CCA Whiteville WCFA Contract Violations, CCA, 2005
Download original document:
![Brief thumbnail](/media/cache/28/50/2850fdd170b93c65c563486c15935dbb.jpg)
Document text
![Brief thumbnail](/media/cache/28/50/2850fdd170b93c65c563486c15935dbb.jpg)
Document text
This text is machine-read, and may contain errors. Check the original document to verify accuracy.
WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR January 2005 OUTDATE OF STANDING REPORT ISSUE Y/N 6/15/04 9/20/04 9/20/04 10/26/04 10/26/04 10/26/04 Yes Yes Monitoring Instrument Drug Testing Drug Testing Yes Drug Testing Yes Security and Control Searches Yes Yes Security and Control Searches Security and Control Searches ITEM NO. NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN Page 1 DATE/METHOD OF CONFIRMATION BY MONITOR/COMMENTS TDOC MANAGEMENT COMMENTS/NOTES 2i 10 inmates issued disciplinary reports for Positive Drug Screen in April were not retested in May. NOTE: Letter of Breach issued by Commissioner 11/29/04. Warden's response dated 7/6/04: Concur: Indicates that there was a break down in the communications in this instance and that new tracking procedures have Verified 12/30/04: By review of been implemented. Warden's response to letter of Drug Testing procedures and Breach, dated 12/10/04, indicates a new officer has documentation. been assigned to these duties, and is being monitored weekly by the Warden's assistant. 2/18/05 CMC note: Breach was corrected during the cure period, as verified. No liquidated damages due to be assessed. 2i Warden’s response dated 10/11/04: Whiteville Correctional Facility acknowledges the error made in 5 inmates convicted for a positive the drug testing department. Effective October 11, drug screen in July were not Verified 12/30/04: By review of 2004 an officer has been assigned the sole retested in August. NOTE: Letter Drug Testing procedures and responsibility to conduct inmate drug testing. In of Breach issued by documentation. addition, the Wardens’ Executive Assistant will monitor Commissioner 11/29/04. compliance on a weekly basis. Warden's response to letter of Breach, dated 12/10/04, same as above. 2/18/05 CMC note: Breach was corrected during the cure period, as verified. No liquidated damages due to be assessed. 10 inmates paroling in August, were not drug-tested 30 days prior Same as above. to their release date or 30 days prior to their parole hearing date. 2/18/05 CMC note: Determined not to be a non-compliance issue. Part of the problem may be due to timeliness of notification by BOPP of release of inmates. Non-compliance indication to be removed from tracking system. NIN 3c 3d 6 Visitors and venders not frisk searched before entering at checkpoint. CM Note: NCN issued for same/similar issue 12/29/04. Warden's response 11/29/04: The Chief of Security will Verified 1/27/05: By review of ensure that proper procedures are strictly enforced shift rosters, log books and other concerning documentation being entered into the documentation. logbook in the future. Warden's response 11/29/04: Partial Concurrence The Chief of Security along with Shift Supervisors will The Shift Supervisor designates a ensure all staff assigned to check point are in strict random selected number to be compliance with posted memo and procedures. searched at checkpoint, this On the day in question, searches were conducted as number is not documented in the Same as above per written directives, however; the officer did fail to checkpoint logbook to verify this. document the searches in the logbook. Please Note: Furthermore staff are frisk The searches were documented on the shift roster as searched only during shift change. required. 11 of 36 cell search requests entered on TOMIS were not preformed according to TOMIS. NOTE: Letter of Breach issued by Commissioner 11/29/04. Verified 1/27/05: By review of shift rosters, log books and other Warden's response 11/29/04: New procedures have documentation, monitor been put into place to ensure future compliance. 2/18/05 CMC note: Breach was corrected determined that the nonWarden's response to letter of Breach, dated during the cure period, as verified. No compliance was appropriately 12/10/04, indicates new procedures and monitoring liquidated damages due to be assessed. addressed during the cure period have resulted in correction of the problem. by the institutions corrective action. Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print 1/05 monthly WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR January 2005 OUTDATE OF STANDING REPORT ISSUE Y/N 10/27/04 12/7/04 12/29/04 12/29/04 Yes Yes Yes Yes Monitoring Instrument Records and Reports Disciplinary Procedures Drug Testing Drug Testing ITEM NO. NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN Page 2 DATE/METHOD OF CONFIRMATION BY MONITOR/COMMENTS 10 1. Items requested from Internal Affairs by CM were not provided. 2. Monthly Drug Testing reports not provided to monitor for June, July, August and September 04. Warden's response 12/1/04: Due to concerns addressed to the Warden by the C M regarding Internal Affairs Assistant truthfulness and integrity, an internal investigation was conducted. As a result there was a determination that this employee had violated CCA’s Verified 1/19/05: By review of core principles and had been less than truthful with C requested documentation and M and Warden. Based upon these findings the items kept in IA office. employee will be removed from Internal Affairs duties and receive strong disciplinary actions. Warden met with C M and advised him of these findings and his planned actions. NIN It appears that inmates may not have been allowed the opportunity to sign or refuse to sign (CR-2727) withdrawal request forms after final disposition of Class A and B disciplinaries.. Warden's response 12/7/04: WCFA has corrected the error. Inmates will be required to place their signature on the CR-2727 while present at the hearing. If the inmate refuses to sign the CR-2727 it will be signed by the D-Board Chairman “refused to sign” and witnessed by an alternate employee while the inmate is present. 2a Warden's response 1/24/05: While we do not contest the findings itself, the deficiency noted in this report was a date to current deficiencies in the U/A testing 1 inmate refused to give a previously identified. Although this was observed in specimen for drug testing. December of 2004, the error occurred in October of Disciplinary report was entered but 2004. Effective November 10 of 2004, the previous wasn’t heard by D-Board. Disciplinary Officer was replaced due to failure to complete assigned duties as required by policy and a new tracking process implemented. NIN 8 inmates paroling in November 04, were not drug-tested 30 days prior to their release date. Verified 2/8/05: By review of inmate withdraw request forms, CR-1834 hearing summary and trust fund documentation. Warden's response 1/24/05: WCF put into place a new procedure to ensure future compliance. All inmates going up for parole will be drug tested no later then the second week of each month. Although these inmates may not be granted parole, WCF has taken the initiative to test regardless of the final result at a CM Note: NCN issued for tremendous cost to the facility when an inmate is same/similar issue 9/20/04. denied parole after recommendation by the initial board. However, every diligent effort is being made to ensure any inmate being considered for parole is tested prior to parole hearing and upon initial parole hearing recommendation. Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print TDOC MANAGEMENT COMMENTS/NOTES 2/18/05 CMC note: Determined not to be a non-compliance issue. Part of the problem may be due to timeliness of notification by BOPP of release of inmates. Non-compliance indication to be removed from tracking system. 1/05 monthly WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR January 2005 OUTDATE OF STANDING REPORT ISSUE Y/N 1/27/05 No Monitoring Instrument Drug Testing ITEM NO. 2h NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE The disciplinary board has been imposing a sanction fee of 30.29 for a positive drug screen disciplinary conviction. This exceeds the cost of the confirmation test. CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN Page 3 DATE/METHOD OF CONFIRMATION BY MONITOR/COMMENTS TDOC MANAGEMENT COMMENTS/NOTES Warden's response 2/7/05: Starting on or about January 27, 2005 all drug test requested from Lab One will be eight panel confirmations at a total cost (including tax) of $9.44. Inmates whose test shows a positive confirmation will be charged this amount. Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print 1/05 monthly WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR February 2005 OUT- DATE OF STANDING REPORT ISSUE Y/N 12/29/04 1/27/05 2/23/05 Yes Yes No Monitoring Instrument Drug Testing Drug Testing Transfer of Inmate ITEM NO. NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN 2a Warden's response 1/24/05: While we do not contest the findings itself, the deficiency noted in this report was a date to current deficiencies in the U/A testing 1 inmate refused to give a previously identified. Although this was observed in specimen for drug testing. December of 2004, the error occurred in October of Disciplinary report was entered but 2004. Effective November 10 of 2004, the previous wasn’t heard by D-Board. Disciplinary Officer was replaced due to failure to complete assigned duties as required by policy and a new tracking process implemented. 2h The disciplinary board has been imposing a sanction fee of 30.29 for a positive drug screen disciplinary conviction. This exceeds the cost of the confirmation test. Warden's response 2/7/05: Starting on or about January 27, 2005 all drug test requested from Lab One will be eight panel confirmations at a total cost (including tax) of $9.44. Inmates whose test shows a positive confirmation will be charged this amount. Inmate was reclassed and transferred to CBCX 2/3/05 even though he was on the parole hearing docket for February 05. Inmate was transferred back to WCFA for his parole hearing. The inmate in question was reclassed to CBCX annex in September of 2004. Classification supervisor began sending his name to CDO in October as we are required to send (10) ten inmate names per month for annex placement. She sends the same names monthly until they are transferred. CCC will now check for parole hearing date monthly prior to submitting 10 names to CDO. If an inmate is scheduled for a parole hearing within 60 days he will not be submitted. 3 Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print Page 1 DATE/METHOD OF CONFIRMATION BY MONITOR/COMMENTS TDOC MANAGEMENT COMMENTS/NOTES 2/05 monthly WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR March 2005 OUT- DATE OF STANDING REPORT ISSUE Y/N 12/29/04 1/27/05 2/23/05 Yes Yes Yes Monitoring Instrument Drug Testing Drug Testing Transfer of Inmate ITEM NO. NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN Page 1 DATE/METHOD OF CONFIRMATION BY MONITOR/COMMENTS 2a Warden's response 1/24/05: While we do not contest the findings itself, the deficiency noted in this report was a date to current deficiencies in the U/A testing 1 inmate refused to give a previously identified. Although this was observed in specimen for drug testing. December of 2004, the error occurred in October of Disciplinary report was entered but 2004. Effective November 10 of 2004, the previous wasn’t heard by D-Board. Disciplinary Officer was replaced due to failure to complete assigned duties as required by policy and a new tracking process implemented. Verified 3/22/05: By review of Drug Testing and Disciplinary procedures and documentation. 2h The disciplinary board has been imposing a sanction fee of 30.29 for a positive drug screen disciplinary conviction. This exceeds the cost of the confirmation test. Warden's response 2/7/05: Starting on or about January 27, 2005 all drug test requested from Lab One will be eight panel confirmations at a total cost (including tax) of $9.44. Inmates whose test shows a positive confirmation will be charged this amount. Verified 3/22/05: By review of Drug Testing, Disciplinary and Trust fund procedures and documentation. Inmate was reclassed and transferred to CBCX 2/3/05 even though he was on the parole hearing docket for February 05. Inmate was transferred back to WCFA for his parole hearing. Warden's response dated 3/1/05: The inmate in question was reclassed to CBCX annex in September of 2004. Classification supervisor began sending his name to CDO in October as we are required to send (10) ten inmate names per month for annex placement. She sends the same names monthly until they are transferred. CCC will now check for parole hearing date monthly prior to submitting 10 names to CDO. If an inmate is scheduled for a parole hearing within 60 days he will not be submitted. 3 Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print TDOC MANAGEMENT COMMENTS/NOTES 3/05 monthly WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR April 2005 OUT- DATE OF STANDING REPORT ISSUE Y/N 2/23/05 4/5/05 4/25/05 4/25/05 Yes No No No Monitoring Instrument Transfer of Inmate ITEM NO. 3 NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE Inmate was reclassed and transferred to CBCX 2/3/05 even though he was on the parole hearing docket for February 05. Inmate was transferred back to WCFA for his parole hearing. Disciplinary Procedures Disciplinary reports were entered and served, however the disciplinary reports were not heard 4a(1) nor were they continued by the Disciplinary Board within proscribed policy time limits of 7 calendar days. Disciplinary Procedures ( Liquidated Damages issue) Inmate was segregated pending investigation, charged on 4/20/05. On 4/25/05 inmate was released 4a(5) from segregation without having had a disciplinary hearing within policy time limit of 72 hours. (Awaiting Legal interpretation) Special Management Inmates 3b Page 1 CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN DATE/METHOD OF CONFIRMATION BY MONITOR/COMMENTS TDOC MANAGEMENT COMMENTS/NOTES Warden's response dated 3/1/05: The inmate in question was reclassed to CBCX annex in September of 2004. Classification supervisor began sending his name to CDO in October as we are required to send Verified 4/20/05: By review of (10) ten inmate names per month for annex placement. parole docket and transfer of She sends the same names monthly until they are inmates. transferred. CCC will now check for parole hearing date monthly prior to submitting 10 names to CDO. If an inmate is scheduled for a parole hearing within 60 days he will not be submitted. Warden's response dated 4/18/05: Upon reviewing the current disciplinary procedures, it has been determined that additional reports were either not heard or not continued as required by policy. Disciplinary action has been taken against the responsible staff. Whiteville Correctional Facility will continue to monitor this process to ensure continued compliance. Four inmates were segregated pending investigation without proper approval from TDOC Liaison’s nor were the segregation’s requested by the Shift Supervisor as required by policy. Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print 4/05 monthly WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR May 2005 OUT- DATE OF STANDING REPORT ISSUE Y/N 4/5/05 4/25/05 4/25/05 5/2/05 No No No No Page 1 ITEM NO. Disciplinary Procedures Disciplinary reports were entered and served, however the disciplinary reports were not heard 4a(1) nor were they continued by the Disciplinary Board within proscribed policy time limits of 7 calendar days. Disciplinary Procedures 5/31/05 CM Note: Advice from TDOC Legal staff indicates: "Since the newly directed DR was not issued on the inmate on Friday but was delayed until Warden's response date 5/16/05: It is without dispute Inmate was segregated pending that the Unit Manager failed to complete and serve the Monday, the inmate should have investigation, charged on 4/20/05. been released from segregation assault charge as specified. However that while the On 4/25/05 inmate was released 4a(5) disciplinary SHOULD have been served immediately; to avoid the 72 hour issue. The from segregation without having inmate could have been kept in there is no non-compliance as the TDOC had a disciplinary hearing within lock up but only if the new DR had Commissioner’s Designee initiated a new 72 hour policy time limit of 72 hours. been issued timely at the direction period and the inmate released prior to it ending. of the CD. Since it is obvious that the inmate did not request a continuance, that option does not exist in this situation." Special Management Inmates Use of Force 3b 3g NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE Four inmates were segregated pending investigation without proper approval from TDOC Liaison’s nor were the segregation’s requested by the Shift Supervisor as required by policy. A Use of Force incident occurred 4/21/05. Copies of the Use of Force incident report were not provided nor was TOMIS incident report (LIBJ) #00613604 entered until 4/25/05. CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN DATE/METHOD OF CONFIRMATION BY MONITOR/COMMENTS Monitoring Instrument TDOC MANAGEMENT COMMENTS/NOTES Warden's response dated 4/18/05: Upon reviewing the current disciplinary procedures, it has been determined that additional reports were either not heard or not continued as required by policy. Disciplinary action has been taken against the responsible staff. Whiteville Correctional Facility will continue to monitor this process to ensure continued compliance. 6/30/05 DCCO CMC Note: The liquidated damages issue previously recorded under this item number, which specifically involve serving paperwork on segregated inmates within prescribed time limits, have been changed to item numbers 4d and 4e on the revised instruments. The issue of holding hearings within 72 hours, specifically, has been cited previously on 4/15/04. Since this specific issue has only been found in non-compliance one time in the past 12 months, no liquidated damages will be assessed at this time. Warden's response dated 5/3/05: There is no indisputable way to determine that he did/did not make the required notification and receive the required approval. All supervisors have had significant experience and the knowledge that approval must be obtained in order to segregate an inmate(s) and there have been no issues of this nature in the past. Warden's response dated 5/18/05: This was not a planned use of force and facility management/supervisors were not aware that a use of force had occurred as the employee involved did not make the shift supervisor aware of his actions. Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print 6/30/05 DCCO CMC Note: This incident involved improper actions by one staff member, who acted on his own, and does not indicate a systemic institutional violation of/disregard for TDOC policy. The institution took appropriate action when supervisory staff became aware of the situation. This has been determined not to be a non-compliance issue. 5/05 monthly WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR May 2005 OUT- DATE OF STANDING REPORT ISSUE Y/N 5/2/05 5/3/05 No No Monitoring Instrument Use of Force Disciplinary Procedures ITEM NO. 3h NIN NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE Page 2 CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN Warden's response dated 5/18/05: It is not contested by CCA that a use of force occurred and was not Commissioner’s Designee was not reported by the duty supervisor to the liaison/monitor notified within (1) hour of this as required. The error however is not a failure by the spontaneous Use of Force supervisor to provide notification as the incident incident. involved a case of employee misconduct and use of force of which the supervisor was not made aware of. Inmate was segregated pending hearing and punitive status for a period of continuous confinement that exceeds a total of sixty (60) days. Warden’s response dated 5/16/05: Facility DOES NOT CONCUR. In this case the inmate has continually expired his punitive time and been released. He has however refused to leave segregation resulting in an additional charge each time for refusing cell assignment. Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print DATE/METHOD OF CONFIRMATION BY MONITOR/COMMENTS TDOC MANAGEMENT COMMENTS/NOTES Same as above. 6/30/05 DCCO CMC Note: This issue was referred to the Compliance section. A directive was issued stating : "...concerning the length of time an inmate can be continuously segregated. Sixty days is a real limit. Releasing an inmate for a day or restoring privileges for a day is normally a function of keeping the inmate in seg for over 30 days, not 60." AS placement or other management practices should be used in the future when dealing with similar situations. 5/05 monthly WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR June 2005 OUT- DATE OF STANDING REPORT ISSUE Y/N 4/5/05 4/25/05 4/25/05 Yes Yes Yes Page 1 ITEM NO. Disciplinary Procedures Disciplinary reports were entered and served, however the disciplinary reports were not heard 4a(1) nor were they continued by the Disciplinary Board within proscribed policy time limits of 7 calendar days. Disciplinary Procedures Verified 6/28/05: By review of Disciplinary and Segregation logs and documentation. 5/31/05 CM Note: Advice from TDOC Legal staff indicates: "Since the newly Warden's response date 5/16/05: It is without dispute directed DR was not issued on Inmate was segregated pending that the Unit Manager failed to complete and serve the the inmate on Friday but was investigation, charged on 4/20/05. assault charge as specified. However that while the delayed until Monday, the inmate On 4/25/05 inmate was released 4a(5) disciplinary SHOULD have been served immediately; should have been released from from segregation without having there is no non-compliance as the TDOC segregation to avoid the 72 hour had a disciplinary hearing within Commissioner’s Designee initiated a new 72 hour issue. The inmate could have policy time limit of 72 hours. period and the inmate released prior to it ending. been kept in lock up but only if the new DR had been issued timely at the direction of the CD. Since it is obvious that the inmate did not request a continuance, that option does not exist in this situation." Special Management Inmates 3b NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE Four inmates were segregated pending investigation without proper approval from TDOC Liaison’s nor were the segregation’s requested by the Shift Supervisor as required by policy. CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN DATE/METHOD OF CONFIRMATION BY MONITOR/COMMENTS Monitoring Instrument TDOC MANAGEMENT COMMENTS/NOTES Warden's response dated 4/18/05: Upon reviewing the current disciplinary procedures, it has been determined that additional reports were either not Verified 6/28/05: By review of heard or not continued as required by policy. Disciplinary and Segregation logs Disciplinary action has been taken against the and documentation. responsible staff. Whiteville Correctional Facility will continue to monitor this process to ensure continued compliance. 6/30/05 DCCO CMC Note: The liquidated damages issue previously recorded under this item number, which specifically involve serving paperwork on segregated inmates within prescribed time limits, have been changed to item numbers 4d and 4e on the revised instruments. The issue of holding hearings within 72 hours, specifically, has been cited previously on 4/15/04. Since this specific issue has only been found in noncompliance one time in the past 12 months, no liquidated damages will be assessed at this time. Warden's response dated 5/3/05: There is no indisputable way to determine that he did/did not make the required notification and receive the required Verified 5/31/05: By review of approval. All supervisors have had significant Disciplinary and Segregation logs experience and the knowledge that approval must be and documentation. obtained in order to segregate an inmate(s) and there have been no issues of this nature in the past. Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print 6/05 monthly WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR June 2005 OUT- DATE OF STANDING REPORT ISSUE Y/N 5/3/05 6/6/05 Yes No Monitoring Instrument Disciplinary Procedures Staffing ITEM NO. NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE Page 2 CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN DATE/METHOD OF CONFIRMATION BY MONITOR/COMMENTS 6/30/05 DCCO CMC Note: This issue was referred to the Compliance section. A directive was issued stating : "...concerning Warden’s response dated 5/16/05: Facility DOES NOT the length of time an inmate can be CONCUR. In this case the inmate has continually continuously segregated. Sixty days is a Verified 6/28/05: By review of expired his punitive time and been released. He has real limit. Releasing an inmate for a day or Disciplinary and Segregation logs however refused to leave segregation resulting in an restoring privileges for a day is normally a and documentation. additional charge each time for refusing cell function of keeping the inmate in seg for assignment. over 30 days, not 60." AS placement or other management practices should be used in the future when dealing with similar situations. NIN Inmate was segregated pending hearing and punitive status for a period of continuous confinement that exceeds a total of sixty (60) days. 11b Warden's response dated 6/6/05: Immediately upon vacancy occurring, WCFA posted the position and made all good faith efforts to fill as soon as possible. Verified 5/29/05: By review of Non-security position 118065 was Efforts to obtain someone to fill position within required staffing legend, position filled on not filled within 45 days time frames were unsuccessful; however several this date. weeks before the end of the 45 day period, I was able to recruit a former Nurse Practitioner of this facility on a PRN (part-time) basis until she can start full time. 6/15/05 No Security and Searches 3d The Shift Supervisor designates a random selected number to be searched at checkpoint; this number is not documented in the checkpoint logbooks for certain days to verify this occurred. (Ref: memorandum attached to policy CCA 9-120). 7/5/05 No Staffing 16 Security Addendum not signed by staff. TDOC MANAGEMENT COMMENTS/NOTES 8/1/05 DCCO CMC Note: The position was vacated 3/15, was covered pat-time from 4/7-5/29, and was filled full-time from that date. The Warden's efforts to fill the position are adequate. No non-compliance finding will be recorded. Warden's response dated 6/16/05: A review of log entries and supervisor’s shift daily reports where documentation of staff searches are required each shift revealed that documentation of searches is inconsistently being done. I am taking measures to ensure that the practice and documentation is in compliance. Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print 6/05 monthly WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR July 2005 OUT- DATE OF STANDING REPORT ISSUE Y/N 6/15/05 7/5/05 8/5/05 Yes Yes No Monitoring Instrument Security and Searches Staffing Staffing Page 1 ITEM NO. NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE 3d The Shift Supervisor designates a random selected number to be searched at checkpoint; this number is not documented in the checkpoint logbooks for certain days to verify this occurred. (Ref: memorandum attached to policy CCA 9-120). 16 Warden’s response 7/18/05: Whiteville Correctional Facility will take the appropriate action to have each of its current employees to read and sign the security addendum. The certification form will be made a part Security Addendum not signed by of the initial hire packet in order to address future hires. staff. However, pursuant to section 6.06 of the addendum, the signed forms are to remain in the possession of the contracting government agency and available for audit purposes. Therefore, all signed forms will be forwarded to the contract monitor for filing. 11b CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN DATE/METHOD OF CONFIRMATION BY MONITOR/COMMENTS TDOC MANAGEMENT COMMENTS/NOTES Warden's response dated 6/16/05: A review of log entries and supervisor’s shift daily reports where documentation of staff searches are required each shift Verified 8/3/05: By review and revealed that documentation of searches is observation of checkpoint inconsistently being done. I am taking measures to procedures and documentation. ensure that the practice and documentation is in compliance. Liquidated damages issue: Nonsecurity position (maintenance) 118046 was not filled within 45 days. Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print 7/05 monthly WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR August 2005 OUT- DATE OF STANDING REPORT ISSUE Y/N 7/5/05 8/5/05 8/3/05 Yes No No Monitoring Instrument Staffing Staffing Use of Force ITEM NO. NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN 16 Warden’s response 7/18/05: Whiteville Correctional Facility will take the appropriate action to have each of its current employees to read and sign the security addendum. The certification form will be made a part Security Addendum not signed by of the initial hire packet in order to address future hires. staff. However, pursuant to section 6.06 of the addendum, the signed forms are to remain in the possession of the contracting government agency and available for audit purposes. Therefore, all signed forms will be forwarded to the contract monitor for filing. 11b Warden's response dated 8/10/05: The appearance that the maintenance position was unfilled in excess of the forty-five day time frame was due to the Human Resource Manager’s resignation. The approval memo was forwarded to the Personnel Office where it was in plain terms lost in the shuffle of transition from the Liquidated damages issue: Non- previous Human Resources Manager and the newly hired Human Resources Manager. I respectfully security position (maintenance) request that this not be viewed as a non-compliant 118046 was not filled within 45 finding, but human error occurring directly as the result days. of the vacancy in the Personnel Office. All steps were made to fill the position within the 45 day period that occurred. The paperwork and data entry function to complete the process did not occur to support the position fill date within the required time frame thus giving the appearance the position went unfilled. 3a On 7/27/05 a spontaneous Use of Force (chemical agents) occurred. Unit Manager administered OC to control inmate after an altercation. Staff completed 5-1a incident report, however as of this date a TOMIS (LIBJ) incident report has not been completed and entered as required by policy. Page 1 DATE/METHOD OF CONFIRMATION BY MONITOR/COMMENTS TDOC MANAGEMENT COMMENTS/NOTES 9/12/05 CMC note: Liquidated damages assessment is currently under review. Warden's response dated 8/16/05 indicates that, after review of the incident package, the TOMIS report had not been completed. The Shift Supervisor and Unit Manager did not ensure the report was entered on TOMIS. The report was completed and entered on TOMIS on August 3, 2005. Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print 8/05 monthly WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR August 2005 OUT- DATE OF STANDING REPORT ISSUE Y/N 8/5/05 No Monitoring Instrument Special management Inmates ITEM NO. 2b NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN An inmate was segregated 7/26/05 pending an investigation for protective custody. The protective Warden's response dated 8/16/05 appears to indicate services routing form (CR-3241) that the routing sheet was, in fact, forwarded to the was not provided to the Liaisons' office within 72 hours. Commissioners Designee for approval within the 72-hour policy guideline. Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print Page 2 DATE/METHOD OF CONFIRMATION BY MONITOR/COMMENTS TDOC MANAGEMENT COMMENTS/NOTES 9/12/05 CMC note: The CM is requested to verify the Warden's response that the packet was sent to the CD on 7/27 and segregation was approved within 72 hours. If the documents were forwarded and proper approval was secured within time guidelines, the non-compliance report will be deleted. 8/05 monthly WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR September 2005 OUT- DATE OF STANDING REPORT ISSUE Y/N 7/5/05 8/5/05 Yes Yes Monitoring Instrument Staffing Staffing ITEM NO. 16 11b NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN Page 1 DATE/METHOD OF CONFIRMATION BY MONITOR/COMMENTS TDOC MANAGEMENT COMMENTS/NOTES 10/24/05 CMC note: Although the Security Addendum does pertain, in large part, to policies and procedures relating to NCIC terminals, it also pertains to the information (rapsheets) generated by such terminals. Ref.: section 1.10 "… authorizes access to criminal history record information, limits the use of the information,...ensures the security and confidentiality of the information..., provides for sanctions..."; 5.07 "the Contractor shall protect against any unauthorized persons gaining access to...any of the data...In Warden’s response dated 8/10/05: We dispute the nonno event shall copies of...criminal history record information compliance in that at this time the purpose for the be disseminated..."; 7.04 "The Contractor shall provide for Security Addendum has not yet been carried out. Security Addendum not signed by NCIC terminals have not been installed at CCA CM note: Item outstanding, under the secure storage and disposal of all hard copy...". facilities contracting with TDOC. Therefore, the nonstaff. review. The security addendum was added to the contract, at the compliance notification is premature. [NOTE: Warden's insistence of the TBI, to enable appropriate contract staff original response of 7/18/05 was subsequently such as counselors, unit management, etc., to have withdrawn and this response submitted.] appropriate access to rapsheets in order to make necessary classification and security decisions. Insofar as the addendum relates to NCIC information generated by the system is concerned, the contractor is expected to provide appropriate training to staff, and to document such training on the form contained by the addendum. A copy of the signed agreement may be forwarded to the Liaisons' office for filing, however, it would also be appropriate to maintain a copy in institutional training or personnel files. Warden's response dated 8/10/05: The appearance that the maintenance position was unfilled in excess of the forty-five day time frame was due to the Human Resource Manager’s resignation. The approval memo was forwarded to the Personnel Office where it was in plain terms lost in the shuffle of transition from the Liquidated damages issue: Non- previous Human Resources Manager and the newly hired Human Resources Manager. I respectfully security position (maintenance) request that this not be viewed as a non-compliant 118046 was not filled within 45 finding, but human error occurring directly as the result days. of the vacancy in the Personnel Office. All steps were made to fill the position within the 45 day period that occurred. The paperwork and data entry function to complete the process did not occur to support the position fill date within the required time frame thus giving the appearance the position went unfilled. Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print 10/24/05 CMC Note: Liquidated Damages assessment notification sent to contractor by Commissioner dated 10/11/05. 9/05 monthly WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR September 2005 OUT- DATE OF STANDING REPORT ISSUE Y/N 8/3/05 8/5/05 9/19/05 Yes Monitoring Instrument Use of Force ITEM NO. NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE 3a On 7/27/05 a spontaneous Use of Force (chemical agents) occurred. Unit Manager administered OC to control inmate after an altercation. Staff completed 5-1a incident report, however as of this date a TOMIS (LIBJ) incident report has not been completed and entered as required by policy. 2b An inmate was segregated 7/26/05 pending an investigation for protective custody. The protective Warden's response dated 8/16/05 appears to indicate services routing form (CR-3241) that the routing sheet was, in fact, forwarded to the was not provided to the Liaisons' office within 72 hours. Commissioners Designee for approval within the 72-hour policy guideline. Yes Special management Inmates No Inmate was segregated pending investigation for fighting on 9/14/2005 at 10:50 am. He was assigned to a cell but the occupant would not allow him to enter so staff placed inmate in a shower stall while arrangements could be Special (NIN) made. Segregation staff continued management No item to document the inmates location Inmates number throughout the night as being in the shower. At approximately 6:30pm 9/15/05, after over 30 hours the inmate was removed from the shower and placed in a segregation cell. Staff has not completed any type of reports to reflect the incident that occurred. CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN Warden's response dated 8/16/05 indicates that, after review of the incident package, the TOMIS report had not been completed. The Shift Supervisor and Unit Manager did not ensure the report was entered on TOMIS. The report was completed and entered on TOMIS on August 3, 2005. Warden's response dated 9/27/05: Warden called Asst. Commissioner shortly after this occurred and discussed this situation with him. There is no violation of policy or contract in this case as the decision to remain in the shower was made by the inmate. Supervisory staff acted on good intentions in following the Warden’s previous directives to avoid uses of force/use of OC when I/M’s refused to allow restraints to be applied to remove them from a shower based on reasoning that after a period of time they would decide on their own to allow removal from the shower without the need for force. In a number of cases over the last several weeks this occurred after a brief period and no need to use force. Secondly if OC agent had been used we then would have had to put the inmate back into the shower for decontamination. It is my belief that in such situations force should be a last response as long as the inmate is not presenting a risk of harm to himself or others. Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print Page 2 DATE/METHOD OF CONFIRMATION BY MONITOR/COMMENTS TDOC MANAGEMENT COMMENTS/NOTES Verified 10/11/05: By review of TOMIS reports, CCA 5-1 reports for all Use of Force chemical agents incidents. CM Note10/11/05: While the segregation package was forwarded to the TDOC office the routing sheet CR-3241 was not in the package. The routing sheet was completed by unit management 8/2 and forwarded to CD 8/305 for review/approval and signature. Copy of routing sheet present for review. 10/24/05 CMC Note: Non-compliance finding is appropriate. 9/12/05 CMC note: The CM is requested to verify the Warden's response that the packet was sent to the CD on 7/27 and segregation was approved within 72 hours. If the documents were forwarded and proper approval was secured within time guidelines, the non-compliance report will be deleted. 11/7/05 CMC note: Letter has been issued by Commissioner indicating that this is a breach and that subsequent breaches may result in liquidated damages. 9/05 monthly WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR October 2005 OUT- DATE OF STANDING REPORT ISSUE Y/N 7/5/05 8/5/05 Yes Yes Monitoring Instrument Staffing Staffing ITEM NO. 16 11b NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN Page 1 DATE/METHOD OF CONFIRMATION BY MONITOR/COMMENTS TDOC MANAGEMENT COMMENTS/NOTES 10/24/05 CMC note: Although the Security Addendum does pertain, in large part, to policies and procedures relating to NCIC terminals, it also pertains to the information (rapsheets) generated by such terminals. Ref.: section 1.10 "… authorizes access to criminal history record information, limits the use of the information,...ensures the security and confidentiality of the information..., provides for sanctions..."; 5.07 "the Contractor shall protect against any unauthorized persons gaining access Warden’s response dated 8/10/05: We dispute the nonto...any of the data...In no event shall copies of...criminal history compliance in that at this time the purpose for the record information be disseminated..."; 7.04 "The Contractor Security Addendum has not yet been carried out. shall provide for the secure storage and disposal of all hard Security Addendum not signed by NCIC terminals have not been installed at CCA CM note: Item outstanding, under copy...". facilities contracting with TDOC. Therefore, the nonThe security addendum was added to the contract, at the staff. review. compliance notification is premature. [NOTE: Warden's insistence of the TBI, to enable appropriate contract staff such as counselors, unit management, etc., to have appropriate original response of 7/18/05 was subsequently access to rapsheets in order to make necessary classification withdrawn and this response submitted.] and security decisions. Insofar as the addendum relates to NCIC information generated by the system is concerned, the contractor is expected to provide appropriate training to staff, and to document such training on the form contained by the addendum. A copy of the signed agreement may be forwarded to the Liaisons' office for filing, however, it would also be appropriate to maintain a copy in institutional training or personnel files. Warden's response dated 8/10/05: The appearance that the maintenance position was unfilled in excess of the forty-five day time frame was due to the Human Resource Manager’s resignation. The approval memo was forwarded to the Personnel Office where it was in plain terms lost in the shuffle of transition from the Liquidated damages issue: Non- previous Human Resources Manager and the newly hired Human Resources Manager. I respectfully security position (maintenance) request that this not be viewed as a non-compliant 118046 was not filled within 45 finding, but human error occurring directly as the result days. of the vacancy in the Personnel Office. All steps were made to fill the position within the 45 day period that occurred. The paperwork and data entry function to complete the process did not occur to support the position fill date within the required time frame thus giving the appearance the position went unfilled. Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print Verified 11/8/05: Health service administrator vacant over 45 days, however, the position was vacated 9/4/05, and the Warden requested an extension 10/19/05. 10/24/05 CMC Note: Liquidated Damages assessment Position was filled by acting notification sent to contractor by Commissioner dated 10/11/05. personnel from other CCA facility 11/1/05, and a new HSA was hired 11/10/05 and began training, will assume position 11/24/05. 10/05 monthly WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR October 2005 OUT- DATE OF STANDING REPORT ISSUE Y/N 8/5/05 9/19/05 Monitoring Instrument ITEM NO. NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE An inmate was segregated 7/26/05 pending an investigation for protective custody. The protective Warden's response dated 8/16/05 appears to indicate services routing form (CR-3241) that the routing sheet was, in fact, forwarded to the was not provided to the Liaisons' office within 72 hours. Commissioners Designee for approval within the 72-hour policy guideline. Yes Special management Inmates Yes Inmate was segregated pending investigation for fighting on 9/14/2005 at 10:50 am. He was assigned to a cell but the occupant would not allow him to enter so staff placed inmate in a shower stall while arrangements could be Special (NIN) made. Segregation staff continued management No item to document the inmates location Inmates number throughout the night as being in the shower. At approximately 6:30pm 9/15/05, after over 30 hours the inmate was removed from the shower and placed in a segregation cell. Staff has not completed any type of reports to reflect the incident that occurred. 2b CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN Warden's response dated 9/27/05: Warden called Asst. Commissioner shortly after this occurred and discussed this situation with him. There is no violation of policy or contract in this case as the decision to remain in the shower was made by the inmate. Supervisory staff acted on good intentions in following the Warden’s previous directives to avoid uses of force/use of OC when I/M’s refused to allow restraints to be applied to remove them from a shower based on reasoning that after a period of time they would decide on their own to allow removal from the shower without the need for force. In a number of cases over the last several weeks this occurred after a brief period and no need to use force. Secondly if OC agent had been used we then would have had to put the inmate back into the shower for decontamination. It is my belief that in such situations force should be a last response as long as the inmate is not presenting a risk of harm to himself or others. Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print Page 2 DATE/METHOD OF CONFIRMATION BY MONITOR/COMMENTS CM Note10/11/05: While the segregation package was forwarded to the TDOC office the routing sheet CR-3241 was not in the package. The routing sheet was completed by unit management 8/2 and forwarded to CD 8/305 for review/approval and signature. Copy of routing sheet present for review. TDOC MANAGEMENT COMMENTS/NOTES 10/24/05 CMC Note: Non-compliance finding is appropriate. 9/12/05 CMC note: The CM is requested to verify the Warden's response that the packet was sent to the CD on 7/27 and segregation was approved within 72 hours. If the documents were forwarded and proper approval was secured within time guidelines, the non-compliance report will be deleted. 11/23/05 CMC Note: Plan of Action submitted by Warden, is under review. 11/7/05 CMC note: Letter has been issued by Commissioner indicating that this is a breach and that subsequent breaches may result in liquidated damages. 10/05 monthly WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR October 2005 OUT- DATE OF STANDING REPORT ISSUE Y/N 10/27/05 10/28/05 No No Monitoring Instrument Policies and Procedures Manual and Operations Plan Special management Inmates ITEM NO. 1d NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE WCFA does not have a current TDOC approved segregation handbook. Chief of Security reported to TDOC Liaison that an inmate had been released from protective custody to general population while pending protective custody investigation (PCI). This move was made before the Warden and 2e(3) TDOC Liaison had approved the protective custody panel recommendation. This inmate was on protective custody investigation status with protective custody pending at time of this unapproved release. CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN Warden's response dated 11/3/05: The above write up references TDOC policy 502.04. Upon detailed research of the said policy, there is no reference to a “segregation handbook.” Policy requires inmates to be orientated and that orientation may occur using a written packet of information. Although, policy and/or the contract does not require a segregation handbook, Whiteville Correctional Facility does issue a “segregation information packet” to all inmates placed in segregation and an orientation is completed of segregation rules and regulation. The CR-2110 is also signed by the segregated inmate(s) and placed in his institutional file for viewing. In addition, the Segregation Packet” is reviewed on an annual basis. Page 3 DATE/METHOD OF CONFIRMATION BY MONITOR/COMMENTS CM Note 11/10/05: WCFA staff provided CCA form 1-13a showing that the appropriate segregation policies had been reviewed by WCFA staff on annual basis. TDOC MANAGEMENT COMMENTS/NOTES 11/23/05 CMC Note: E-mail of clarification sent to Warden 11/4/05 indicating that a separate handbook, per se, may not be required, however, approval in writing by TDOC is required for any rules for the unit which differ from thosae of the general population and are not authorized by TDOC policy. Determination as to whether this is in noncompliance will be made when CM determines if all rules for segregated inmates have been approved by TDOC. Warden's response dated 11/1/05: On notification of non-compliance, the following was discovered: Inmate received a Protective Custody Services hearing. The chairperson and committee recommended that the inmate be released. Inmate wrote a statement stating that he did not want to be released because he feared for his life. The hearing was approved by the Assistant Warden, however; was not approved by TDOC. Unit Manager (Chairman) advised Segregation Correctional Counselor to seek TDOC approval. However, proper approval was not received. Unit Manager assumed that proper notification and approval had been granted, therefore, releasing the inmate. TDOC CM and Assistant Warden discussed the placement of inmate, at which time, both parties were of the understanding that the inmate had not been released. Acting Unit Manager noticed that he had been released. Upon notification that the said inmate was in fact released to general population, Assistant Warden revised the original Warden’s action and returned the inmate to Protective custody status as stipulated on his approved Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print 10/05 monthly WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR November 2005 OUT- DATE OF STANDING REPORT ISSUE Y/N 7/5/05 8/5/05 9/19/05 Yes Yes Yes Monitoring Instrument ITEM NO. NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN Page 1 DATE/METHOD OF CONFIRMATION BY MONITOR/COMMENTS Warden’s response dated 8/10/05: We dispute the noncompliance in that at this time the purpose for the Security Addendum has not yet been carried out. NCIC terminals have CM note: Item outstanding, under not been installed at CCA facilities contracting with TDOC. Staffing 16 Security Addendum not signed by staff. review. Therefore, the non-compliance notification is premature. [NOTE: Warden's original response of 7/18/05 was subsequently withdrawn and this response submitted. ] CM Note10/11/05: While the segregation package was An inmate was segregated 7/26/05 forwarded to the TDOC office the pending an investigation for protective routing sheet CR-3241 was not in Special Warden's response dated 8/16/05 appears to indicate that the custody. The protective services routing the package. The routing sheet management 2b routing sheet was, in fact, forwarded to the Liaisons' office form (CR-3241) was not provided to the was completed by unit Inmates within 72 hours. Commissioners Designee for approval management 8/2 and forwarded within the 72-hour policy guideline. to CD 8/305 for review/approval and signature. Copy of routing sheet present for review. Warden's response dated 9/27/05: Warden called Asst. Commissioner shortly after this occurred and discussed this Inmate was segregated pending situation with him. There is no violation of policy or contract in investigation for fighting on 9/14/2005 at this case as the decision to remain in the shower was made by 10:50 am. He was assigned to a cell but the inmate. Supervisory staff acted on good intentions in the occupant would not allow him to enter following the Warden’s previous directives to avoid uses of so staff placed inmate in a shower stall force/use of OC when I/M’s refused to allow restraints to be while arrangements could be made. Special (NIN) applied to remove them from a shower based on reasoning Segregation staff continued to document management No item that after a period of time they would decide on their own to the inmates location throughout the night Inmates number allow removal from the shower without the need for force. In a as being in the shower. At approximately number of cases over the last several weeks this occurred 6:30pm 9/15/05, after over 30 hours the after a brief period and no need to use force. Secondly if OC inmate was removed from the shower and agent had been used we then would have had to put the placed in a segregation cell. Staff has not inmate back into the shower for decontamination. It is my belief completed any type of reports to reflect that in such situations force should be a last response as long the incident that occurred. as the inmate is not presenting a risk of harm to himself or others. Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print TDOC MANAGEMENT COMMENTS/NOTES 10/24/05 CMC note:…the contractor is expected to provide appropriate training to staff, and to document such training on the form contained by the addendum. A copy of the signed agreement may be forwarded to the Liaisons' office for filing, however, it would also be appropriate to maintain a copy in institutional training or personnel files. 10/24/05 CMC Note: Non-compliance finding is appropriate. 9/12/05 CMC note: The CM is requested to verify the Warden's response that the packet was sent to the CD on 7/27 and segregation was approved within 72 hours. If the documents were forwarded and proper approval was secured within time guidelines, the noncompliance report will be deleted. 11/23/05 CMC Note: Plan of Action submitted by Warden, is under review. 11/7/05 CMC note: Letter has been issued by Commissioner indicating that this is a breach and that subsequent breaches may result in liquidated damages. 11/05 monthly WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR November 2005 OUT- DATE OF STANDING REPORT ISSUE Y/N 10/27/05 10/28/05 No Yes Monitoring Instrument Policies and Procedures Manual and Operations Plan Special management Inmates ITEM NO. 1d NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE WCFA does not have a current TDOC approved segregation handbook. Chief of Security reported to TDOC Liaison that an inmate had been released from protective custody to general population while pending protective custody investigation (PCI). This move was made before the Warden and TDOC 2e(3) Liaison had approved the protective custody panel recommendation. This inmate was on protective custody investigation status with protective custody pending at time of this unapproved release. 11/16/05 No Release Procedures 3 11/21/05 No Special management Inmates 4g CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN Warden's response dated 11/3/05: The above write up references TDOC policy 502.04. Upon detailed research of the said policy, there is no reference to a “segregation handbook.” Policy requires inmates to be orientated and that orientation may occur using a written packet of information. Although, policy and/or the contract does not require a segregation handbook, Whiteville Correctional Facility does issue a “segregation information packet” to all inmates placed in segregation and an orientation is completed of segregation rules and regulation. The CR-2110 is also signed by the segregated inmate(s) and placed in his institutional file for viewing. In addition, the Segregation Packet” is reviewed on an annual basis. Page 2 DATE/METHOD OF CONFIRMATION BY MONITOR/COMMENTS CM Note 11/10/05: WCFA staff provided CCA form 1-13a showing that the appropriate segregation policies had been reviewed by WCFA staff on annual basis. TDOC MANAGEMENT COMMENTS/NOTES 11/23/05 CMC Note: E-mail of clarification sent to Warden 11/4/05 indicating that a separate handbook, per se, may not be required, however, approval in writing by TDOC is required for any rules for the unit which differ from those of the general population and are not authorized by TDOC policy. Determination as to whether this is in non-compliance will be made when CM determines if all rules for segregated inmates have been approved by TDOC. Warden's response dated 11/1/05 states: "...Protective Custody Services hearing... recommended that the inmate be released...The hearing was approved by the Assistant Warden, however; was not approved by TDOC... Unit Manager assumed that proper notification and approval had been granted, therefore, releasing the inmate... Assistant Warden revised the original Warden’s action and returned the inmate to Protective custody status as stipulated on his approved Protective Services Hearing Sheet." Warden's response dated 11/21/05 indicates that procedures were examined and new procedures are being put in place to cross check staff more closely to ensure this does not occur again; records staff were counseled and trained again on proper release procedures. Warden’s response date: 11/29/05. Assistant Warden and Two inmates were segregated pending Assistant Chief conducted a meeting with all Senior hearing. Their segregation packets, Correctional Officer, Unit Managers and the Shift Supervisors. property checklist, personal property Proper procedures relating to: segregation packets, property storage request form and TOMIS offender checklist, personal property storage request forms and TOMIS property (LIBN) all reflect their TV’s were entries on LIBN were reviewed at length. All supervisory staff taken and placed in storage prior to their were made aware that if future non-compliant issues occur, disciplinary hearing and punitive disciplinary action will follow. segregation status began on 11/17/05. Several improper actions were taken by WCFA staff concerning the release to detainer of an inmate. Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print 11/05 monthly WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR DECEMBER 2005 OUT- DATE OF STANDING REPORT ISSUE Y/N 7/5/05 8/5/05 9/19/05 Yes Monitoring Instrument Staffing ITEM NO. 16 NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE Security Addendum not signed by staff. An inmate was segregated 7/26/05 pending an investigation for protective custody. The protective services routing form (CR-3241) was not provided to the Commissioners Designee for approval within the 72-hour policy guideline. CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN DATE/METHOD OF CONFIRMATION BY MONITOR/COMMENTS Warden’s response dated 8/10/05: We dispute the noncompliance in that at this time the purpose for the Security Addendum has not yet been carried out. NCIC terminals have CM note 1/5/06: Item not been installed at CCA facilities contracting with TDOC. outstanding, under review. Therefore, the non-compliance notification is premature. [NOTE: Warden's original response of 7/18/05 was subsequently withdrawn and this response submitted. ] Yes Special management Inmates Yes Warden's response dated 9/27/05: Warden called Asst. Commissioner shortly after this occurred and discussed this Inmate was segregated pending situation with him. There is no violation of policy or contract in investigation for fighting on 9/14/2005 at this case as the decision to remain in the shower was made by 10:50 am. He was assigned to a cell but the inmate. Supervisory staff acted on good intentions in the occupant would not allow him to enter following the Warden’s previous directives to avoid uses of so staff placed inmate in a shower stall force/use of OC when I/M’s refused to allow restraints to be while arrangements could be made. Special (NIN) applied to remove them from a shower based on reasoning Segregation staff continued to document management No item that after a period of time they would decide on their own to the inmates location throughout the night Inmates number allow removal from the shower without the need for force. In a as being in the shower. At approximately number of cases over the last several weeks this occurred 6:30pm 9/15/05, after over 30 hours the after a brief period and no need to use force. Secondly if OC inmate was removed from the shower and agent had been used we then would have had to put the placed in a segregation cell. Staff has not inmate back into the shower for decontamination. It is my belief completed any type of reports to reflect that in such situations force should be a last response as long the incident that occurred. as the inmate is not presenting a risk of harm to himself or others. 2b Page 1 Warden's response dated 8/16/05 appears to indicate that the routing sheet was, in fact, forwarded to the Liaisons' office within 72 hours. Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print TDOC MANAGEMENT COMMENTS/NOTES 10/24/05 CMC note:…the contractor is expected to provide appropriate training to staff, and to document such training on the form contained by the addendum. A copy of the signed agreement may be forwarded to the Liaisons' office for filing, however, it would also be appropriate to maintain a copy in institutional training or personnel files. Verified 1/5/06: By review of Movement confinement, Protective routing sheets, TOMIS Wardens report and monitoring of 10/24/05 CMC Note: Non-compliance finding is segregation unit. CM Note appropriate. 9/12/05 CMC note: The CM is 10/11/05: While the segregation requested to verify the Warden's response that the package was forwarded to the packet was sent to the CD on 7/27 and TDOC office the routing sheet CRsegregation was approved within 72 hours. If the 3241 was not in the package. The documents were forwarded and proper approval routing sheet was completed by was secured within time guidelines, the nonunit management 8/2 and compliance report will be deleted. forwarded to CD 8/305 for review/approval and signature. Copy of routing sheet present for review. 11/23/05 CMC Note: Plan of Action submitted by Warden, is under review. 11/7/05 CMC note: Letter has been issued by Commissioner indicating that this is a breach and that subsequent breaches may result in liquidated damages. 12/05 monthly WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR DECEMBER 2005 OUT- DATE OF STANDING REPORT ISSUE Y/N 10/27/05 10/28/05 11/16/05 11/21/05 No Yes Yes Yes Monitoring Instrument Policies and Procedures Manual and Operations Plan Special management Inmates Release Procedures Special management Inmates ITEM NO. 1d NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE WCFA does not have a current TDOC approved segregation handbook. Chief of Security reported to TDOC Liaison that an inmate had been released from protective custody to general population while pending protective custody investigation (PCI). This move was made before the Warden and TDOC 2e(3) Liaison had approved the protective custody panel recommendation. This inmate was on protective custody investigation status with protective custody pending at time of this unapproved release. 3 4g Page 2 CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN DATE/METHOD OF CONFIRMATION BY MONITOR/COMMENTS TDOC MANAGEMENT COMMENTS/NOTES Warden's response dated 11/3/05: The above write up references TDOC policy 502.04. Upon detailed research of the said policy, there is no reference to a “segregation handbook.” Policy requires inmates to be orientated and that orientation may occur using a written packet of information. Although, policy and/or the contract does not require a segregation handbook, Whiteville Correctional Facility does issue a “segregation information packet” to all inmates placed in segregation and an orientation is completed of segregation rules and regulation. The CR-2110 is also signed by the segregated inmate(s) and placed in his institutional file for viewing. In addition, the Segregation Packet” is reviewed on an annual basis. CM note 1/6/05: Item outstanding, WCFA in process of TDOC approval for segregation rules. CM Note 11/10/05: WCFA staff provided CCA form 1-13a showing that the appropriate segregation policies had been reviewed by WCFA staff on annual basis. 11/23/05 CMC Note: E-mail of clarification sent to Warden 11/4/05 indicating that a separate handbook, per se, may not be required, however, approval in writing by TDOC is required for any rules for the unit which differ from those of the general population and are not authorized by TDOC policy. Determination as to whether this is in non-compliance will be made when CM determines if all rules for segregated inmates have been approved by TDOC. Warden's response dated 11/1/05 states: "...Protective Custody Services hearing... recommended that the inmate be released...The hearing was approved by the Assistant Warden, however; was not approved by TDOC... Unit Manager assumed that proper notification and approval had been granted, therefore, releasing the inmate... Assistant Warden revised the original Warden’s action and returned the inmate to Protective custody status as stipulated on his approved Protective Services Hearing Sheet." Verified 1/5/06: By review of segregation logs, TOMIS Warden's report (MGH), segregation end date report (MGM), protective custody review and protective routing sheets. Warden's response dated 11/21/05 indicates that procedures were examined and new procedures are being put in place to cross check staff more closely to ensure this does not occur again; records staff were counseled and trained again on proper release procedures. Warden’s response date: 11/29/05. Assistant Warden and Two inmates were segregated pending Assistant Chief conducted a meeting with all Senior hearing. Their segregation packets, Correctional Officer, Unit Managers and the Shift Supervisors. property checklist, personal property Proper procedures relating to: segregation packets, property storage request form and TOMIS offender checklist, personal property storage request forms and TOMIS property (LIBN) all reflect their TV’s were entries on LIBN were reviewed at length. All supervisory staff taken and placed in storage prior to their were made aware that if future non-compliant issues occur, disciplinary hearing and punitive disciplinary action will follow. segregation status began on 11/17/05. Several improper actions were taken by WCFA staff concerning the release to detainer of an inmate. Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print CM note 1/5/06: Item outstanding, monitoring not complete. Verified 1/5/06: By review of segregation logs, Segregation packet documentation, inmate property storage, property inventory and property room inventories. 12/05 monthly WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR DECEMBER 2005 OUT- DATE OF STANDING REPORT ISSUE Y/N 12/6/05 No Monitoring Instrument Staffing ITEM NO. 11b NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE Two non-security positions were not filled within 45 days. Position #118064, Clinical Supervisor, Position #118068, Registered Nurse. CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN Page 3 DATE/METHOD OF CONFIRMATION BY MONITOR/COMMENTS Warden’s response dated 12/8/05: WCF has advertised locally and nationally in an attempt to fill these positions. WCF continues to practice due diligence in filling these positions however have not at this point been able to recruit applicants. CM note 1/5/06: Item still in nonRecruitment continues in an effort to fill these positions as compliance and is outstanding. expeditiously as possible. We are covering the CNS position with an acting supervisor until the position is filled and covering the RN position with overtime . Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print TDOC MANAGEMENT COMMENTS/NOTES 2/10/06 CMC note: A determination of breach status is pending additional information concerning RN coverage and acting CNS credentials. 12/05 monthly