What do prisoners think of Wandsworth?
This is a summary, produced mostly by AI, of the report of the findings of the Measuring the Quality of Prison Life (MQPL) survey undertaken at HMP Wandsworth from 17–20 November 2025. WPIC obtained a copy of the report through a Freedom of Information request.
The survey is based on a random sample of prisoners. It measures prisoners’ perceptions of different areas of prison life based on their experiences over the previous few months at Wandsworth Prison. 83 prisoners completed questionnaires at Wandsworth. Results are compared with 30 other reception prisons, making 31 prisons in total.
MQPL is based on a sample of prisoners and the report stresses that the scores are estimates; comparisons between prisons should therefore be interpreted taking account of relevant contextual differences and sampling variations.
Overall message
The report paints a predominantly negative picture of prisoners' experience, particularly around the day-to-day regime, time locked in cells, personal hygiene, relationships with staff, fairness and communication.
The strongest concern is Ordered Regime, which received the most negative score of any reception prison surveyed. Wandsworth's score was -0.42 compared with the reception-prison average. Other significantly weaker areas were Harmony with Staff (-0.27), Staff Use of Authority/Incentives (-0.26), Distress/Wellbeing (-0.24) and Personal Hygiene (-0.30).
Perceptions of safety and security were broadly inline with other receptions prisons although there were concerns about supervision and drug prevalence. Perceptions of Progression and Rehabilitation were negative but similar to other remand prisons, with concerns around a lack of support from Offender Management Unit and gaps in structured progression and case management. Family contact scores were broadly in line with the average, although new arrivals reported delays in receiving PIN numbers and accessing contact details.
Beyond the MQPL categories, prisoners raised concerns about physical living conditions, including cramped cells, insufficient bedding, unreliable heating and poor maintenance. Dissatisfaction with food and canteen provision was also common.
Ethnic minority prisoners were more negative than their white counterparts for Personal Safety and Personal Hygiene. The difference in perceptions was not reflected in other reception prisons. This could suggest systematic issues for personal safety of ethnic minority prisoners in Wandsworth but it is also possible that sampling factors could have contributed to this finding.
Compared with 2017 when the last MQPL survey was carried out at Wandsworth, most perceptions remained stable with an improvement in family contact, possibly driven by in-cell phones, and a decline in Distress/Wellbeing, indicating poorer emotional wellbeing.
1. Regime and time out of cell — the biggest concern
This is the report's clearest area of concern.
Prisoners described the regime as:
disorganised and unpredictable;
poorly communicated;
subject to frequent lockdowns;
providing too little time out of cell;
restricting access to exercise, showers, association and activities;
leaving prisoners bored and frustrated.
Only 11% agreed that the prison was well organised, while 74% agreed there was not enough structure. Only 14%thought the regime was fair.
The confinement findings are particularly stark:
89% said prisoners spend too long locked in cells.
84% said their time in prison feels very much like a punishment.
73% said they have no control over their day-to-day life.
The report links these problems partly to staffing pressures, restricted exercise-yard capacity, construction work and the need to prevent different wings mixing. Limited funding and space also restrict purposeful activity.
Practical implication: improving the reliability and predictability of the daily regime appears to be the single most important issue identified by the MQPL.
2. Staff-prisoner relationships and fairness
Relationships with staff are another area of weakness. Only 17% of prisoners said they trusted officers, while 66% agreed that staff were argumentative towards prisoners. Only 31% felt they were treated fairly by staff.
There were also strong concerns about how rules and privileges were applied:
only 18% thought staff distributed privileges fairly;
only 21% thought privileges were given and taken fairly;
only 23% thought staff treated prisoners fairly when applying rules.
The report also identifies problems with legitimate bureaucracy—in other words, whether decisions are transparent, understandable and responsive. For example:
81% said you have to "ask and ask and ask" to get things done;
73% said the prison was poor at giving reasons for decisions;
only 18% thought staff had sufficient experience and expertise to deal with issues that mattered to them.
However, the report also records positive experiences of individual staff, with some prisoners describing officers as kind, helpful and easy to communicate with.
3. Personal hygiene and physical conditions
Personal Hygiene scored -0.30 against the reception-prison average, making it one of the weakest areas in the survey. Only:
42% felt they had adequate opportunities to keep themselves clean;
49% felt they could keep their living area clean;
34% felt the prison provided adequate facilities to maintain a presentable appearance.
Reported problems included:
insufficient shower opportunities;
dirty or poorly maintained showers;
unreliable hot water.
4. Mental health and wellbeing
Prisoners reported moderate levels of distress, slightly higher than the reception-prison average. However the report notes that Wandsworth had lower self-harm rates than its comparator prisons.
The report associates distress with:
prolonged periods in isolation/cell;
lack of meaningful activity;
inconsistent staff support;
difficulties accessing healthcare.
Conversely, physical activity and faith-based activities were identified by some prisoners as positive influences on wellbeing.
Compared with 2017, Distress/Wellbeing had deteriorated.
5. Progression, rehabilitation, education and work
The Progression & Rehabilitation score was negative, although broadly comparable with other remand prisons. Prisoners identified:
limited work and education;
waiting lists;
limited rehabilitative activity;
delays with legal support, video links and mail;
insufficient support from OMU/keyworkers;
limited follow-up on individual needs.
The report does acknowledge several developments, including a Drug Strategy Lead, Housing Specialist, Prison Employment Lead and Remand Support Team, as well as violence-reduction interventions and substance-misuse support.
6. Safety, drugs and prisoner relationships
Overall safety-related scores were broadly in line with other reception prisons, and the report says that security improvements following the 2023 escape and subsequent assurance work had produced considerable progress.
However, there are still concerns:
54% agreed that supervision of prisoners was poor, compared with 43% in comparator prisons.
54% agreed that drug use was quite high, compared with 41% elsewhere.
Some prisoners reported bullying, violence, intimidation and difficult cell-sharing arrangements.
7. Family contact
Family contact was broadly in line with the reception-prison average and slightly better in some areas, such as the use of phones. The introduction of in-cell telephones appears to have improved the position compared with 2017. Prisoners valued the privacy and flexibility they provide. However, new prisoners experienced delays obtaining PINs and contact details, and there were complaints about phone faults, credit and affordability.
8. Ethnic differences
The report identifies a statistically significant difference between Ethnic Minority and White prisoners in two areas:
Personal Safety: -0.38
Personal Hygiene: -0.40
Ethnic Minority prisoners were more negative in both areas. The Personal Safety difference was particularly notable because it differed from the pattern seen across the wider reception estate. However, the report cautions that sampling factors may have contributed, and it does not establish why the difference exists.
Importantly, the report says there were no written comments explicitly describing perceived discrimination, although it cautions that this does not mean discrimination does not occur.
9. Physical environment, food and canteen
Outside the formal MQPL dimensions, prisoners raised substantial concerns about the overcrowded physical environment. Issues included:
cramped cells, particularly when two people share;
poor mattresses and pillows;
inadequate heating and holes in windows;
cold cells;
unreliable hot water;
maintenance problems.
Food and canteen provision were also criticised, particularly for limited choice, repetition, portion sizes, nutritional value and early meal times. A new menu with improved nutritional standards was introduced earlier this year, after the survey.
10. What has improved since 2017?
The comparison with the previous MQPL survey in October 2017 is mixed.
Most dimensions remained broadly similar. The main positive movement was family contact, which the report associates with in-cell telephones. There was a moderate decline in relation to Distress/Wellbeing.
At individual statement level, there were improvements in areas such as movement control and reduced prisoner influence, but deterioration in perceptions of:
fairness;
staff expertise;
transparency of decision-making;
autonomy;
personal decency.
Conclusion
The MQPL report suggests that HMP Wandsworth's biggest challenge is not principally security—it is the quality and reliability of everyday prison life.
The priorities emerging from the evidence are:
Priority | Main issue |
1. Daily regime | Unpredictable regime, lockdowns and excessive time in cell |
2. Time out of cell | Insufficient exercise, association, showers and purposeful activity |
3. Staff relationships | Low trust, perceived confrontation and inconsistent treatment |
4. Fairness & communication | Decisions not explained; prisoners feel they must repeatedly ask for things |
5. Decency and hygiene | Showers, hot water, heating, sanitation and clothing |
6. Wellbeing | Distress linked to confinement, inactivity and difficulties accessing support |
7. Rehabilitation and Progression | Waiting lists and inconsistent access to work, education, rehabilitation and keywork |
8. Physical environment | Overcrowding and ageing infrastructure |
9. Drugs | Concern about drug prevalence |
10. Equality | Significant ethnic differences in perceptions of safety and hygiene |
Overall, the report suggests that making the regime predictable, increasing meaningful time out of cell, improving staff-prisoner relationships, and delivering basic decency consistently would have the greatest potential impact on prisoners' experience. The report's own data also indicate that some improvements are already underway, particularly in security, communication systems, laundry/cleaning and reducing-reoffending roles.
