Prison officer vetting and social media: what is checked?

In shortSocial media screening is not mentioned in the policy or careers pages we read; that proves nothing either way about whether anyone looks.

We read the Security Vetting Policy Framework (PSI 07/2014, revised 20 February 2025) in full, together with the careers pages on how to apply and eligibility. Neither mentions social media screening. The list of Enhanced Level 2 checks in paragraph 4.8 does not include it.

That is a fact about the published documents. We do not know whether the vetting team or anyone involved in recruitment looks at candidates' public accounts, how often, or what would be done with what they find.

Forum advice saying 'they definitely check' or 'they definitely do not' is, as far as published HMPPS material goes, unsupported either way.

In shortSocial media is not named, but the racist group declaration, online relationships overseas and the 'will not discredit the Service' purpose all touch online behaviour.

Although social media is not named, several published requirements touch on things people do online.

Racist group declaration

The policy says HMPPS prohibits people who work for it from being members of groups or organisations considered to have racist philosophy, principles, aims or policies, and that everyone at Enhanced level must sign a declaration. The annex names the British National Party, the National Front and Combat 18 as examples, and says no one working for HMPPS can be a member of any group promoting racism.

Change of circumstances

Includes entering into or changing a personal relationship with a person residing in a foreign country, and the annex specifies 'including information regarding online relationships, as well as relationships in person'. It also includes involvement with any individual, group, society or organisation that may be of security concern, which the annex says can include special interest groups.

Overall purpose

The policy says vetting exists in part so that staff 'will not discredit the Service'. That is a purpose, not a social media rule, but it shows why content that is racist, violent or that glorifies crime could matter if it came to light, and why the declaration exists.

In shortFor most applicants the declaration is a simple yes or no; failing to complete it makes you ineligible and a false one risks dismissal.

The policy's racist group annex says all external recruitment adverts must include a statement that applicants will be required to declare whether they are a member of a group or organisation which HMPPS considers to be racist. Anyone applying through external recruitment completes a declaration on their application form.

For most applicants this is a simple yes or no. If you have ever been involved with a group you are unsure about, or followed or joined an online community that could fall within the definition, answer honestly and ask the recruitment team.

The annex quotes a definition of racism as conduct, words or practices which disadvantage or advantage people because of their colour, culture or ethnic origin.

• Failing to complete the declaration renders an individual ineligible, and they may not be selected or start work.
• If someone declares membership of a group other than the three named, advice must be sought from the Staff Equality and Diversity Policy team.
• Appointment letters carry a paragraph saying that any member of staff found to have made a false declaration, or who becomes a member of a prohibited organisation after joining, will be subject to disciplinary procedures and possible dismissal.

In shortTreat anything public as seen: employers may look at open content, and you can ask what data is held about you.

Employers in general are allowed to look at what candidates publish openly, and data protection law requires them to act fairly. The Information Commissioner's Office has a section on pre-employment vetting of candidates in its employment practices guidance, which you can read for yourself.

We could not extract its detail during research, so we do not summarise it here.

That does not mean a vetting team is scanning your timeline, which is unverified, but a public post, a tagged photograph, a comment on someone else's page or a group membership can reach people you did not intend.

In shortSpend an hour viewing your accounts as a stranger would, tidy up legitimately, and never deny something that exists.

Look at what appears without logging in. Consider both what you posted and what others have tagged you in.

Deleting old posts, adjusting privacy settings, removing tags and leaving groups you no longer want to be linked with are all legitimate. What you must not do is deny something that exists or answer a vetting question untruthfully.

If a past membership or post is relevant to a question you are asked, answer honestly, explain it and, where appropriate, show what has changed.

1. Search your name and view your profiles while logged out.
2. Review old posts, comments, tags, photographs and group memberships.
3. Identify anything you would struggle to explain to a security-minded employer.
4. Tighten privacy settings, remove tags and leave groups you no longer want to be associated with.
5. Never deny something that exists. If a question applies to something you did, answer honestly.
6. Keep your answers consistent across your application and vetting questionnaire.

In shortDeclare and think carefully about any online contact with people in custody or their associates, before and after you join.

The Exclusion from Working for HMPPS Policy Framework lists inappropriate relationships with prisoners, former prisoners or people on probation, conveyance of prohibited items and unauthorised disclosure of information among behaviours that can lead to exclusion for those already employed.

It does not mention social media specifically, but it shows the kinds of interactions that are treated seriously.

We could not read an HMPPS social media policy for staff during research, so we do not describe its rules here. Our conduct hub's planned guides on declarable associations and social media rules will cover it.

In shortEmployees' online behaviour falls under conduct rules, so no operational information, no abuse and no contact with prisoners' associates.

The Civil Service Code, last updated in 2015, sets out integrity, honesty, objectivity and impartiality, though it does not specifically address personal social media conduct.

The Exclusion Framework lists threatening behaviour, harassment of any kind including sexual or racial harassment, unauthorised disclosure of information and behaviour that risks the reputation of HMPPS among the grounds for considering exclusion.

HMPPS publishes more detailed staff guidance, but we have not read it, so check your establishment's current policy and the induction materials.

• No sharing of operational information
• No photographs or details of prisoners, colleagues or establishments that could compromise security
• No abusive or discriminatory comments
• No relationships with prisoners or their associates

In shortThese guides cover the full list of vetting checks, the other areas candidates worry about and the wider process.

• Full list of checks: the pillar guide to prison officer vetting
• Other areas: family in prison, criminal records and debt
• If something has gone wrong: failed vetting
• The whole process: the recruitment process guide and how to become a prison officer
• A private way to prepare: the vetting checker; the joining hub lists the other guides