Sentencing and Penal Policy Commission - call for evidence: analysis of responses

5. Release from custody

Question 3 - In your view, what are the priority issues affecting release from prison custody? In Scotland, what needs to change and why?

Introduction

Over eight in ten respondents left a comment at Q3. Just under half of these respondents were individuals, with some providing a coordinated response (see box below). The most prevalent themes were addressing barriers to release, starting to prepare for release in prison, planning issues immediately prior to release, and the need for improved victim safety and support (see Chapter 2: Overarching themes). Several respondents recommended more awareness raising, and a few suggested the need for more research or data collection; these issues are also covered in Chapter 2: Overarching themes.

Due to the range of comments left by many respondents on support needed by those involved in the criminal justice system to facilitate integration in the community upon release, this chapter will firstly address those views, followed by other themes. As a result, themes are not presented in prevalence order, unlike the rest of the report (see the paragraph above for the main themes in prevalence order).

Coordinated responses

As noted in the report introduction, 19 individuals responded to Q3 with near identical responses. These responses typically outlined the respondent's personal experience of knowing someone currently serving a long-term standard determinate prison sentence in Scotland, then outlined using identical wording on the key issues they identified and suggestions for changes.

These responses called for Scotland to implement measures similar to those recommended for England and Wales in the Independent Sentencing Review: Final report and proposals for reform report published in May 2025. It was felt that these measures could enhance prisoner progression, release policies, and family reintegration, ultimately benefiting communities and reducing reoffending behaviour.

Respondents outlined three issues, before detailing why these pose a problem and suggesting recommendations. These were:

1) That Scotland does not currently have an appropriate and adequate automatic release provision for long-term prisoners, i.e. prisoners sentenced to more than 4 years in prison.

2) Their view that the progression system for long-term prisoners is broken.

3) The impact of imprisonment on families and children is not being considered as part of decisions related to prisoner progression and parole.

Support needed by those involved in the system

This chapter section focuses on themes relating to support perceived as needed by people involved in the criminal justice system to facilitate reintegration into society after completing a custodial sentence. Where feasible, it is structured in terms of the pathway that people experience, for instance, the need to start planning for release early, notably at the start of a custodial sentence, then issues relating to the immediate pre- and post-release stage, and then as people are released into the community. However, it should be noted that there is considerable overlap between support needed in prison and community-based support; for instance, throughcare is a concept that considers both.

Start to prepare for release in prison

Many respondents felt that preparation for release should begin in prison, as early as possible. Key concerns raised were that conditions in prisons were not currently considered conducive to pre-release planning and support, with purposeful activity opportunities for people often lacking, especially for those on remand.

Identified issues within prisons included:

• The lack of, and challenges of providing, mental health support in prisons, such as the environment not being suitable to delivering therapy. Survey data from 12 closed conditions prisons collected by HMIPS between 2022-2025 found 70% of people in prison reported it difficult to access mental health support.
• People being confined to their cells for longer periods post-pandemic, with the lack of purposeful activity becoming normalised, as noted in HMIPS annual reports. Overcrowding and staff shortages were noted as contributing to this.
• Many elements of the prison environment being unsuited for those with neurodivergence and learning disabilities, as found in an independent review of neurodiversity in the criminal justice system in England and Wales. Issues identified in the review as causing distress included busy and noisy wings, cell sharing and changes in the daily routine.
• Just over one in ten people starting treatment for substance use, despite around 38% of people reporting illicit substance use during their imprisonment, according to the 2019 prisoner survey of the Scottish Prison Service.
• One respondent felt the employment aspirations of people on long-term sentences were not reflective of conditions they may have placed on them upon leaving prison.

Suggestions for improvement included:

• Increasing training and education opportunities for people in prison, such as prison-based apprenticeships and more modernised work opportunities. It was felt that the focus of this should be on re-skilling people.
• Improving the flow of information between community services, prisons and courts to inform immediate care plans for those given a custodial sentence or upon release, such as improving the interface between information systems and compliance with data protection legislation.
• Ensuring consistency of pre-release support across Scotland, and starting preparation as early as possible, such as from the start of a prison sentence. For instance, home release could occur at an earlier stage.
• Using open estates to teach people practical skills (see ‘Provide skills development’ theme below).
• Broadening home leave and day release opportunities for those serving sentences in closed prisons.
• Increasing opportunities for people in prison considered low to medium risk to serve part of their sentence in community-based settings.
• Evidence from one Scottish prison that incentives like improved wages or earlier access to release had helped increase engagement by people in prison. Alternatively, drug free wings could be used for those keen to address their substance use and further aid progression.

“HMIPS has made clear in its annual reports that it believes the Scottish Prison Service has been slow to recover from the COVID pandemic and secure full access for prisoners to education and employment opportunities. Work parties have repeatedly been closed to cover staffing shortfalls in residential areas. Even when prisons have managed to secure full access to the opportunities for purposeful activity, these are often insufficient for whole population.” - His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons Scotland (HMIPS)

“Offering support that starts at the prison and continues in a similar form after release is even more beneficial. Individuals that have received counselling for past trauma at HMP Grampian for example are pleased to have that service stretch beyond liberation.” - CFINE

“Transition planning should occur earlier in the sentence, with more integrative working between services. Prison-based rehabilitation programmes are most effective when an individual assessment has been conducted to understand a person’s experiences and the situation in which they have found themselves.” - The British Psychological Society (BPS)

Address barriers to release from custody

The need to address barriers to release from custody was raised by many respondents. These views centred around issues with a requirement to undertake rehabilitation programmes as a condition of release. Some respondents raised these views as part of the coordinated response described in Chapter 1. A perceived lack of support was also felt to act as a barrier to release from custody. Points raised by respondents on this theme included:

• Housing insecurity can affect an individual’s ability to prepare for and move towards release, with inconsistent implementation of SHORE (Sustainable Housing on Release for Everyone) that could work to address this (see ‘Address housing needs’ below).
• That a lack of flexibility or timely reintegration support, particularly for those with complex needs, has been identified as a barrier to release for many years.
• Lack of funding for community-based supports and a lack of services more generally impact release.

Concerns regarding the Order for Lifelong Restriction (OLR) custodial sentence, and their impact on release for people subject to them, were raised by a few respondents. Issues included that:

• People on OLRs could be detained significantly longer than their original punishment date.
• Indeterminate release dates caused psychological harm, as people tend not to be released once the original punishment tariff has been served.
• OLRs drive up costs for prisons.
• People in prison for minor offences were being placed on OLRs, despite a policy intent that such sentences were created to protect the public from those committing the most serious crimes.
• The longer the time spent in jail, the harder it is to reintegrate into society upon release, and this could increase risk, rather than reduce it.

It was suggested that releasing people subject to OLR would free up prison space and that the order should be abolished. More specifically, one individual suggested using a panel of assessors to make a group decision, rather than one, for those on an Order for Lifelong Restriction, to ensure assessors are not affected by their work or to overcome engagement issues. It was highlighted in the appeal court there are three judges, but only one OLR assessor. Only using one assessor was felt to serve as a barrier to release in such cases.

“Since OLR prisoners are rarely ever released (contrary to the expectations when the sentence was created that time spent in the community was an integral part of the sentence) and their numbers keep growing, how is the Scottish Government planning to justify this use of taxpayer's money? By 2029, it is predicted there will be 330 OLR prisoners and many will remain in prison for many years over their tariff. The bill to the Scottish taxpayer for one prisoner per year is over £47,000. This means the annual bill for just OLR prisoners in 2029 will be £15,510,000.” - NOLR

“Release of long-term prisoners also requires to take a long-term view of the effects of keeping offenders in prisoner for long-term periods. This is particularly clear in OLR prisoners.” - Edinburgh Bar Association

“The OLR is an absolute disgrace to our justice system. Everyone should be given a second chance, but those sentenced with an OLR face unnecessary and inhumane treatment, it parallels the Imprisonment for Public Protection [sentence] in England and Wales that was thankfully abolished." - Individual

Consider how people progress through the system

The issue of progression^[10] of people through the criminal justice system was raised by many respondents, with barriers experienced in enabling progression to release from prisons or to open estates. The main area identified was that progression is generally linked to a requirement to attend rehabilitation programmes as the way to demonstrate reduced risk. Key factors acting as a barrier to release in terms of accessing these programmes included:

• The lack of availability of relevant programmes; for instance, a membership / forum / professional organisation cited a lack of interventions to address domestic abuse for those in custody.
• Progression being impacted by an inability to get appointments with psychologists, delays in undertaking initial Generic Risk Assessments, or Integrated Case Management (ICM) meetings being delayed or cancelled.
• Programmes being so over-subscribed that participation is unlikely before a person’s parole hearing.
• That failure to complete a programme is often given greater weight in decisions around progression than other indicators of positive progress, such as the completion of educational changes or relational support.
• People being refused for programmes because they maintain their innocence or because relevant programmes are not offered in their prison.
• Overcrowding and prison staff shortages result in limited staff time to facilitate programme attendance or understand progression criteria.
• People being released at their Earliest Date of Liberation, having not completed any programmes, resulting in offending behaviours not being addressed.
• Lack of prison transport to prisons that offer relevant programmes.

Calls were made to improve support and progression opportunities, with increased resourcing in these areas being the main suggestion. Other suggestions included:

• Taking a broader view of what constitutes progress with more individualised testing options to demonstrate risk reduction, so progress is not solely dependent on completing a programme.
• Internal processes for progression requiring improvement, such as communication between establishments or requests for further information leading to Risk Management Team meetings being delayed.
• Maximise home leave and day release opportunities and recognise the benefits of home leave appointments with social work and support staff during testing.
• Some individual respondents used identical wording to endorse using ‘earned progression’ as is being proposed in England and Wales.
• To provide work opportunities in the area where people are from, instead of far from their community, to allow them to maintain ties and aid reintegration.
• Partners across national and local government and the wider criminal justice system should maximise opportunities to remove barriers to reintegration, recognising these were often systemic and were beyond the ability of community justice social work services alone to address, for instance the need to address housing needs, health needs and financial hardship.
• Adopting an approach that operates in many European countries, e.g. Germany, where the key priority is social reintegration as soon as a custodial sentence begins.
• Developing transparent progression pathways.
• Using evidence-based, neutral progression programmes that are not a requirement for parole, to include people who maintain their innocence.
• Provide families with support, both in their role supporting people released from prison, and for themselves.
• Focus efforts on long-term prisoners and the parole system.

Three respondents cited the thematic review by His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons for Scotland on prisoner progression in Scottish prisons, which found the system was not operating as it should, and two welcomed the Scottish Prison Service’s current efforts to improve progression, such as an analysis of the availability and suitability of programme activity and a ‘Prison to Rehab’ protocol to help people with problematic alcohol or drug use move seamlessly into residential rehabilitation on release from custody.

“Current waiting lists for programmes present a barrier to liberation which is entirely outwith of the convicted person’s control such that it appears unjust to punish them for it. Where interventions and programmes need to be completed there should be options to do this combined with day release. It is equally important for progression that home leave and day release be available from the closed estate, not just the top end and open estate.” - The Scottish Association of Social Work (SASW)

“In the case of prisoners maintaining their innocence, particularly men accused of rape, neutral progression programmes which are evidence-based in terms of efficacy, should be available, although it should be made clear that attending a course is not a requirement for parole and certainly should not become so. Scotland needs to give offenders a chance to prove they have changed in prison and are able to live a life without crime.” - Individual

“We have advocated for people in prison and their families at SPARC for several years. By far, the highest proportion of our advocacy work relates to people trying to navigate the progression system through access to programmes, clarity over parole timelines, or support through recall.” – Scottish Prisoner Advocacy and Research Collective (SPARC)

The need to ensure timely support, both to allow for progression, and upon release, was highlighted by some respondents. In this theme, delays noted as causing most issues included access to rehabilitation programmes, access to mental health support, assessments and access to open prisons.

“Release from custody in Scotland is often delayed, not because of ongoing risk or new offending, but due to systemic failures: inaccessible programmes, rigid parole criteria, and institutional bottlenecks in progression. These delays contribute directly to over-tariff detention, chronic institutionalisation, and a significant risk of mortality post-release.” - Scottish Prisoner Advocacy and Research Collective (SPARC)

“It’s not untypical for people to endure waiting lists for weeks to access basic skills courses and libraries. A lack of resources and lengthy delays in accessing prisoner programmes were highlighted in the case BS v Scottish Ministers [2024]. The court held that the delay in providing access to the Self-Change Programme breached Article 5 (1) of the ECHR.” - Scottish Centre for Crime and Justice Research (SCCJR)

Release planning prior to release from custody

Many respondents advocated for improved release planning just before leaving prison. Similarly, the need for effective throughcare was highlighted as was the need to build trusting relationships with people.

Issues related to planning immediately prior to release included:

• Services being ‘surprised’ that a person is being released, leading to a reactive response due to an absence of advance planning. A consequence is that the person being released must handle issues such as housing, benefits and medication immediately on release. One also noted such ‘surprise’ applied within establishments, for instance, gate staff being unaware that someone is leaving.
• That the point of release is one of the most vulnerable transitions in the criminal justice system.
• That release direct from court continues to pose challenges for pre-release planning, specifically concerning housing (see below).
• Inconsistencies in pre-release planning and coordinated support across the country.
• That preparation of release for some prisoners, such as those in prison long term or with significant health and social care needs, can be more complex and will often require supports such as wraparound residential support services.

“The preparation for release for some long-term prisoners can be more complex and will often involve the need for wraparound residential support services. Local government budget pressures mean that vital services such as the Dick Stewart Project in Glasgow, the Dundee Survival Group in Dundee and Crane Services in Edinburgh are not available in every local authority.” - Howard League Scotland

“Release plans are often rushed, fragmented, or poorly tailored to individual needs, especially for those with complex backgrounds (e.g. trauma, neurodivergence, addiction).” – Individual

“It often seems that establishments are ‘surprised’ by prisoners getting released. It comes across as a lack of communication between the halls and the gate.” - Scottish Recovery Consortium

Respondents provided views on emergency early release schemes. Issues relating to emergency early releases included that these had created safety concerns among the public or a perception this was a ‘soft touch’ practice, that insufficient risk assessment or support planning had taken place prior to release, that victims had not been informed, that it could be fuelling the likelihood of custodial sentences, and that it brought sentencing into disrepute. However, other positive views on early release were given, such as that it demonstrated with sufficient coordination and leadership, improvements were achievable and impactful and that evidence indicated a clear reduction in reoffending rates.

“Victim Support Scotland has been clear in its opposition to the Prisoners (Early Release) (Scotland) Act 2025 and the small number of victims contacted regarding the release of their perpetrator. The concerns with this scheme have been that there has been insufficient risk assessment of individuals being released and a failure to proactively contact and prepare victims for the release of the perpetrator in their case. This has been shown to have placed victims and the wider public at heightened risk.” - Victim Support Scotland

“In recent months we have seen prisoners being released even earlier. This is to relieve the unsustainable pressures on prisons, and is far from being the first time governments have subverted court sentences as an expedient. We should be in no doubt that such emergency use of early release brings the whole purpose of supervised conditional release (and sentencing more generally) into disrepute.” – Individual

Other comments addressed the timing of release, or clarity as to when release would occur. It was noted that release close to the weekend, such as on Fridays, or the day before public holidays, made it difficult to access support adequately, particularly if individuals had to present as homeless or had no access to funds. Despite the Bail and Release from Custody (Scotland) Act 2023 having removed Friday liberations, it was highlighted that these were still happening for some people. Additionally, views were given that where the release date was unclear or changed, this could impact negatively on mental health or impact pre-release planning arrangements.

Suggested improvements for these issues included:

• Not allowing releases on a Friday.
• Action to offer some clarity and consistency in release dates to allow for planning, preparation and relationship building.
• Where release dates are changed, the impact of this change, and the risk it poses, should be acknowledged and action taken to minimise harm.

“We note that the Bail and Release from Custody (Scotland) Act [2023] removed Friday liberations, but this only applies to those individuals sentenced, we would welcome clarity around those individuals on remand, particularly given the significance of the population size in Scotland.” - Inverclyde Community Justice Partnership

“The point of release is one of the most vulnerable transitions in the justice system. However, consistent pre-release planning and coordinated support are not currently standard practice. Recent early release processes illustrated that with sufficient coordination and leadership, improvements are achievable and impactful.” - Sacro

Many respondents specifically mentioned the need for effective throughcare support. Throughcare support involves planning but also the provision of support to meet specific needs. A few respondents welcomed the introduction of the new national throughcare service for those on short-term sentences or remand – called ‘Upside’ – expressing the view that this was a positive development and could help improve consistency across Scotland. However, issues with ‘Upside’ were raised, including that:

• It was too early to determine its effectiveness.
• Resourcing for the service was insufficient.
• The loss of throughcare support officers was impacting outcomes.
• Referrals to relevant community-based organisations have reduced since its introduction.
• It will not necessarily, on its own, improve system fragmentation.

Ways the throughcare service could be improved were suggested, including forging strong links with services in each local authority, establishing clear and regular communication with justice services in each area, ensuring direct outreach contact with people in custody and ensuring multi-agency case management structures are in place. Other singular suggestions included:

• Expanding the remit of voluntary throughcare to ensure a shift from fragmented, reactive models to a coordinated, preventative, rights-based and person-centred approach.
• Introducing continuity of care models where services inside prison link directly with those in the community.
• Aligning data systems to follow the pathways people take through the criminal justice system.
• Incentivising court attendance, such as through time taken off sentences. This could help reduce the number of Throughcare Assessment for Release on Licence reports where a person will not come for interview in custody.

“The third sector has a vital role to play here, as recognised by the introduction on 1 April 2025 of ‘Upside’, the new Throughcare Service national initiative for short-term and remand prisoners. HLS notes that in replacing and extending the previously available ‘New Routes’ and ‘Shine’ throughcare and mentoring services, direct outreach contact with prisoners is crucial. Research has shown that without it, understanding and awareness of what can be offered can be very limited. We are heartened to hear that the new Throughcare Service is prioritising this direct contact through its own prison throughcare workers taking on the role previously provided very successfully by SPS’s Throughcare Support Officers.” - Howard League Scotland

Some respondents noted the need to build trusting relationships between people involved in the criminal justice system and professionals so that that support can be offered through release. This was felt to help people being released stay ‘on track’ and adjust during this period, overcome setbacks, and provide reassurance. This was felt lacking for many people who could benefit from such an approach. Insufficient capacity of prison-based social work to develop meaningful and constructive relationships with people in prison was highlighted.

Evidence from the ‘Prison-based social work: thematic review’ indicated such relationships can have a positive impact on the welfare, motivation and involvement of people in key processes during their time in custody. Throughcare officers, prison officers, peer mentors, or social workers were felt able to offer such support should more time or resources be provided to allow this to happen. Considering ways the role of supervising parole officers could be adapted to provide this support was suggested by one respondent.

“The Board is aware that local authority capacity to carry out effective supervision is stretched. We believe this is partly a resource issue but would welcome a wider look at alternative models for supervision, including a national rather than devolved service, with the option for more intensive and active 24/7 supervision where required.” - Parole Board for Scotland

“Upon release, the availability of direct support from staff to access the community and relevant social work and court attendance provided the security for individuals to manage the transfer from custody. The continued assistance to embed these core skills, managing money & budgeting, food shopping & healthy meal preparation, provided the route to managing life in the community and reductions in justice involvement for these young people. These are not overly complex solutions, and practical relationship-based support should form part of future release planning.” - Braveheart Industries

Support for families

The need to improve involvement and support for victims of crime was identified by many. This issue is covered in Chapter 2 as it was an overarching theme. However, at Q3, additional issues regarding how families of people involved in the criminal justice system are considered were also raised, including by some individuals who provided identical comments. This issue is addressed below, as families were also felt to be victims of crime.

Issues raised by respondents included:

• That families often bear responsibilities for supporting people upon release, with insufficient support or consideration of the needs of family members.
• Negative impacts to family health and wellbeing and risks to family ties.
• Impacts on children affected by parental imprisonment such as a lack of consistency in child centred visits across prisons or poor quality of support for these children, children of people in prison enduring an Adverse Childhood Experience and children in Scotland living apart from a parent in prison up to twice as long as other parts of the UK.
• Children’s views not being routinely included in decision making.
• Costs for families associated with travelling to visit someone in prison or supporting people on release, as well as stigma and isolation.

Suggestions for improvement included:

• Scottish Prison Service doing more to facilitate family contact, e.g. asking each person being received into prison to sign a data protection mandate to allow SPS to discuss specified matters with specified members of the person’s family.
• Providing responsive, accessible and knowledgeable support to families and children to minimise unintended but significant impacts that can occur in the delivery of justice services.
• Using Child Rights and Wellbeing Impact Assessments at every stage of the justice system, including during sentencing, imprisonment, progression and release.
• Considering the human rights of families, including rights to privacy, family life, and safety. For instance, tighten media restrictions to protect children’s right to privacy and ensure rights are upheld when parents return to the community.
• Valuing the importance of family, such as through providing days when children can spend a good part of the day with their parent to allow quality time together.

“The Integrated Case Management process [ICM], in conjunction with the SPS family policy, offers unique opportunities to engage families in supporting people during their sentence and preparing for release. However, to be effective, the policies and processes require to be fully and consistently implemented across the prison estate.” - Care Inspectorate

“The impact on families is monumental. Families report a lack of information sharing, direct impact of stigma, danger due to vigilantism, adverse childhood experiences, financial pressures. The trauma that the system itself causes to families is significant.” - Next Chapter Scotland

Address physical and mental health needs

Many respondents at Q3 highlighted the need to address the mental and physical health needs of people being released from custody, in part to counter the traumatic and disruptive impact of custodial sentences. Addressing mental health was also raised in other questions, as noted elsewhere in this report. This theme included some individuals who used identical wording to highlight the impact on their family’s mental health due to uncertainty surrounding release dates and obstacles to the progress of a family member.

Respondents highlighted a recent study that considered healthcare contacts among people released from prison, comparing these with a general population sample. It found that in the four years post-release, 1 in 4 people released will need an ambulance, and 1 in 5 will need accident and emergency care for their mental health or substance use; these are significantly higher rates than for those who had not been in prison. One of the researchers, who responded to this call for evidence, concluded:

“These results suggest that imprisonment and release may be detrimental to mental health, and exacerbate substance use related harms. Whilst there is evidence of higher rates of contact with primary and secondary care, many people who need it either are not making contact or the contact they are making does not result in adequate mental health and substance use support – consequently requiring emergency intervention.” - Individual

Issues relating to health care included:

• The need for wraparound, multi-agency solutions to address health issues.
• That services should adopt trauma-informed approaches, with SHORE (Sustainable Housing on Release for Everyone) (see ‘Address housing needs’) in particular, highlighted as doing so.
• The need for an address at which to register for GP practices or to send information to, which was not always known at the point of release.
• The need to avoid delays or disruption in accessing mental health or prescribing services was highlighted by the Care Inspectorate, noting these were referred to in their review reports.
• That victims may need access to a range of supports, including mental health support.

“In cases of poor mental health for example, people leaving prison armed with a week’s supply of medication might be thought to have a fighting chance, but without an address to connect to a GP practice or community team, or somewhere to pass information on to, the risks of destabilisation (and potential reoffending) are too great for some.” - Howard League Scotland

Few suggestions were made for improvements in this area, though respondents highlighted access to gym memberships, counselling and systematic liaison between prison and community-based services to ensure seamless transition in accessing mental health and/or prescribing services.

Address substance use

Similar to the need to address mental health issues, respondents across questions raised the impact of substance use on people’s outcomes. Some respondents specifically highlighted the need to address drug or alcohol use in response to Q3.

The use of alcohol or drugs was highlighted as contributing to crime and reasons for custodial sentences, as well as poor conditions in prison and reducing chances for positive life outcomes. Prison conditions were seen to exacerbate substance use, such as due to boredom or as a coping mechanism for mental health issues.

Suggestions for improvement included:

• Debating the merit of remanding straight to residential rehabilitation for those with entrenched dependency and, on completion, returning to court for review with a view to being placed on a structured deferred sentence.
• Using drug-free wings in prisons for people who wish to advance their recovery journey. These could operate more like residential rehabilitation.
• Providing effective and discrete abstinence monitoring programmes. Specific examples were provided. Closer liaison between prison and alcohol or substance use agencies, such as those a person had been in contact with at the point of entry to custody.
• Knowing where a person would reside upon release so they can be linked into local treatment and support services.

“We also consider that there is merit in a national conversation to end people who have an entrenched dependency on substances and who would receive a custodial sentence being remanded straight to Residential Rehabilitation and on completion returning to court for review with a view to then being placed on structured deferred sentence. Generally, there needs to be drug-free estates that people can be transferred to who wish to advance their recovery journey. Could these operate more like residential rehabilitation?” - South Lanarkshire Council

“Addiction is often at the heart of why someone ultimately returns to custody. Strengthening connections to recovery services before release would likely reduce recidivism. Mandated engagement with such services as part of an individual's release could make a significant difference to someone's prospects. Anecdotally, participants that have gone into residential rehab directly from custody have made successful starts to their time back in Aberdeen.” - CFINE

Provide skills development support

The need to provide people in prison, as well as upon release, with support to gain practical skills were noted by several respondents to facilitate reintegration into the community. This could help improve people's life chances, such as developing structure and routines, improving self-efficacy, confidence, and mental health, and developing positive social networks. It was also felt to be useful in bridging the transition from a highly structured prison environment to life in the community, which had no imposed routine. Providing such opportunities would improve access to purposeful activity while serving custodial sentences, which were felt to be currently lacking, outmoded or unhelpful.

Suggested skill or development opportunities that people in the criminal justice system might require to facilitate independent living included digital skills, employment skills, cookery, exercise, education, coping skills, and wellbeing and money management.

“Our own work in partnership with the 'One Glasgow' partnership, preparing and facilitating release for young people, has provided some insight. This collaboration allowed for pre-release development work on a regular basis to both build strong relationships and assess the real practical skills of those involved. A lack of core skills and understanding of the judicial processes was evident. Core skills, including the most basic money skills, bank accounts, self-support and feeding were not common and work to build these while still in custody was undertaken.” - Braveheart Industries

“Home visits are important to keep the prisoner informed of wider developments in society. It is then for SPS to ensure that prisoners are fully conversant with such changes and able to participate in society fully. This could mean, for instance, prisoners knowing how to use a card or a mobile phone, rather than cash, to pay for goods and services; knowing how to use computers and how to make full use of technology, such as AI. It is difficult enough for former prisoners to gain employment, but to do so without current and relevant skills makes the task all the more difficult.” - Individual

Maximise income and enable access to information

The need to ensure people being released from custody have access to sufficient financial income was raised by several respondents at Q3. Some individuals provided identical comments at this question, highlighting the negative impact on family finances when a family member is released. Issues raised by respondents included:

• Financial pressure caused by reduced access to benefits, such as no longer being eligible for a universal credit advance due to frequent claims.
• The time between applying for benefits and receiving them. Research by Families Outside that found families were spending £300 a month on average, or half the family income after tax and rent, to cover gaps while waiting for benefit claims. Another respondent highlighted this gap could lead to debt.
• Weight changes while in prison can result in new clothes being needed upon release, but that applications for the Scottish Welfare Fund Community Care Grant are only being awarded to those in greatest need, as the fund is local authority administered and discretionary.
• The impact of cost-of-living increases.
• Challenges finding employment post-release, for instance, the need to disclose all offences when applying for jobs, even though people may have changed significantly since offending, was perceived as a barrier to employment.
• The ‘exhausting’ experience of applying for benefits and the stress involved.
• The need for information and advice, such as on welfare benefits, legal proceedings, prisoner rights and housing.

A few highlighted practice initiatives that could help in this area. These included providing welfare benefits or debt advice and support, starting benefit claims pre-release, ensuring welfare payments are high enough to support community reintegration and delivering employment support, such as offered through Release Scotland.

“Within ‘benefits’, 42% of enquiries were about Universal Credit and 37% referred to applications to the Scottish Welfare Fund, Crisis and Community Care Grants, which are mostly made to support people leaving prison. ‘Housing’ includes housing debt and rent arrears, and 66% of enquiries under finance and charitable were about banking issues. In total, the advisors saw 745 prisoners but dealt with 5196 issues, as on average each client is given assistance on 7 issues.” - Parkhead Citizens Advice Bureau

“The key recommendations are that release payments and welfare benefits need to be at a level sufficient to allow prisoners to re-establish themselves in the community without incurring substantial levels of debt that can only prompt further offences.” – Parkhead Citizens Advice Bureau

“Community justice social work staff described claiming of state benefits such as Universal Credit as ‘an exhausting experience’ for people. ‘The process caused stress, anxiety and delays in receiving money [which] acted as a significantly demotivating factor’. We suggested there were opportunities to build upon existing best practice examples to ensure ease of access to funds on the day of release.” - Care Inspectorate

Address housing needs

The need to address the housing needs of people being released was raised across call for evidence questions, but notably by several respondents at Q3.

Housing insecurity and a lack of housing options were raised as issues for people released from custody, such as difficulties for authorities placing people with no fixed abode in bed and breakfast accommodation or the loss of housing due to being incarcerated. Other issues respondents felt were relevant included:

• Only being able to make homelessness applications upon release in certain cases. For instance, it was noted one local authority only accepts applications when the person actually resides in the area (which can differ from the area where they were incarcerated).
• That clear protocols for ensuring a person’s housing needs are met before release are not preventing people from becoming homeless.
• Post-release housing plans being ‘precarious at best’.
• Long-term secure accommodation being unattainable for most people.
• Living in substandard housing with fuel poverty does not help promote positive change or can contribute to the likelihood of reoffending.
• That unplanned releases can impact housing plans.
• Licensing conditions were not fully considered when offering housing upon release, for instance, being placed in residences where other residents are using substances or living chaotic lives.
• Concerns regarding children leaving secure care in respect of housing access and experiences of homelessness.

A few respondents commented on the Scottish Prison Service SHORE (Sustainable Housing on Release for Everyone) standards. These were welcomed as enabling a consistent, person-centred and trauma-informed approach to meeting housing needs, a clearer structure for multi-agency working, a nationally agreed framework to support implementation, and proposed action plans to mitigate implementation gaps and strengthen accountability. However, respondents felt implementation of these standards remained inconsistent. Perceived barriers to implementation included variation between prisons, local housing shortages, unclear lines of accountability and the absence of mechanisms to ensure compliance with the standards.

Suggested improvements to meet housing needs included:

• Offering halfway houses, with initial intensive support coupled with progress to permanent housing and employment plans.
• Approaches such as those used in Perth and Kinross Council, where a homelessness prevention team works to protect and maintain people’s tenancies when they receive a short-term prison sentence.
• To make referrals to housing support services or complete a homelessness assessment before release to ensure lack of housing is not used as a reason to prevent release from prison.
• Improve the quality of temporary accommodation, ensuring it is clean and safe.
• To routinely record and consider housing needs in court decision-making.
• To provide additional housing support to those released directly from court, such as having housing advisors or housing advice connected with the court, like Citizens’ Advice in-court advisors.

“A woman we were working with was released from prison at 8pm on the Thursday before the Easter weekend. She had been doing well while in prison and engaging with us, making good progress on her goals. We were expecting and planning for her release in May, had a permanent tenancy lined up for her, but this wasn’t ready for her unexpected release. Instead, she went back to her family, ended up sofa surfing and was drawn back into the issues she had worked so hard to move away from, and she is now back in prison…” - Turning Point Scotland

“I had to put in a homelessness application, and this could only be done once I had been released. This meant I had to travel 100 miles as soon as I left prison for an appointment, which was difficult and required three trains and a bus. On the day I left prison, I had no idea where I would be sleeping that night. Your whole life is in a suitcase that you have to lug around with you.” - Next Chapter Scotland

Improve specialist community-based support

Specific types of support needed in the community, such as health and housing, are addressed within the specific themes above. In addition, respondents expressed a view that there is a lack of specialist community support, such as for people with convictions for a sexual offence. One respondent highlighted that many third sector organisations refuse to work with such people, and those that do often struggle to support the individual to overcome stigma-related barriers.

Other themes

This section addresses other themes that were raised in Q3 not directly related to support and preparation for release. These themes were the need to improve parole decision-making, better use of technological solutions, staffing issues and comments on those who maintain their innocence.

Parole decision-making

Many respondents, including some individuals who provided identical statements, commented on the need to improve parole decision-making or court decision-making more broadly. This latter issue is addressed in Chapter 4: Bail and remand, with points raised there also relevant here. Issues raised by respondents about parole decisions included:

• Issues around risk, such as risk assessments not always being required by the Parole Board for Scotland or an expectation of the complete elimination of risk before parole is granted.
• Lack of awareness of why people are being refused parole.
• Psychologists' opinions not being routinely included in parole decision-making.
• Variable levels of professional courtesy and respect for social work by the Parole Board for Scotland, as evidenced through analysis from the Social Work Scotland throughcare sub-committee reports.
• A ‘revolving door’ where people are released and recalled continually. People subject to recall can lead to them being continually punished for crimes that happened decades ago because of having to apply for parole.
• People are reluctant to seek support for mental health issues or substance use for fear of this being held against them in parole reports.

Suggested improvements to parole decision-making included:

• Revising parole criteria to consider those who maintain their innocence.
• Reform parole frameworks to support proportional, trauma-informed decisions.
• Ensuring the parole board is informed of risks, to ensure decisions can be defended if challenged. For instance, it was highlighted that updated risk assessments and psychologist opinion were not always required by the parole board and that oral hearing requests to social work were requested late, despite revised triage arrangements in place to address this.
• Ensuring the rights and views of children of people in prison are respected, with the aim of returning the parent back to their children as quickly as possible in a supportive way.
• Granting parole in as many cases as possible to promote reintegration into the community.
• Giving people clear expectations of parole, and what needs to be achieved before it can be applied for.
• To enact the part of the Prisoners and Criminal Proceedings (Scotland) Act 1993 that empowers Scottish Ministers to appoint parole advisors. These could provide education and preparation of people involved in the criminal justice system e.g. to understand how parole works and what is required to support release from custody.
• Requiring the Scottish Prison Service to identify inputs and resources required to achieve parole and enabling people to claim damages where the lack of such provision results in a person being refused parole or if such inputs are not provided.

“My primary interest is in relation to life-sentenced prisoners. From the annual reports of the Parole Board for Scotland it is evident that life prisoners have a 1 in 5 chance of being released on parole at their first appearance before the Parole Board…To my mind it is a shocking indictment that parole rates are so low with nothing being done to investigate why this is so and what could be done to increase parole rates.” – Individual

“Regarding recall, we believe there must be an urgent re-evaluation of how it functions. People who are recalled have already served the punishment part of their sentence. They should not be required to reapply for parole in the standard way, as though they were returning to square one.” - Scottish Prisoner Advocacy and Research Collective (SPARC)

“Too often it is evident that prisoners have little knowledge of how the parole process works or what is required to provide evidence that would support their release. In our view, preparation for parole should start on day one of [the] sentence. The Prisoners and Criminal Proceedings (Scotland) Act 1993 empowers Scottish Ministers to appoint Parole Advisers to carry out this function, but this has never been done. The Board would support the appointment of parole advisers and believe education and preparation of prisoners about their journey to release would positively impact release rates.” - Parole Board for Scotland

Make better use of technological solutions

Across questions, including many respondents at Q3 and some at Q1, incorporated here, raised the need to modernise technological solutions within the criminal justice system. These comments reflected a view that better use of technological solutions could assist penal reform, for instance, by supporting monitoring compliance in the community (see ‘Electronic Monitoring’ in Chapter 4: Bail and remand), improving integrated electronic recording systems, increasing engagement and access to programmes and maintaining family ties. As part of this, it was noted that people involved in the criminal justice system might need support to overcome digital exclusion, or for staff training on the use of digital technologies.

Suggestions for improvement included:

• Using video conferencing systems, such as ‘Near Me’ used in health services for patient meetings, or Microsoft Teams. For instance, this could facilitate meetings between people in custody and community-based professionals to strengthen pre-release planning.
• Facilitating access to rehabilitation programmes via digital means to overcome the need to travel elsewhere to attend these.
• The Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (LS/CMI) system has the potential to provide valuable insights about the justice social work population and the measures that prove effective in reducing risk and reoffending.
• Reducing the overall administrative burden on professionals through solutions such as AI and ‘Magic Notes’ to use with risk assessment and case recording. However, it was noted that caution needed to be applied with the use of AI, such as understanding that generic tools are not GDPR compliant and can be biased or inaccurate.

“Improve pre-release planning and throughcare support by using digital technology to facilitate collaboration between partners and support greater connections to local communities, services, and support networks on release.” - Social Work Scotland

“There are also issues with access to technology upon release, particularly smart phones. In Scotland, this is necessary to access the benefits system (to use the journal feature, etc), but many prisoners are released without this, and services are not providing phones or a suitable alternative. Opportunity to link into the SG digital lifelines work.” - Scottish Recovery Consortium

“SPS could make much better provision of its existing video call system and cold roll out computers with limited functionality for all prisoners. At present, SPS only permits video calls to be undertaken by those already authorised to visit a prisoner. There seems no reason, however, why the same facility could not also be used to allow prisoners to participate in other family issues. This could include attending parents’ nights remotely and attending doctors’ appointments of a family member remotely. This would help the prisoner to realise they are still part of the family and help to prepare them for release.” - Individual

Address inequalities faced by people in the system

The need to address inequalities experienced by people involved in the criminal justice system was also raised by some at Q3 and aligned to the theme ‘Tailor approaches to ensure individualised response’ described in Chapter 2: Overarching themes. The ability of certain people to understand how to progress, or to comply with imposed conditions upon release, was highlighted. Specific groups mentioned included older people, neurodiverse people, people with learning disabilities, and young people undergoing brain development. Concerns were raised that not making reasonable adjustments to accommodate the needs of such individuals could be discriminatory. One respondent suggested introducing legislation to ensure the basic human rights of those with complex needs are considered within release planning.

“The most concerning cases are those involving people with complex needs. This group includes individuals with autism, other forms of neurodiversity, and learning difficulties. Not only are reasonable adjustments often absent in these cases, but individuals appear to be treated more harshly—as if their complexity or disability were a form of belligerence or non-compliance.” - Next Chapter Scotland

“There are older people in prison whose risk could easily be managed in the community, but because they have not progressed sufficiently - either in their programmes or to the open estate - they will never get out early. This is poor use of an expensive prison system and may be building in discriminatory approaches towards people with protected characteristics such as age.” - The Scottish Association of Social Work (SASW)

Staffing issues

A few respondents highlighted staffing issues impacting custody and release, notably staff shortages or work pressures, and the knowledge or attitude of staff. Issues regarding staff shortages or work pressures included:

• Recruitment and retention being an issue across justice social work.
• Sustained challenging conditions in prisons making it more difficult to recruit appropriate staff, which can then impact prisoners’ quality of life in prison.
• High levels of administrative work impacting the ability of staff to undertake direct engagement with people involved with the criminal justice system.
• The negative impact on people in custody being unable to access training and education opportunities, due to staffing and other challenges.

Suggested areas for training or attitudinal change included SPS officers being trained in relational and therapeutic techniques to address offending behaviour, greater training and understanding of neurodivergence, awareness and clarity on available programmes, and reviewing ‘common language’ used by professionals (see ‘Improve Awareness’ in Chapter 2: Overarching themes for more information on these topics).

“As Vision for Justice acknowledged, sustained poor – and dangerous – conditions in prisons make it more difficult to recruit and retain the right kind of staff, creating a vicious circle in which the quality of life in prisons spirals downwards. Prisons cannot be run well without sufficient and well-trained staff or with inexperienced staff.” - Scottish Quaker Community Justice Working Group

“Many people in custody are unable to access opportunities to address offending behaviours due to staffing and other challenges experienced by SPS.” - Justice services for adults, the City of Edinburgh Council

“Training SPS officers to address offending behaviour – relational and therapeutic, rather than the current focus on warehousing, containment and behaviour management.” - Community Justice Partnership

Comments on those who maintain their innocence

A few respondents, the majority of whom were individuals, raised the need to consider the treatment of people who maintain their innocence or are wrongly convicted. Views expressed by these respondents included that:

• Refusal to admit guilt could lead to a refusal of parole or rehabilitation programmes, or was equated with risk, even where there were clear signs of innocence, such as a victim admitting the accused had not committed a crime.
• Contact with families is being restricted.
• There should be more recognition of the impact of wrongful convictions and the need for support to address the harm done.

Suggested improvements included:

• Reviewing how such cases are handled.
• Prioritising alternatives to prison, particularly for people with mental incapacity.
• Creating an independent review body with the power to act quickly in cases of miscarriages of justice.
• Stop equating ‘denial’ with ‘risk’ and ensuring that claims of innocence are not a barrier to release, and:
• Creating a parole process that recognises wrongful convictions can occur, for instance, Parole Board for Scotland being required to discount behaviours that directly relate to being reimprisoned (see quote below for details).

“My understanding is that the Parole Board Scotland operate on a balance of probabilities in reaching their determination. It is therefore possible that a prisoner could be released on parole, charged with committing an offence, returned to prison for breach of licence conditions, be found not guilty of the offence alleged to have been committed, but still be refused parole on the ground that the prisoner posed a risk to society because of his or her actions when re-imprisoned. While this may not be a major issue in and of itself it would seem appropriate that the Parole Board Scotland be required to discount any behaviour of the prisoner while re-imprisoned where such acts could reasonably be attributed to the re-imprisonment.” – Individual

“Many are denied parole not because they’re a danger to society, but because the required ‘rehabilitation’ courses aren’t even available - or they're not allowed on them because they refuse to confess to something they didn’t do. That’s not justice; that’s coercion. On top of that, contact with family is often restricted, making reintegration even harder and punishing not just the prisoner, but their children, partners, and parents.” - Individual