Section 4. Outcomes for children (some establishments had in-cell showers), only half (55%) had enough clean, suitable clothes for the week, and not all children (79%) were provided with clean sheets every week. Shower facilities at most sites were adequate but they were squalid at Feltham. Safety 4.52 Perceptions of safety among children living on designated units were also a concern; a fifth (22%) said that they felt unsafe at the time of the survey. This was not surprising given that almost half reported that they had been victims of threats or intimidation from other children. Alarmingly, less than a third (32%) reported that they felt they were able to report such matters to a member of staff. 4.53 For children deemed at risk of suicide or self-harm, we were told by managers that constant supervision was not used very often. However, local data was not available in all establishments for us to assess this. In all but one of the establishments we visited (Werrington), we judged constant supervision as a form of separation and it was concerning to see children on constant supervision prevented from mixing with other children, dining communally or attending education.27 Staff nearly always conducted the observations through a locked door or gate covered with Perspex with very little engagement. The cells were institutional and not appropriate for caring for a child in crisis. However, at Werrington children on constant supervision attended education and this was managed sensitively; deeming teachers as competent to constantly supervise a child in class was good practice 5. Children who are separated have access to a regime that meets their needs including regular and meaningful contact with staff and their peers 4.54 The daily regime for separated children was poor – all children had an unpredictable and limited amount of time out of their cell. In most cases, children were regularly subject to a regime that constituted solitary confinement: locked up for more than 22 hours a day, without meaningful human contact. In our survey of children on designated segregation or specialist separation units, only 53% reported getting more than two hours out of their room on a weekday. This dropped substantially at weekends, when most separated children were subject to regimes that constituted solitary confinement: only 17% of these children reported getting more than two hours a day out of their room. Our consistent finding across all sites was that the regime for children separated on normal location (66% at the time of the inspection) was worse than for those on designated units. In nearly all cases, children separated on normal location had an impoverished regime of around 90 minutes a day out of their cell during the week and as little as 15 minutes at the weekend. 4.55 We also found that children separated under rule 58 pending adjudication were subject to regimes that constituted solitary confinement. Most of the children subject to rule 58 reported very minimal time out of their cells, accessing showers and telephones only. There was no other opportunity for meaningful human interaction. Others reported no time out of their cells at all. It was particularly concerning that some separation documentation was missing, incomplete or inaccurate. 4.56 We noted distinct differences for separated children in accessing a regime depending on their location in the prison. As table 3 shows, children in a dedicated segregation unit, while still subject to an unacceptable regime, were more likely to be able to access basic necessities, including a shower and exercise daily; recording practices evidencing this remained inadequate but were better than we saw on normal location. Children separated 27 A child will be constantly supervised if they are deemed at the most risk of attempting suicide or self-harm. Separation of children in young offender institutions 31