employment, addiction, ill-health, social relationships, motherhood and mothering are rendered more difficult, and, in some cases, impossible, by imprisonment. It is estimated that approximately 65 per cent of women in prison in Scotland are mothers; of those around 70 per cent had childcare responsibilities prior to imprisonment, and most intend to resume that care on release (Scottish Government 2022). Around a third of mothers in prison describe themselves as single parents (SPS 2016). However, this is likely to be an underestimate as many women are reluctant to disclose that they have children. Separation anxiety, coupled with concerns about their childrens’ wellbeing, can raise already high stress levels of mothers in custody who are sole caretakers, particularly when the custodial facility is far from home (Sheehan & Flynn 2007).

While it is important that imprisoned women are not defined by these vulnerabilities these are, nonetheless, the fundamental realities for many. Even short periods of incarceration – a sentence of six months or less (Baldwin & Epstein 2017; Masson 2019) can significantly exacerbate women's already disadvantaged lives.

Gender-specificity

Until relatively recently gendered issues affecting women in prison have largely been ignored by penal institutions, primarily because prisons have been designed ‘for men, by men’ (Menis 2021; MoJ 2023). Contemporary gender-specific approaches acknowledge that women have distinct histories, pathways to offending, and gendered experiences at each stage of the criminal justice process that are different to men (Brown & Gelsthorpe 2022; Crowley 2021; Covington 2022; Petrillo 2016; 2021; Petrillo & Bradley 2022).

Gender-specific approaches aim to address issues that may contribute to women’s involvement in the criminal justice system, such as domestic abuse, victimisation, family and relationships; marginalisation, trauma; and poverty, mental ill-health, and illicit substance use as well as abusive relationships with coercive or controlling men. Women also often require specific health, welfare and social care interventions that take account of their gender as well as their circumstances and their needs, not only whilst in prison but also on returning to the community. Addressing these needs call for a response which is gender-sensitive and takes account of women’s distinctive gendered circumstances.

Trauma-informed practice

King (2017) describes trauma as an individual’s experience of an event that considerably and negatively affects their ability to cope with or recover from it, evoking emotions such as fear, hopelessness and a sense of violation. The experience of trauma – whether from a one-off event or a cumulative and ongoing series of events – can have lasting implications on an individual’s social, physical and emotional wellbeing (Felitti et al. 1998; Perry et al. 1995). Women in, or ‘at risk’ of contact with criminal justice systems are widely considered to have experienced high levels of victimisation and abuse, parental conflict or separation, bereavement and loss, all of which can result in traumatisation (Sharpe 2012; Prison Reform Trust 2017; Karatzias et al. 2018; Petrillo 2022; 2023; Brown & Gelsthorpe 2022; Burman et al. 2023; Kelman et al. 2024). There is an established evidence base concerning both the immediate and long-term effect of trauma on individuals (McCann & Pearlman 1990; Perry et al. 1995; Van der Kolk et al. 1996; Breslau 2012).

Because of their past experiences, many women enter prison traumatised. Existing backgrounds of trauma can be deepened at each stage of the criminal justice process. The processes of arrest and awaiting trial amid a paucity of information can re-traumatise – leading to feelings of fear and helplessness (Levenson & Willis 2019). Prisons are not only trauma-inducing but can be a catalyst for previous trauma to re-emerge (Crewe et al. 2017; Thomas 2023).

There is now a strong recognition of the role played by practitioners, services, and institutions in exacerbating trauma (Bloom & Farragher 2010; Chard 2021; Agenda & Alliance for Youth Justice 2022). Almost 25 years ago, Harris & Fallot (2001) called for a ‘paradigm shift within service delivery systems’ (2001: 21). They argued that organisations should reconfigure their service systems, taking into account the past trauma in a way that would encourage the service user to engage with them (Harris & Fallot 2001).

Trauma-informed approaches have since developed and multiplied (Berliner & Kalko 2016; Hanson & Lang 2016; Johnson 2017). For justice-involved women in particular, such approaches are premised on the understanding that many of these women have experienced multiple or cumulative traumatic experiences throughout their lives. Therefore the approach to working with them needs to recognise this as a key consideration (Covington 2017, 2022; Petrillo & Bradley 2022). Trauma-informed practices are those that realise the impact of trauma and potential paths for recovery, recognise the signs and symptoms of trauma, respond by integrating knowledge about trauma into their approach, and resist retraumatisation (SAMHSA 2014). A main goal is to minimise the extent to which service users are re-traumatised or triggered by aspects of the way they experience the service (SAMHSA 2014; Kelman et al. 2024). Crucially service providers need to understand the impact and prevalence of trauma amongst those with whom they work. Essentially this involves ensuring that working with traumatised individuals and groups is sensitive to trauma and adopts, as a minimum standard, what Miller and Najavits (2012) describe as a ‘do no harm’ approach.

The development of trauma-informed work is based on considerable expertise and a strong commitment by professionals to transform this into practice (Auty et al. 2022). The influence of US psychologist Stephanie Covington, who introduced the trauma-informed practice approach into criminal justice settings and prisons in the UK, is marked in Scotland (2019; 2023). Indeed, she visited Scotland to advise SPS on the value of ensuring trauma-informed practice across the prison estate, and how to embed this way of working in the transformed female estate. Her influence can be seen in the SPS Strategy for Women in Custody. Additionally, in Scotland, trauma-informed practice is enshrined in the Transforming Psychological Trauma: A Knowledge and Skills Framework for the Scottish Workforce (NHS Education for Scotland 2017). This is designed to support and develop trauma-related knowledge and skills across the entire Scottish workforce, not just among those practitioners with a direct remit to work with trauma. This framework aims to equip practitioners to identify the impact of trauma and adapt practice to minimise distress, maximise trust, and promote engagement and recovery (NHS Education for Scotland 2017).

While implementation of new and innovative approaches, such as trauma-informed approaches, may be challenging, it is of note that there is some oversight of impact by the Prisons Inspectorate for Scotland (HMIPS). Shortly after the opening of the two CCUs, HMIPS conducted full inspections: Lilias between 27 and 29 of February 2024 (HMIPS, 2024a) and Bella between 5 to 7 March 2024 (HMIPS, 2024b). These inspections took place during the fieldwork on which this report is based.

Policy and practice context

Scotland has seen a raft of policy reviews and reports highlighting the need to limit the use of female imprisonment and to make use of alternative and gender-appropriate community-based services (Social Work Services and Prisons Inspectorate for Scotland 1998; Scottish Executive 2002; Scottish Consortium on Crime and Criminal Justice 2006; Scottish Prisons Commission 2008). This was prompted initially by a series of suicides in the 1990s. At the same time there have been numerous political pledges to reduce the numbers of women in prison, with limited effect (Burman, Malloch & McIvor 2015; Armstrong & Malloch 2024).

Nevertheless, ongoing concerns about the size and composition of the female prison population have led to many attempts to identify different ways to respond to women who encounter the criminal justice system. The Scottish National Party (SNP) 2011 election manifesto committed to ‘address the explosion in the female prison population’ despite the number of females committing offences staying the same. They commissioned ‘a review of female offending, including the rise in female incarceration’ (SNP 2011: 18). That same year, the Scottish Parliament Equal Opportunities Committee emphasised the importance of recognising the distinctive needs of women and ensuring that criminal justice responses took gender differences into account. In June 2011, Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons (HMIP) undertook a follow-up inspection of HMP & YOI (Young Offender Institution) Cornton Vale, once again pointing to serious overcrowding and the adverse consequences on women living there.

The Scottish Government subsequently announced the establishment of a Commission on Women Offenders (CWO) to find a more effective way of responding to women in the criminal justice system. The remit of the Commission was: ‘to consider the evidence on how to improve outcomes for women in the criminal justice system; to make recommendations for practical measures in this Parliament to reduce their reoffending and reverse the recent increase in the female prisoner population’.

The resultant report (CWO 2012) pledged a strong desire to reduce the number of women in custody for minor offences and remand. It found that service provision for women in the community and upon leaving custody was ‘highly variable and disjointed’; that interventions delivered in prison were rarely followed up in the community and performance measures relating to women’s outcomes were considered inappropriate. It also found that funding arrangements favoured activity over outcomes, making it difficult to measure the impact or effectiveness of programmes being undertaken (CWO 2012).

The CWO was particularly struck by the high levels of trauma, anxiety and mental health problems as well as underlying physical health issues experienced by women in the criminal justice system in Scotland, and made a strong case for the value of co-ordinated working to ensure a holistic approach to women’s mental health and addiction needs. They proposed a set of 37 recommendations across seven broad areas for improving outcomes for women in the criminal justice system and reducing their reoffending. These were: service redesign, alternatives to prosecution, alternatives to remand, sentencing, prisons, community reintegration, and leadership structures and delivery (CWO 2012). These included recommendations proposing service redesign through an interconnected and collaborative framework of support and direction for women offenders. One of which was the establishment of Community Justice Centres, envisaged as ‘one-stop’ centres that would coordinate and deliver a consistent range of services to reduce reoffending. ‘One-stop’ centres were very much endorsed by the Corston Report (2007), following the Westminster Government’s experiment with ‘Women Together’ in England and Wales (Hedderman et al. 2008).

The idea was that the Community Justice Centres in Scotland could include interventions for supervision and management. These would be suited to the needs of women; challenging women’s offending behaviours and attitudes; addressing the root causes of reoffending; and, simultaneously providing practical advice and support on matters such as housing, benefits, employment, and childcare. The CWO was convinced of the importance of women-specific programmes and solutions to deal with the problems that women with convictions face. It was therefore considered important that the Community Justice Centres would be available and involved at every stage of the criminal justice system, and that services would be ‘proactive and persistent’ in engaging with women (CWO 2012).

Radical recommendations were made in the CWO Report regarding the existing prison estate. Primarily that HMP & YOI Cornton Vale (the only purpose-built women’s prison in Scotland) should be demolished and replaced by a smaller national prison for women serving long-term sentences (i.e. 4 years and over) and who were considered to present a significant risk to the public. This specialist prison would have the capacity for what was described as ‘meaningful and consistent work’. It would include an adequate medical centre, a young women’s unit, a purpose-built mother and baby unit, an appropriate and family friendly visitor centre, and a Community Integration Unit to help women access community services and support networks prior to release.

The use of local prisons for remand and short-term prisoners was also recommended with the aim of improving reintegration to the community and with improved links to services following release as well as improved links with families and children through the extension and expansion of video technology. Gender-specific training for all those working with women was also recommended.

The Scottish Government accepted 33 of the 37 recommendations, of which six were specifically for the SPS to implement. It announced its intention to close HMP & YOI Cornton Vale and develop HMP Inverclyde as a new 300 capacity national prison for women. However, in early 2015, the then Cabinet Secretary for Justice announced that the plans for the latter would not proceed; and that a ‘bolder’ and ‘more radical and ambitious approach’ was needed.

Following consultation to rethink the approach to the custody of women, and an international symposium to discuss ‘best practice’ (Scottish Government 2015), plans were announced for the future of the custodial estate for women in Scotland. It was confirmed that there would be a new national facility for women (HMP Stirling) to be built on the site of HMP & YOI Cornton Vale, for up to 80 women with higher security requirements or more complex needs, and up to five regional Community Custody Units (CCUs) to be located across Scotland. Along the way, the CWO recommendation for the Community Justice Centres was dropped in favour of custodial units, with a vision that these would support women’s rehabilitation nearer their home, family and community.

The SPS took forward the development of the redesign of the custodial arrangements for women. The re-design was intended to ensure that the physical environment and services were gender-specific, trauma-informed and that conditions were based on safety, respect and dignity, incorporated within the specificities of the risks and needs of women in prison.

The building of the CCUs was undertaken in a phased approach, although as yet only two of the five that were proposed have been built. Interviews with senior SPS personnel indicated that views have changed as to whether more CCUs for women should be created. HMP Bella in Dundee eventually opened in August 2022 (with capacity for 16 women) and HMP Lilias in Glasgow opened in October 2022 (with capacity for 24 women). A key aim of the CCU model is that women can access activities and services that will assist them in the development of skills for reintegration into the community.

Following the demolition of HMP & YOI Cornton Vale, the new national women’s prison HMP & YOI Stirling opened in October 2023; it has the capacity to hold a maximum of 117 women, along with a separate mother and baby unit. Women are housed in house-style accommodation and HMP & YOI Stirling receives admissions from court and has an assessment centre. The remit of the Governor extends to oversight and governance of the two CCUs, with overall responsibility for the progression/transfer of women to the CCUs.

Scottish Prison Service Strategy for Women in Custody

Alongside the redesign of custodial facilities, the SPS formulated a four-year Strategy for Women in Custody (2021-2025) (SPS 2021). The SPS Strategy sets out an overarching plan for all women in custody in Scotland. It outlines how SPS intends to work with partners, stakeholders and the women themselves to ensure that ‘women’s time spent in custody will contribute to better outcomes for them, their families and their communities’.

Recognising that women and their needs are different to those of men, the SPS Strategy for Women is founded on the principles that all aspects of the care of women in custody should be designed for women (gender-specific) and take account of their likely experience of trauma and adversities (trauma-informed). Central to the approach are the health and wellbeing of the women, the quality of the relationships established within all the new custodial establishments, the skills and knowledge of staff, and the services, approaches and tools that will be available to help to address the individual needs and risks of the women. All aspects of the approach are therefore intended to be gender-specific and trauma-informed, recognising the effects of trauma on women’s lives.

The SPS Strategy for Women incorporates six core values:

1. Belief that women have the capacity to change.

2. Respect for individuals, their needs and rights.

3. Integrity, high ethical, moral and professional standards.

4. Openness to work with others and innovate to achieve best results.

5. Caring for people in distress, understanding that fear can result in behaviours that challenge.

6. Humility to be able to learn from others and from evidence.

Highlighting the commitment to women’s distinctive needs and circumstances, the SPS Strategy for Women and the new models of custody that it underpins are designed to be aligned with the United Nations (UN) standards for the treatment of women in prison. The UN Rules for the Treatment of Women Prisoners and Noncustodial Measures for Women Offenders (the ‘Bangkok Rules’) were adopted by the UN General Assembly in December 2010. They provide standards which give guidance to policy makers, legislators, sentencing authorities and prison staff to reduce the imprisonment of women, and to meet the specific needs of women in prison.

The SPS Strategy for Women was also designed to align with recommendations made by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT). This group visited Scotland in 2019 and 2020 and raised serious concerns about the wellbeing of women with mental ill health in HMP & YOI Cornton Vale (Council of Europe 2020). Specifically, these were in terms of the provision of appropriate accommodation, access to activities, hygiene and health care, gender-sensitive prison management, staffing and training, and contact with the outside world. In addition, the SPS Strategy was designed to align with ‘Equally Safe’, Scotland’s strategy to prevent and eradicate violence against women and girls (Scottish Government 2023).

The SPS Strategy for Women was also tasked to take account of the requirements of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) for the children of women in custody and, for female children aged 16 or 17 who are in SPS custody.^[2] As such the accommodation, approaches and services provided to women in custody are required to be designed to acknowledge and reflect women’s distinctive gendered needs and circumstances.

In its adoption of a trauma-informed approach embodying the principles of safety, trustworthiness, choice, collaboration and empowerment, the Strategy states that the design of the physical prison environment, staff approach and organisational policies and procedures need to take account of women’s likely experience of trauma and the potential for re-traumatisation. Further, that the harmful effects of custody are minimised and that women’s opportunities for growth and wellbeing are maximised.

Encapsulating all of this, the Strategy incorporates nine key gender-sensitive and trauma-informed principles. These focus on a recognition of:

• women’s distinctive needs and circumstances;
• women’s potential;
• the importance of positive relationships to support women’s journeys through the penal system;
• the effects of trauma and the potential for re-traumatisation;
• the development of women’s agency to encourage engagement and participation;
• the importance of an evidence-based approach to interventions known to promote desistance from crime and improve life chances;
• the wellbeing and rights of children with others in custody, and;
• a culture of continuous improvement based on evaluation, evidence and lived experience.

The principle and fundamentals of the approach are intended to be consistent across all of the SPS women's estate, although SPS acknowledges that there may be differences on how these are put into operation in different establishments.

Drawing on these concepts, the intention for the CCUs was that they embody an organisational shift to be more gender-specific and trauma-informed, in their physical design, their organisational ethos, and in the approach of staff and partners delivering services into them. The rest of this report discusses the evaluation of this Strategy as operationalised in the CCUs.

3. Research aims and objectives

The research that is the subject of this report is set against the important background of the fundamental re-visioning of the women’s custodial estate and the core characteristics of women in prison in Scotland.

The primary objective of the SPAROW study is to evaluate the early impact and emerging outcomes of the new model of CCUs and the application of the SPS Strategy in the context of the CCUs. The research therefore aimed to provide an in-depth and focused assessment of the operation of the CCUs, the experiences of the women who live in them, the staff who work within them and the partners that deliver services into the CCUs. It also aimed to include the participation of SPS staff working in another prison establishment in Scotland and imprisoned women in that establishment who were not currently living in a CCU in order to gain understanding of their experiences of gender-sensitive and trauma-informed practice.

A set of pre-determined research questions were identified in the specification documents, although these were amended and added to by the research team during the research tender process. These additional questions drew on the existing research literature on women in prison and from our own experiences of working with this group. The additional questions were agreed by the research commissioners. A copy of the research questions can be found in Appendix 1 with the additions highlighted in blue.

The specification document for this work required that it comprise two phases. Phase 1 was to be an Interim Review which explores and captures emerging evidence on how the CCU model is operating in practice, and on how far gender-specific and trauma-informed principles and approaches have been implemented. It also specified that a Phase 2 on Emerging Outcomes should build on the findings from Phase 1, continuing to capture evidence, but also to capture women’s experience of living in a CCU, and whether and how their journey in, through and out of a CCU, might improve outcomes for them. This second Phase also explored outcomes experienced by SPS staff and delivery partners. Both phases utilise interviews with women, prison officers and managers and SPS delivery partners and identify examples of success and good practice as well as challenges and barriers. In the event, Phase 2 involved two stages of fieldwork – as we describe below.

Research design

In designing this research, we have taken a critical feminist perspective, incorporating the principles of ethical care, reflexivity, inclusivity, flexibility, activism, and empowerment. In practice, this means that the ethics of conducting the research are carefully considered and that as researchers we examine our own values, judgements and beliefs throughout the research process. It also means that we endeavour to create an inclusive and accessible research culture which shifts the balance of power from the researcher to those with lived experience and enables participants to shape the research process. This also means that the research design remains open and flexible to unexpected events such that it is able to accommodate new empirical materials which may benefit the research. This leads to research which embodies a commitment to transformative change in women’s lives. These principles, together with the nine SPS gender-sensitive and trauma-informed principles outlined above inform the overall methodological approach.

We adopted a Theory of Change (ToC) approach which entailed, first, drawing on interviews with senior SPS personnel involved in developing the vision for the CCUs and the use of key policy documents to set out the intentions and aspirations behind the vision. Second, we employed the full suite of research data to determine the extent to which the ToC is being realised in practice and the key barriers to implementation as planned.

Given the sensitivity around the evaluation and the high levels of media interest, a set of FAQs were developed by the research team. Following approval by the research commissioners, these were posted on the project web-page and can be found on the Scottish Centre for Crime & Justice Research website.

Research phases and fieldwork

Before commencing the research fieldwork, ‘getting to know you’ visits were undertaken in HMP Bella and HMP Lilias in July 2023. This afforded opportunities to meet the women living there and some of the SPS officers working there, as well as learning more about the layout and operation of the CCUs including the custodial environments and regimes, and links with external partners. Posters and flyers outlining the research and what participation would entail were displayed throughout the duration of the study in the communal Hub areas of the CCUs.

Following the ‘getting to know you’ visits, further visits to both CCUs were undertaken to discuss and develop interview themes and questions with women and SPS staff. This is congruent with our commitment to the use of a feminist methodology which accentuates women's experiences and the use of participatory methods in the design of research materials. These visits were intended to engage women and staff in a process of thinking about and sharing their experiences, and an opportunity to shape the research materials.

Two visits were undertaken to HMP & YOI Stirling, the new national facility for women built on the site of the old HMP & YOI Cornton Vale. The visits helped in gaining an understanding of the relationship between HMP & YOI Stirling and the CCUs and the physical layout of the new prison. The visits were also helpful in gaining insights into the processes for identification and selection of women from across the women’s estate who are considered suitable for transfer or progression to one of the CCUs.

As stated above, the specification for this study required that the research be structured in two separate but inter-linked phases. Phase 1 captures emerging evidence on how the CCU model is operating in practice, and on how far gender-specific and trauma-informed principles and approaches have been implemented. Phase 2 captures women’s experience of living in a CCU, and outcomes experienced by SPS staff and delivery partners. In practice, each phase provided data that allowed a longitudinal assessment of implementation and experiences.

Whilst we were required to structure the research in two phases, the fieldwork was conducted at three different time points. The budget was insufficient to allow continuous fieldwork, so a decision was taken to segment it into three stages. This would allow us to immerse ourselves into the workings of the CCUs for three periods, rather than just two and to strengthen the longitudinal lens of the study. The first period of in-CCU fieldwork, which focused on Phase 1, commenced in August 2023 and ran until November 2023. The second period of fieldwork was delayed somewhat by the HMIPS inspections of the CCUs that were carried out in January/February 2024; it thus commenced in March 2024 and ran until July 2024. The third period of fieldwork ran from September 2024 to February 2025. As indicated above, the latter two periods of research fieldwork comprised Phase 2 of the study. However, it should be noted that, outside the research fieldwork periods, members of the research team attended events in each CCU, such as displays and exhibitions of art produced by the women, coffee fundraising mornings, a family day, and International Women’s Day celebrations.

Most fieldwork visits to the CCUs were undertaken by two researchers working together, although on occasion three researchers were present. Researchers remained in the CCUs for between one and five hours each day during fieldwork periods. Some of the women living in the CCUs attended work placements during the week and so were frequently away when we visited. To ensure their inclusion, we often visited the CCUs at the weekend or stayed later in the evening. In total, across both CCUs, members of the research team visited the CCUs on a total of 42 occasions.

Ethics

Ethical considerations in this study are significant and determined the reflexive research design and implementation of the research. In addition to ensuring the informed consent of all participants, assuring anonymity/confidentiality, and the minimisation/avoidance of harm, other ethical issues related to the conduct of research in a custodial environment. These include the respective positions of the research participants (women in CCUs, prison staff and delivery partners) and likely barriers to their participation, safety and sensitivity to risk, and the power dynamics that exist between researchers and the researched.

All participants were provided with specific information about the research team, the aims of the research, why it was being done, and who the research commissioners were, in order to facilitate informed consent. Materials were also provided in Easy Read format. Participant recruitment required careful and ongoing consideration to avoid potential perceived pressure on participants. Researchers held frank discussions with participants about the research and their involvement, both before and after data collection and throughout the duration of the study. There was also inclusion of space in interviews for participants to discuss any questions or concerns they may have had about participating in the study.

We were very careful to acknowledge and uphold the autonomy, privacy and dignity of participants throughout the research process, with attention paid to the likely toll taken by interview participation, including debriefing and ‘warm-down’. Formal ethical approval for the research was obtained from the University of Glasgow College of Social Sciences Ethical Review Committee.

With the assistance of the University of Glasgow’s Research Regulation & Compliance Manager, it was determined that an Integrated Research Application (IRAS) for NHS Research & Innovation/Research & Development management approval to include the views of the NHS workers in the CCUs was not required. This was because participants would not be recruited via the NHS.

Methods of data collection

A multi-method approach focused on capturing the experiences and views of women, SPS staff and delivery partners was adopted. Each method is described briefly below: (see Appendix 2 for a more detailed description of the research methods)

• 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.
• 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 but agreed with women and SPS staff in advance the kinds of features we might note.
• 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 senior strategic managers (SSM) were interviewed; they 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. These also allowed for a narrative approach to more fully elicit participants’ views and experiences and any issues that were especially important to them. A total of 33 women were interviewed. Throughout the report, women residents are referred to by the CCU in which they reside, an ‘R’ to denote that they are a resident, 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).

In addition, four larger group discussions were conducted 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.

• 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.
• 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).

  Three arts-based workshops took place in each CCU around 3-4 weeks apart in Phase 2. Women attended in groups ranging from six to eleven in size. Data and findings from Phase 1 were used to stimulate further dialogue on life in the CCUs, and to explore how things might have changed in the time between the fieldwork stages. Workshops involved an illustrator working directly with women to 'visually minute' what women were saying in words, metaphors and drawings that evoked their experiences, and then incorporated into large poster-style drawings. The worked-up versions were taken to the CCUs in a subsequent visit for the women to check accuracy and make any final changes (see Chapter 8 for the produced images).

• 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 might enable different relational, behavioural and cultural dynamics; successes/good practices and challenges/barriers to implementing gender-specific and trauma-informed principles/approaches to care and support for women in custody.
• A total of 40 SPS officers were interviewed. In the Report, they are referred to by the CCU in which they work (i.e. an L or B) an ‘S’ to denote they are staff, the fieldwork stage in which they were interviewed, and a number (e.g. LS2 002).

• 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.

  A total of six women were interviewed. They are referred to using the same protocol as women in the CCUs, that is, GR 001, GR 003.

• 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. A total of four SPS officers from the same prison as the six women interviewed; three were operational officers and one was a Hall officer. They are referred to as GS 001 to GS 004.
• 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 first online survey was distributed to SPS delivery partners in November 2023 and generated 23 responses. The second was distributed in July/August 2024 and yielded just five responses. The findings assisted in identifying themes and issues to explore further in the study.
• 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 was to explore the factors that either facilitated/enhanced or limited their ability to engage directly with women, and to seek views on issues of community reintegration during sentence and support for transition at the end of sentences.

  Four focus groups took place with, respectively, two, four, five and six participants, and five 1:1 semi structured interviews took place with delivery partners.

Data analysis

Fieldnotes were taken throughout all stages of fieldwork. For the most part, these were descriptive notes recording sights, smells, sounds and impressions of the physical features and layout of the CCUs, and the ways in which the spaces were occupied and used by women and officers. Fieldnotes also included notes of interactions between women, between women and officers, and between officers. These included direct quotes, descriptions of interactions, and the researcher’s impressions of what these meant. Fieldnotes were useful in understanding participant meaning and provided rich contextual detail which aided in the wider analysis; they assisted in the identification of themes and facilitated preliminary coding of interviews and focus groups.

All interviews and focus groups were audio-recorded, with permission from participants (with the exception of one interview where the woman did not wish to be recorded, and so notes were taken instead). Following transcription, interviews and focus groups were coded using NVivo 12. The coding framework included emergent themes emanating from the data (including from the fieldnotes) and codes identified through the literature on women’s imprisonment and on gender-specific and trauma-informed practice.

Coding was undertaken by members of the research team to ensure consistency, sense-check ideas and explore different interpretations of the data. Reflexive thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke 2019) was undertaken. Data analysis was iterative, with researchers reviewing each other’s results and further coding/refinement for consistency. We attempted to ensure reflective and thoughtful engagement with the data and the analytic process whilst also acknowledging our own interpretations of patterns of meaning across the data.

Research fatigue and research hesitancy

As experienced prison researchers we were expecting some hesitancy from women and officers around engaging with the research and hence our materials and approach were prepared with this likelihood in mind. We set up the ‘getting to know you’ visits to introduce ourselves, to explain the research and what participation would involve and also as a means of circulating materials about the research. Participation in the research was entirely voluntary (and this was emphasised throughout) and our research materials were carefully constructed to be clear, transparent and informative.

Whilst we managed to interview all of the women residents in HMP Bella during the 1st stage of the research, the take up in HMP Lilias was lower. It emerged that the main reason for this was that women said they had already participated in SPAROW research and answered similar questions to what we were proposing. They were referring here to the SPAROW baseline study undertaken by the Scottish Government. They had heard nothing back from participating in that research and believed that ‘nothing had changed’ as a result of their participation. Whilst we did try to explain the differences between the two studies and that we were an independent team, it is clear that the proximity of both studies reduced women’s participation.

It would have been helpful to have received a list of women who underwent the SPAROW baseline study which, we learnt, concluded in July 2023. We started fieldwork shortly after in August 2023; it is therefore unsurprising that both studies were conflated in women’s minds. This is unfortunate and it would have been much more helpful to the evaluation if the baseline study had been concluded earlier (we understood at the inception meeting in May 2023 that the survey was closing imminently). Over time, as new residents arrived into the CCUs, this hesitancy became less pronounced.

We also encountered hesitancy from some officers in both CCUs. Initially we planned to hold focus groups with officers but, due to shift patterns, staff rotas and frequent high levels of staff absence due to ill health, the conduct of focus groups was rendered not feasible. In conducting this research, we tried to ensure built-in flexibility to take account of structural and organisational constraints in an evolving context. Whilst semi-structured interviews were suggested by several officers and agreed with us as a means of getting around the focus group practicalities, when it came to interview recruitment we encountered some resistance.

It transpired that this was due primarily to a general wariness about anonymity and confidentiality. It may be that the interview method is considered off-putting and exposing; whereas focus groups offer ‘safety in numbers’ and generate discussion between participants such that individual voices are less conspicuous. CCU officers are highly conscious of the media and public and political interest in the CCUs, which had already been subject to adverse media attention in some Scottish media outlets. As one officer maintained, the ‘high stakes’ media attention is a key reason for deterring officers to participate. Other officers spoke of ‘tensions’ and ‘opposing views’ within SPS about the viability of the CCUs and were wary of participating for fear of playing into these debates. In essence, this concerned officer perceptions of differing views about the need for CCUs and the new approach to women’s custody that they embody.

We always made arrangements in advance with managers to visit the CCUs to undertake interviews with officers and the women. However, on several occasions we were denied access by front desk operational staff who informed us that officers were no longer available for the pre-arranged interviews. This may be partly explained by low staffing levels as a result of staff calling in sick, but it did feel as if we were being dismissed without checking with more senior colleagues. To help address the situation, a Unit Manager who had participated in an interview sent an email to all officers saying the interview was enjoyable, that confidentiality was assured and encouraging their participation. This did result in proactive contact by a small number wishing to participate. However, there is a limit to such encouragement as participation must be voluntary. Participant recruitment requires careful consideration. Whilst every attempt was made to ensure free and informed consent, avoiding potential pressure (real or imagined) on women and officers to take part in the study, or to appease potential gatekeepers, we encountered some degree of hesitancy that featured throughout the study.

It is important to note that, even when officers did agree to participate in an interview, some were reticent in their answers to some questions, particularly those around risk assessment processes and the support they receive from SPS. Officers were visibly more relaxed when interviewed in staff offices rather than the Hub or one of the small meeting rooms. We suspect that this was because of the surveillance cameras in the public areas. In future, it will be imperative to always interview officers in staff offices where there are no surveillance cameras and privacy can be assured.

Limitations of the research

The limitations of the study mainly revolved around organisational and operational access. In addition to the hesitancy described above, a key limitation related to the constraints that operate within a prison setting – with locked doors and restricted areas. There were continuing debates over whether we, as researchers, were required to undertake the SPS Personal Protection Training (PPT). We were initially informed by SPS that we did not need this. However, at various points during the study we were asked to present confirmation of PPT completion on arrival at the CCUs. This impacted upon our access to and movements within the CCUs, as different line managers held different views about whether or not we required it. During the final (third) fieldwork phase we were told that we had to complete the training, but it was several weeks before we could gain training places for members of the research team.

Whilst we always called ahead to the CCUs to agree dates for fieldwork visits, often the women were not informed of this, and so were unable or unprepared to participate in interviews. Once in the CCUs, we were often restricted to the Hub (the communal area within the CCUs) which was not conducive to conducting interviews as there were usually other women, visitors and/or activities taking place there. If there were no women in the Hub at the times of our visits, we were entirely reliant upon officers to ask the women whether they wished to participate in interviews or activities with us. This often did not give us the opportunity to explain exactly what it was we were doing each time we were there. We attempted to get round this by providing flyers for the women explaining particular elements or research-based activities. As these were passed on to the women, this occasionally led to misunderstandings, such as the women being asked by officers if they wanted to be interviewed, when we were actually conducting arts-based workshops.

Sometimes we were allowed to sit in the Hub without supervision from officers and talk to any of the women who came in or could observe activities taking place. However, on a couple of occasions, due to the PPT issue, an officer had to remain whilst we spoke with women. This had an inhibiting effect. Where PPT was not raised as an issue, we were permitted to interview women one-to-one in an unoccupied side room, sometimes with an officer in the corridor. Women were always aware that they were under surveillance via CCTV cameras wherever they were in the CCU, and so this also tended to have an inhibiting effect.

Significant delays were experienced regarding which other prison establishments SPS would allow us to access to conduct interviews with SPS staff and women not working/residing in CCUs. Eventually we were given access to one closed establishment. The delays in being given clarity and access limited the number of interviews we were able to conduct, but nonetheless this was a valuable part of the research.

In addition to the delays outlined above, we were, for some considerable time, unable to obtain relevant data concerning women’s journeys in, through and out of the CCU for HMP Bella residents from SPS that was comparable to that received for HMP Lilias. Although we finally received this data in June 2025, it differs somewhat to that obtained from HMP Lilias and contains less detail. As such, we are unable to offer a detailed comparative analysis of women’s journeys in the two CCUs. Following the completion of fieldwork, we received data from Scottish Government Justice Analytical Services which provided a partial picture of the journeys of the women in HMP Bella.

There were two additional areas of exploration that may have provided useful insight and information into the women’s lives and the impact of the CCUs, namely following the women up in the community, and conducting research with their families. However, we believe both areas to be very sensitive, and to present significant ethical concerns. With women who have been released, seeking to conduct further research with them once back in the community presents a risk of continuing surveillance and disruption to their lives. Not all women have family visits, and for those who do not, this is experienced as difficult. We also know from other research that this can be a source of sadness and tension (e.g. Umeh 2025). Recruiting participants from those families who do visit will generate limited information about the role of the CCUs in enhancing family relations. Recruiting participants from families who do not visit presents a range of practical and ethical problems, even if women do give their permission to involve their families.