Recurring concern

Failure to provide timely review and progression for IPP prisoners

First to latest report 20 Dec 2024 — 20 Oct 2025

Reports that mention this concern: 2
Times this concern has been raised: 3
Stated actions linked to this concern: 5

What this concern includes

Includes failures in arrangements for reviewing and progressing prisoners serving IPP sentences, including timely parole-board or sentence reviews, review of continued detention, access to relevant progression programmes or therapeutic units, and coordination of information and support needed for progression.

What is not included

Excludes general prison mental-health, suicide-prevention or welfare concerns where the IPP review or progression process is not the deficient control.
Excludes ordinary parole or release processes for prisoners without an IPP sentence.
Excludes errors in sentence calculation, recall or release-date administration unless they directly impair review or progression of an IPP sentence.
Excludes failures occurring after a timely and adequate IPP review and progression decision when the remaining issue is implementation of that decision.

Trends

Reports over time

Reports mentioning this concern, over time

Reports about this concern issued each year.

* 2026 is projected from reports observed to 7 Sep 2026.

Most frequent recipients

Reports about this concern sent to each recipient.

HM Prison and Probation Service2

Ministry of Justice2

Coldingley Prison1

NHS England1

Parole Board1

Reports and published responses 2 reports

See individual reports that have raised this concern, and the actions taken in response

20 Oct2025
East Riding and Hull
Concerns raised2
1. Lack of access to Offender Delivery Programmes or therapeutic and progression units for unreleased IPP prisoners
2. Delays in parole board review for unreleased IPP prisoners
Linked response

HM Prison and Probation Service
Stated actions 5
1. HM Prison and Probation Service
  Publish and operate Progression Panel arrangements to place IPP prisoners on appropriate progression pathways with timely interventions.
2. HM Prison and Probation Service
  Create the Phoenix Unit at HMP Aylesbury for IPP prisoners with red RAG ratings who are struggling to progress.
3. HM Prison and Probation Service
  Update the Generic Parole Process Policy Framework to introduce presumed review intervals for IPP and DPP prisoners.
1. HM Prison and Probation Service
  Streamline recall documentation and require consideration of Risk Assessed Recall Review suitability.
2. HM Prison and Probation Service
  Run the recall referral trial to extend the referral period and allow more time to consider Risk Assessed Recall Review.
Respondent positions 1
1. HM Prison and Probation Service
  Priority for listing IPP parole reviews is determined by the independent Parole Board, not HMPPS.
  Redirects responsibility
AI-generated summary

Scott Stephen Berry · Prevention of Future Deaths report

This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

Report summary

Scott Stephen Berry was a prisoner serving an Imprisonment for Public Protection sentence when, after expressing suicidal thoughts, he was found hanging on 12 October 2023. He was resuscitated and taken to hospital but died on 21 October 2023 after sustaining a hypoxic brain injury. The principal concern was that unreleased IPP prisoners may face prolonged detention, limited access to progression or therapeutic support, poor mental health and little hope of release, creating a risk of future deaths.

Read the report on judiciary.uk
Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted
PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.
PFD Monitor interpretation
Lack of access to Offender Delivery Programmes or therapeutic and progression units for unreleased IPP prisoners
Wider context from the report
“However, there still remains a large number of unreleased IPP prisoners in prison. For those who remain detained in prison, some many years after their original tariff, there is still a long period for them to wait for a review. These prisoners are, in many cases, still waiting for parole board review and not all have access to Offender Delivery Programmes or therapeutic and progression units to assist them. These prisoners are suffering with their mental health and still have little hope of release. If action is not taken with regard to those still serving these sentences in prison, then there is a risk of future deaths occurring. ”
Source location
Scott Stephen Berry · Prevention of Future Deaths report
Page 2 · concerns
Open source report
Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted
PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.
PFD Monitor interpretation
Delays in parole board review for unreleased IPP prisoners
Wider context from the report
“However, there still remains a large number of unreleased IPP prisoners in prison. For those who remain detained in prison, some many years after their original tariff, there is still a long period for them to wait for a review. These prisoners are, in many cases, still waiting for parole board review and not all have access to Offender Delivery Programmes or therapeutic and progression units to assist them. These prisoners are suffering with their mental health and still have little hope of release. If action is not taken with regard to those still serving these sentences in prison, then there is a risk of future deaths occurring. ”
Source location
Scott Stephen Berry · Prevention of Future Deaths report
Page 2 · concerns
Open source report
Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation
Publish and operate Progression Panel arrangements to place IPP prisoners on appropriate progression pathways with timely interventions.

Verbatim wording from the response
“• We published the Progression Panel Policy Framework in July, and have already seen a significant number of panels recorded. These panels, comprising of HMPPS staff and wider partner agencies, ensure that those serving IPP sentences are on the right progression pathway, with access to the right interventions, at the right time.”

Source location
Response from HM Prison & Probation Service
Page 4 · response
Published 26 January 2026
Open published response
Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation
Create the Phoenix Unit at HMP Aylesbury for IPP prisoners with red RAG ratings who are struggling to progress.

Verbatim wording from the response
“• HMP Aylesbury is in the process of creating the Phoenix Unit, which will be a bespoke unit dedicated to support IPP prisoners with a red RAG rating who are struggling to progress in their sentence.”

Source location
Response from HM Prison & Probation Service
Page 4 · response
Published 26 January 2026
Open published response
Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation
Update the Generic Parole Process Policy Framework to introduce presumed review intervals for IPP and DPP prisoners.

Verbatim wording from the response
“I note that you raised concerns that IPP prisoners are waiting for a Parole Board review. The priority when listing cases is a matter for the Independent Parole Board. Nonetheless, HMPPS updated the Generic Parole Process Policy Framework in February 2025 and introduced a presumption for an 18-month period between parole reviews for IPP prisoners and 12 months for DPP (youth equivalent of IPP sentence) prisoners¹.”

Source location
Response from HM Prison & Probation Service
Page 2 · response
Published 26 January 2026
Open published response
Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation
Streamline recall documentation and require consideration of Risk Assessed Recall Review suitability.

Verbatim wording from the response
“• HMPPS have streamlined recall documentation and added a direct request to consider suitability for Risk Assessed Recall Review (RARR) ensuring that the potential for a swifter re-release is firmly in the mind of the Probation Officer completing it.”

Source location
Response from HM Prison & Probation Service
Page 4 · response
Published 26 January 2026
Open published response
Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation
Run the recall referral trial to extend the referral period and allow more time to consider Risk Assessed Recall Review.

Verbatim wording from the response
“• The recall referral trial has begun; this will extend the period of time in which IPP prisoners must be referred to the Parole Board following recall with the intent of allowing more time for consideration of RARR.”

Source location
Response from HM Prison & Probation Service
Page 4 · response
Published 26 January 2026
Open published response
Source evidence

How this respondent position was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation
Priority for listing IPP parole reviews is determined by the independent Parole Board, not HMPPS.

Verbatim wording from the response
“I note that you raised concerns that IPP prisoners are waiting for a Parole Board review. The priority when listing cases is a matter for the Independent Parole Board. Nonetheless, HMPPS updated the Generic Parole Process Policy Framework in February 2025 and introduced a presumption for an 18-month period between parole reviews for IPP prisoners and 12 months for DPP (youth equivalent of IPP sentence) prisoners¹.”

Source location
Response from HM Prison & Probation Service
Page 2 · response
Published 26 January 2026
Open published response
20 Dec2024
Surrey
Concerns raised1
1. Lack of a process to expedite face-to-face parole hearings for eligible IPP prisoners
This report raised 10 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
No linked response statements
No respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
AI-generated summary

Haydar Jefferies · Prevention of Future Deaths report

This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

Report summary

Haydar Jefferies was detained at HMP Coldingley and developed severe depression and psychosis before self-ligaturing in his cell on 1 March 2023; he was resuscitated but died at hospital on 5 March 2023 from hypoxic brain injury and pneumonia. The principal concerns included failures to record and share risk-relevant information, refer him promptly to mental health services, provide an adequate mental health assessment and obtain appropriate clinical care and supervision during his acute deterioration.

Read the report on judiciary.uk
Source evidence
How this individual concern was interpreted
PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.
PFD Monitor interpretation
Lack of a process to expedite face-to-face parole hearings for eligible IPP prisoners
Wider context from the report
“8. Imprisonment under an IPP is a recognised suicide risk. The delay in dealing with the IPP parole hearing exacerbated the risk. There is currently no process in place to expedite face to face parole hearings for IPP prisoners when allegations leading to their recall have been withdrawn and no criminal action is being considered. ”
Source location
Haydar Jefferies · Prevention of Future Deaths report
Page 5 · concerns
Open source report

Actions and positions describe what organisations say in published responses. Implementation is not independently verified.

Data last updated 7 September 2026

What this concern includes

Trends

Reports mentioning this concern, over time

Concerns raised2

Lack of access to Offender Delivery Programmes or therapeutic and progression units for unreleased IPP prisoners

Delays in parole board review for unreleased IPP prisoners

Linked response

Stated actions An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.5

Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1

Concerns raised1

Lack of a process to expedite face-to-face parole hearings for eligible IPP prisoners

Stated actions 5

Respondent positions 1