actions whose implementation is planned in the course of their imprisonment in order to promote their rehabilitation”175. They form an extension of the “sentence enforcement projects” (projet d’exécution de peine) trialled at the end of the 1990s in ten prisons176. Generally speaking, penal institutions for convicted prisoners have put PEPs in place. Conversely, the majority of remand prisons have not put such programs in place, due to the shortness of imprisonment in these types of institution and the absence of recruitment of psychologists dedicated to the PEP. Yet, the provisions of article 89 of the Prisons Act state that PEPs are elaborated “for convicted prisoners” without making any distinctions between the various different types of institution. Moreover, a few remand prisons have succeeded in putting a PEP in place which fits into the long-term supervision of prisoners. According to article 89 of the Prisons Act, “from the time of their reception in the prison and after a multidisciplinary period of observation, a personality assessment is made of prisoners”. This first phase of imprisonment needs to make it possible to give impetus to commitment to the PDP. The PEP psychologist is in most cases at the heart of the scheme. Thus in one of the institutions inspected, the PEP psychologist meets all new arrivals, conducts a fifty-minute interview and completes a standard form in order to summarise the prisoner’s situation. In others, either a PEP platform is organised by the PEP psychologist, the local employment manager and the local professional training manager, or collective meetings are organised with the professionals and the person concerned in order to elaborate a project. At the time of changes of assignment or transfers of prisoners, the Contrôleur Général has noted that the PEP elements elaborated in the previous institution are not systematically taken up again during the reception phase. The actors and staff specifically in charge of PEP need to support the steps undertaken by the person and guide them in their choices in order to elaborate a project with a view to rehabilitation. The factors taken into account in the assessment and guidance of the person, throughout the course of their imprisonment, vary from one institution to another: length of the sentence, factors connected with the health of the person concerned, financial resources, behaviour in prison and assessments made by staff concerning the prisoner in question, existence of a project on release etc. This diversity harms the clarity of the sentence enforcement programme execution procedure. The observational data on the person are collected in particular in the electronic liaison register (CEL)177 or in the computerised prisoner management software application (GIDE). The CEL is used appropriately overall, in particular in the drafting and passing on of summaries to the various different services and actors. In the observation of the behaviour of prisoners, carried out on a daily basis, negative elements are reported, those with positive connotations much less frequently (except for new arrivals). Training of staff in the use of this working tool (CEL), with regard to the recording of behavioural observations, should enable their content to be made more balanced. Article 89 of the Prisons Act provides that PEP should be worked out “in cooperation” with the convicted prisoners. The programme is established and the project studied for the person in a 175 Article D.88. of the CPP. The experiments made it possible to establish three objectives: "giving more meaning to custodial sentences", "improving judicial and administrative adaptation of sentences to the requirements of defendants” and "defining terms of supervision and observation enabling better knowledge of the prisoner". Source: DAP circular of 21st July 2000 concerning the bringing into general use of sentence enforcement projects for penal institutions for convicted prisoners. 177 On the use of the CEL, cf. CGLPL, Annual Report for 2010, p.18. 176 115