Eleven approved premises that were meant to house higher‑risk offenders leaving prison have been closed, seven because of staff shortages and four due to problems such as infestations or a lack of running water. The closures came to light just six days after roughly 700 male prisoners – including violent criminals and burglars – were released under the early release scheme, with some telling reporters they now have nowhere to go and fear they may reoffend. Nearly one in eight of the facilities for dangerous prisoners have shut during this period, up from about one in ten in July.
Closures amid early release surge
The shutdowns affect a significant slice of the network that supervises around 2,000 individuals deemed too risky for ordinary release. These hostels provide up to twelve weeks of accommodation, during which residents are subject to strict monitoring for drug and alcohol use, and can be recalled to prison if they refuse testing or allow room searches. Among the specific sites named are Western approved premises in Weymouth, a 27‑bed hostel set to close this Friday because of staffing gaps, and Bridgewood in Northampton, which looks after seventeen high‑risk men and was shut earlier this year for the same reason. Lightfoot House in Ipswich, run by the East of England Probation Service, is also among the closed locations.
Staff shortages and safety concerns
Insiders point to a combination of high stress levels and the expiry of contracts with private providers Sodexo and OCS, who previously supplied overnight cover. As a result, security guards have been stepping in for qualified staff while dealing with some of the most serious offenders, a situation that has generated formal complaints. A February probation watchdog report on Bridgewood highlighted “concerns over the workplace culture, training gaps and inconsistent supervision” and noted occasions when staffing levels fell below what is required for safe and effective operation.
Voices from the frontline
Martin Jones, HM inspector of probation, warned that the trend is troubling:
> “Approved premises play a critical role in the safe reintegration of the most complex individuals back into the community,” he said. “It is therefore concerning if there has been an increase in closures at a time when releases are increasing. Action needs to be taken to ensure adequate staffing cover and contingency plans.”
Ian Lawrence, general secretary of the probation officers’ union Napo, echoed the alarm:
> “At a time when we are seeing greater pressure on accommodation needs due to early releases, these closures are adding additional issues for our members to deal with and for those coming out of prison,” he said. HM Prison and Probation Service “needs to urgently address this issue so safe and robust release plans can be made in advance of early releases”.
What happens next
A second tranche of early release prisoners is due to leave prison on 13 October, with about 2,000 offenders set to be freed over the month and another 3,000 to follow in stages over the coming year to ease overcrowding – a figure that was trimmed from an original 6,000 after intervention by Andy Burnham. The Ministry of Justice insists it is tackling the shortfall, saying:
> “This government is fixing the crisis it inherited by investing a record £700m in the Probation Service and recruiting 1,300 new officers this year.”
>
> “Prisoners at risk of becoming homeless are offered up to 12 weeks of basic accommodation on release and we will always ensure that those who present the very highest levels of risk are placed in an approved premises.”
Why it Matters
The closure of more than one in ten approved premises comes at a moment when the state is pushing larger numbers of people back into the community, stretching an already thin safety net. Without adequate staffing and suitable accommodation, newly released individuals face a heightened risk of homelessness, relapse, and reoffending, which not only endangers the public but also undermines the very purpose of the early release programme. Urgent investment in recruitment, training, and contingency planning is therefore essential to prevent a cycle of crisis that could compromise both public safety and the rehabilitation prospects of those leaving prison.
