U.S. DOJ-Federal Bureau of Prisons-Office of Internal Affairs Report for Fiscal Year 2020
Download original document:
Document text
Document text
This text is machine-read, and may contain errors. Check the original document to verify accuracy.
U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Prisons Washington, DC Office of Internal Affairs Report for Fiscal Year 2020 Executive Summary of Findings ..................................................................................................................... 1 Reporting Incidents of Misconduct.. ................................................................................................................ 3 Guidance for Reporting Allegations of Staff Misconduct... ....................................................................... 3 OIA "Complaints" ...................................................................................................................................... 5 Review of Local Staff Misconduct Investigations .......................................................................................... 6 Local Investigation Guidance ..................................................................................................................... 6 Reported Misconduct ....................................................................................................................................... 8 USA Patriot Act ........................................................................................................................................ 10 Closed/Sustained Misconduct ........................................................................................................................ 11 BOP Employees Statistics ........................................................................................................................ 11 BOP Employees Disciplinary Process ...................................................................................................... 13 BOP Employees Disciplinary Action Statistics ....................................................................................... 14 BOP Employees Gender Statistics............................................................................................................ 15 BOP Employees Job Discipline Statistics ................................................................................................ 18 Residential Reentry Center Employees/Drug Treatment Contractors ..................................................... 19 Staff in Privatized Facilities ...................................................................................................................... 20 Contract EmployeesNolunteers Working in a BOP Facility ................................................................... 2 1 Public Health Service Employees Working in a BOP Facility ................................................................ 22 Physical Abuse of Inmates ............................................................................................................................. 23 Title 18, United States Code, Chapter 13 - Civil Rights ......................................................................... 23 Statistics .................................................................................................................................................... 24 Introduction of Contraband ............................................................................................................................ 25 Title 18, United States Code, Chapter 87 - Prisons ................................................................................. 25 Statistics .................................................................................................................................................... 27 Sexual Abuse of Inmates ............................................................................................................................... 28 Title 18, United States Code, Chapter 109A - Sexual Abuse .................................................................. 28 Statistics .................................................................................................................................................... 32 Representative Case Summaries .................................................................................................................... 33 Appendices ..................................................................................................................................................... 39 Updated Data - Sustained Misconduct for BOP Employees - Fiscal Year 2019 .................................... 39 Updated Data - Sustained Misconduct for BOP Employees - Fiscal Year 2018 .................................... 40 Updated Data - Sustained Misconduct for BOP Employees - Fiscal Year 2017 ................................... .41 Updated Data - Sustained Misconduct for BOP Employees - Fiscal Year 2016 .................................... 42 Updated Data - Sustained Misconduct for BOP Employees - Fiscal Year 2015 .................................... 43 Updated Data - Sustained Misconduct for BOP Employees - Fiscal Year 2014 .................................... 44 Updated Data - Sustained Misconduct for BOP Employees - Fiscal Year 2013 .................................... 45 Types of Misconduct ........ ........................................................................................................................ 46 OIA Special Agent Monitoring Assignments ................................................................................................ 50 Executive Summary of Findings This report from the Office of Internal Affairs (OIA) for Fiscal Year 2020 provides information concerning the types and frequency of misconduct that occurs within the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) operations. The report is intended for managers and supervisors to address any trends and to identify any need for training to prevent misconduct from occurring. The report examines all aspects of BOP operations, and therefore data is examined for BOP employees; Public Health Staff (PHS) staff who work in BOP facilities; Contractors and volunteers that work in BOP facilities; and Contractors that manage inmates in outside facilities such as Residential Reentry Centers (RRC) and secure private facilities. OIA tracks several data points, to include the number of allegations received; the number of cases treated as complaints; the number of cases opened; and the number of cases closed (i.e. OIA has determined whether an allegation is sustained or not sustained); and the number, type, and gender of employees involved. The data is tracked through broad categories of misconduct, which includes behavior of varying levels of seriousness. The offenses included in these broad categories, as well as representative examples of some cases, can be found in the Appendices. Please note, the data system used by OIA is dynamic; i.e. subject to change as new allegations are discovered, cases are closed, etc. In addition, as some matters continue from one fiscal year to another, it is difficult to provide exact figures for the reporting period. Therefore, this report is meant to provide a "snapshot" which will be instructive for agency management. Findings from FY 20 include the following: • There was a 19.6 percent increase in the total number of misconduct allegations reported in Fiscal Year 2020, as compared with Fiscal Year 2019. The rate of reported misconduct allegations specifically for BOP employees increased 20.4 percent from Fiscal Year 2019. • There was a 19.2 percent increase in the number of cases opened in Fiscal Year 2020, as compared with Fiscal Year 2019. • Cases classified as Classification 1 offenses showed an increase of 17.2 percent; cases classified as Classification 2 offenses showed an increase of 19. 9 percent; and cases classified as Classification 3 offenses showed an increase of 19.7 percent. • The most frequently reported type of misconduct in Fiscal Year 2020 was Unprofessional Conduct. Other On-Duty Misconduct and Failure to Follow Policy placed second and third, respectively. 1 Executive Summary of Findings • All categories of reported misconduct showed an increase from Fiscal Year 2019, except for the allegations of Sexual Abuse of Inmates (decrease of 7.93 percent), Introduction of Contraband (decrease of 17.60 percent), and Bribery (decrease of 16.10 percent). • During Fiscal Year 2020, seven cases involved Patriot Act violations. As of March 17, 2021, four cases remained open pending investigation. No cases involving Patriot Act violations were sustained. • The most frequently sustained categories of misconduct among BOP employees with a sustained decision as of March 17, 2021, were Failure to Follow Policy and Personnel Prohibitions. • As of March 17, 202 1, the most frequently sustained category of misconduct among both male and female BOP employees was Failure to Follow Policy. For those BOP employees with a sustained decision as of March 17, 2021, the rate was highest among Co1Tectional Services staff. • As of March 17, 2021, the most frequently sustained category of misconduct for Residential Reentry Center employees was Inappropriate Relationships with Inmates. The most frequently sustained category of misconduct for staff in privatized facilities was Failure to Follow Policy. • There were three sustained allegations of Physical Abuse as of March 17, 2021, stemming from three separate incidents. Three subjects were BOP employees; two employees were suspended, as a result of the sustained allegations, and the other received a written reprimand. The remaining one subject was a contractor at a privatized facility, who was temunated as a result of the sustained allegation. None of the subjects were criminally prosecuted. • During Fiscal Year 2020, 351 allegations oflntroduction of Contraband were reported. As of March 17, 2021 , 35 of these allegations were sustained. There were 34 individuals involved in the sustained allegations of Introduction of Contraband. • During Fiscal Year 2020, 65 1 allegations of Sexual Abuse were either reported to the OIA or detected during the course of an investigation. As of March 17, 2021 , five of these allegations were sustained. 2 Reporting Incidents of Misconduct Staff Reporting In accordance with the Bureau's Standards of Employee Conduct, staff who become aware of any violation or alleged violation of the Standards of Employee Conduct must report said allegations/violations to the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), the Office of Internal Affairs (OIA), or the Department of Justice (DOJ), Office of the Inspector General (OIG). Additionally, the OIG has established a toll-free hotline ( 1-800-869-4499) which is available to report DOJ employees' misconduct, to include potential areas of fraud, waste, or abuse in government. Bureau Staff are encouraged to use the OIG hotline if they wish to remain anonymous, and/or perceive fear of retaliation/reprisal. To report violations directly to the OIA Central Office, please submit a written complaint to: Federal Bureau of Prisons Office of Internal Affairs 320 First Street, NW, Room 600 Washington, DC 20534 Written complaints may also be emailed to BOP-DIR-InternalAffairs-S@bop.gov or sent via fax to (202) 514-8625. CEO Reporting Upon becoming aware of any possible violation of the Standards of Employee Conduct (either through a report from staff or personal knowledge), the CEO at the institution, Regional Office or Central Office Division, or his/her designee, is to report the violation to the OIA within 24 hours. Details and definitions are as follows: • Classification 1 cases are defined as allegations, which, if substantiated, would constitute a prosecutable offense (other than offenses such as misdemeanor airests). • Classification 2 cases are defined as allegations which involve violations of rules, regulations, or law that, if substantiated, would not likely result in criminal prosecution, but constitute serious misconduct. • Classification 3 cases are defined as allegations of misconduct, which ordinarily have less impact on institutional operations. Note: Classification 1 and 2 cases must be reported to the OIA immediately. As a particular investigation unfolds, the severity of misconduct may increase or decrease, thereby moving it into another classification. 3 Reporting Incidents of Misconduct Again, written notification to the OIA will be made within 24 hours (not to include weekends and holidays) from the time management official(s) learn of the matter. When there is suspected criminal conduct, the CEO may refer the matter simultaneously to the OIA and the local OIG or Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) office. Submitting Initial Information A Referral oflncident form (BP-A715 .012) is used to organize the information to be provided (for contract employees form BP-A774.012 is used). Be sure to include the following information: • • • The identity of the complainant(s), subject(s), witness(es), and victim(s); The details of the allegation(s); and All corroborating evidence. The subject of the allegation or complaint must not be questioned or interviewed prior to receiving clearance from the OIG and the OJA. This is to ensure against procedural e1Tors, as well as to safeguard the rights of the subject(s). Supporting Documentation A Referral oflncident form (BP-A 715.012) and all supporting documentation (e.g. victim or witness statements, medical reports, photos, BP-583/586, and related memoranda), must be sent to the OIA immediately. If an inmate alleges physical or sexual abuse by a staff member, and has not received a medical examination, the CEO must arrange an immediate, confidential medical examination and forward a copy of the results to the OIA as soon as possible. PREA related protocols must be followed, accordingly. Contact the OIA immediately if there is any question as to the classification of the misconduct. It is important to note that case classifications are often based upon limited information. All signed Referral of Incident forms (BP-S715.012 or BP-S774.012), in tandem with appropriate predicating information, should be scanned as a single file (via .pdf, Adobe Acrobat) and sent directly to the OIA via e-mail: OIA BOPNet Group Wise mailbox, "BOP-DIR/IntemalAffairs-Referrals-S." The signed Referral of Incident form should appear on the top of the file with all supporting documentation underneath. 4 Reporting Incidents of Misconduct Complaints Matters designated by the OIA as complaints are forwarded to the CEO via memorandum. Such complaints will be categorized as follows: Complaint for Information and Complaint for Disposition. Additionally, correspondence received by the OIA, which has been determined to not include any discernable allegation of staff misconduct, will be forwarded to the CEO directly. During Fiscal Year 2020, the OIA reviewed 685 items, which did not contain any discernable allegation of staff misconduct. These matters were forwarded to the CEO directly. A Complaint for Information will be sent via memorandum in the event the OIA has reviewed a referred matter, and dete1mined the allegation(s) do not rise to a level of staff misconduct. During Fiscal Year 2020, the OIA opened 385 matters as a Complaint for Information. (This value does not include additional information received by the OIA concerning Complaints for Information which were already opened within Fiscal Year 2019). A Complaint for Disposition will be sent via memorandum for CEO edification and review. A summary of the CEO's findings is not required by the OIA. Should the CEO determine, however, that any misconduct might have occurred, he/she will make an appropriate refenal back to the OIA in accordance with policy. These complaints are generally received from external sources (e.g. deferred by OIG) for OIA review. During Fiscal Year 2020, the OIA opened 3,732 matters as a Complaint for Disposition. (This value does not include additional information received by the OIA concerning Complaints for Disposition which were already opened within Fiscal Year 2020). 5 Review of Local Staff Misconduct Investigations The CEO must receive OIA approval prior to initiating a local investigation. The investigator must fo1ward the complete investigative packet for all misconduct investigations directly to the OIA for approval prior to forwarding it to the CEO for action. These procedures apply to all local staff misconduct investigations in which BOP employees are the subject (Classification 1, 2, and 3 allegations), regardless of whether any misconduct will be sustained. Where to Send Local Investigative Packets Local investigative packets should be sent via e-mail to the OIA GroupWise mailbox: "BOP-DIR/Internal Affairs-Local Investigative Packets-$" (not to be confused with OIA's main resource mailbox, "BOP-DIR/Internal Affairs-S"). The subject of your e-mail message should include the OIA case number and the facility mnemonic code (e.g., 2020-00001 - BUX). To ensure local investigative packets are reviewed by the OIA in a timely manner, packets should not be sent to either any individual OIA staff member or directly to any OIA field office. Format for Local Investigative Packets and What to Send Local investigative packets should include the investigative report (signed by the investigator) and all supporting documentation (e.g. affidavits, memorandums, video files, etc.). Note: The Summary of Investigation for Classification 3 Cases form (BP-A7 16.012) is no longer applicable and should not be used. Documents must be scanned as .pdf format (Adobe Acrobat), and saved as follows: Investigative Report (OIA Case Number) Affidavits and MOis (OIA Case Number) Supporting Documentation (OIA Case Number) Do not send documents in other formats (e.g., .tif files, .docx files). Do not send an e-mail that exceeds 14.0 MB in size (including attachments). Affidavit files should include the "Warning and Assurance to Employee Required to Provide Information" (BP-Al94.012), if applicable, as well as the signed oath for each individual. The investigative packet should not include national policy or any documents not specifically related to the investigation (e.g., staff rosters, inmate SENTRY information, etc.). 6 Review of Local Staff Misconduct Investigations Time Guidelines Local investigators must complete investigative packets and forward them to the OIA within 120 calendar days of the date a local investigation was autholized by the OIA. Once received, the OIA will complete their review of the local investigative packet within ten business days. The local investigator will be advised as to whether the investigative packet is approved, or if additional information is required. This information will be sent via e-mail to the local investigator with a copy to the CEO. If additional information is required, the local investigator should forward the additional information to the OIA within 30 calendar days, who will again notify the local investigator and CEO if the packet has been approved. Once the investigative packet has been approved, the local investigator should forward the investigative packet to the CEO for appropriate action, with all requisite "Review of Local Investigative Packet" forms attached. No disciplinary proceedings or other notifications to subject(s) should occur prior to the OIA's approval of the investigative packet. Reports from the OIA The OIA sends the CEO a monthly repo1t of all local staff misconduct investigations which have extended past established deadlines. Special Investigative Agents/Special Investigative Services (SIAs/SISs) should continue to work with the OIA monitoring agent assigned to their facility on an ongoing and recurring basis. SIAs/SISs should provide updates on any outstanding matters. The OIA monitoring agent will provide guidance, as needed. 7 Reported Misconduct All allegations of misconduct received by the OIA are reviewed and classified. Allegations classified as Category 1 or 2 matters are immediately referred to the OIG for review and disposition. The OIG determines which matters they will accept for investigation and possible criminal prosecution and defers other matters to the OIA for investigation. The OIA coordinates with the OIG and/or the FBI when investigations may lead to criminal prosecution or when there are allegations involving the deprivation of an individual's rights under color of law. For those matters deferred for investigation, the NOTES OIA determines, after consulting with relevant BOP management officials, whether an on-site Due to the dynamic nature of the investigation is warranted, or if the matter can OJA database, figures in this report be investigated at the local institution level. are subject to change. During the course of an investigation, evidence Allegations categorized as Classification 3 may indicate circumstances other offenses are referred to the OIG via computer than those initially rcp01ted, extract on a monthly basis. ( causing data t() be added, deleted, and/or changed. There is no nexu,; between reported and sustained allegations. During Fiscal Year 2020, the OIA opened 5,270 cases involving 6,593 BOP employees, 26 contract employees working in BOP facilities, 42 Public Health Service (PHS) employees working in BOP facilities, two volunteers working in BOP facilities, 112 contract/residential reentry center employees, 279 employees working in privatized facilities, and nine other individuals. The number of subjects exceeds the number of cases throughout this report as some cases have multiple subjects. Also. some subjects may be charged with multiple types of misconduct in a single case. causing the number oi allegations to be higher Finally, individual employees may be subjects in more than one case. These 5,270 cases represent a 19.2 percent increase from the 4,421 cases opened during Fiscal Year 2019. The rate of reported misconduct among BOP employees increased 18.5 percent from Fiscal Year 2019. Allegations refe1red to as "Inmate Related" included some type of inmate involvement, while allegations referred to as "Non Inmate Rclate<l" occmTed in the workplace but t.litl not include inmate involvemcn1. flora complete list of the types of misconduct included in each category, pka~c rclcrcnce the Appendices section of this report. The 5,270 cases opened during Fiscal Year 2020 were classified as follows: Classification 1 Classification 2 Classification 3 8 1,138 1,40 1 2,731 Reported Misconduct Cases classified as Classification 1 offenses showed an increase of 17 .2 percent, cases classified as Classification 2 offenses showed an increase of 19.9 percent, and cases classified as Classification 3 offenses showed an increase of 19. 7 percent. Table 1: Types of Reported Misconduct - Fiscal Year 2020 Number of Reported Allegations Types of Misconduct Inmate Related Total Non Inmate Related 6,103 OIT-Duty 5,193 % C hange from TOTAL 521 2019 11,817 + 23.90 Abuse of Inmates 1,254 1,254 + 38.41 Sexual Abuse of Inmates 499 499 - 7.93 Introduction of Contraband 220 131 351 - 17.60 7 6 13 + 333.33 117 277 394 + 11.30 68 5 73 - 16.10 531 + 6.63 11 3 + 34.52 1,200 + 20.60 Discrimination Fiscal Improprieties Bribery Inappropriate Relationships With Inmates 531 investigative Violations 113 Personnel Prohibitions 1,172 28 80 43 123 + 12.84 Inattention to Duty 557 430 987 + 56.17 Breach of Security 187 197 384 + 45.45 Unprofess ional Conduct 976 606 l.582 + 29.35 Failure to Follow Policy 782 590 1,372 + 35. 17 985 985 + 26.93 638 1,463 + 21.31 493 + 18.22 Unauthorized Release of Information Failure to Follow Supervisor' s Instructions Other On-Duty Misconduct 825 Other Off-Duty Misconduct 493 Table 1 provides a breakdown of those categories of misconduct reported during Fiscal Year 2020. Note: A single case may contain multiple allegations; therefore, the number of misconduct allegations exceeds the number of opened cases. 9 Reported Misconduct USA Patriot Act In the aftermath of September 11, 2001, Congress passed the USA PATRIOT Act, signed into law by President George W. Bush on October 26, 2001. One of the provisions of the Patliot Act addressed reporting any potential abuse(s) of individual civil rights and liberties by DOJ employees involving violence, discrimination, or threats. Accordingly, the Patriot Act mandated that the OIG widely advertise receiving allegations and any associated investigations of violence, discrimination, or threats on the part of a DOJ employee; particularly when such cases are directed toward individuals or groups associated with the public's perception of "extremist ideology" pertaining to an individual's religious beliefs, place of birth, and/or appearance. Patriot Act allegations typically reported to the OIA involve alleged mistreatment or unprofessional behavior of BOP staff toward/around certain inmates, their visitors, or members of the public. Due to the sensitivity of these allegations, they are automatically classified as Classification 2 or higher offenses; they should be forwarded immediately to the OIA. All Patriot Act violation allegations are referred to a Special Operations Unit at OIG Headquarters, devoted to reviewing and investigating such alleged misconduct. During Fiscal Year 2020, seven cases involved potential Patriot Act violations. As of March 17, 2021, four cases remained open pending investigation. 10 Closed/Sustained Misconduct 5,270 cases were opened during Fiscal Year 2020. As of March 17, 2021, 1663 (31.6 percent) were closed. The remaining 3,607 cases (68.4 percent) were still open pending investigation. NOTES All figures in th is section relate to ca,;cs. which were opened during Fiscal Year 2020 and were closed as of March 17. 2021. Figures arc subject to change as additional cases are closed, and only relate to cases which were sustained and not sustained. Of the 1,663 cases closed: 1,547 (93.0 percent) were investigated at the institution level ("local investigation") with authorization and monitoring provided by the OIA; 86 (5.2 percent) were OIA on-site investigations; and 30 (1.8 percent) were investigated by the OIG. Please refer to the appendices section of this report for the types of misconduct sustained against BOP employees in cases opened during Fiscal Y car 2020. Of the 1,663 cases closed, 478 (28.7 percent) were sustained. Misconduct was sustained against 445 BOP employees, five contractors working in a BOP facility, two PHS employees working in a BOP facility, eight contract/residential reentry center employees, 73 contractors working in privatized facilities, and two other non-BOP individuals. BOP Employees Out of 36,875 active-duty BOP employees, there were 6,593 BOP employees identified as subjects of alleged misconduct in cases opened during Fiscal Year 2020. As of March 17, 2021, the cases had been closed for 29.0 percent of those employees. Of the 29.0 percent (or 1,912 employees), 23.3 percent (445 employees) had a sustained decision (1.2 percent of total BOP employees). Table 2 (on the following page) reflects the categories of misconduct sustained against BOP employees in cases closed as of March 17, 2021. The most frequently sustained categories of misconduct were Failure to Follow Policy and Personnel Prohibitions. Please note, the number of sustained allegations will vary, as some BOP employees were involved with multiple allegations. 11 Closed/Sustained Misconduct Table 2: Types of Sustained Misconduct for BOP Employees . FY 2020 With 31.6 Percent Closed Number of Sustained Allegations Type of Misconduct Non Inmate Related Inmate Related Total 169 OIT-Duty 476 TOTAL 33 678 Abuse of Inmates 3 3 Sexual Abuse of Inmates 2 2 Introduction of Contraband 5 23 28 Discrimination 0 0 0 Fiscal Improprieties I 21 22 Bribery 2 0 2 Inappropriate Relationships With Inmates 26 26 11 Investigative Violations I02 Personnel Prohibitions II 3 105 I 3 4 lnauention to D uty 39 40 79 Breach of Security 9 8 17 Unprofessional Conduct 9 37 46 Failure to Follow Policy 38 78 116 0 l0.1 IOI 34 52 86 Unauthorized Release of lnfom1ation Failure to Follow Supervisor's Instructions O ther On-Duty Misconduct Other Off-Duty Misconduct 30 12 30 Closed/Sustained Misconduct Disciplinary Process Once a subject is investigated and the allegations are sustained, the type of disciplinary action taken is Ien to the deciding official, generally the CEO. Since each case is unique, with varying degrees of seriousness attached to the allegation of misconduct, disciplinary actions may vary from case-to-case. In addition, a subject may be charged with multiple types of misconduct in any particular incident(s). The Douglas factors' must be considered when deciding the appropriate penalty to impose on employees if the penalty will be an adverse action. Douglas Factors The Douglas factors derive from the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) decision, Douglas v. Veterans Administration. In Douglas, the MSPB identified a non-exhaustive list of twelve factors which deciding officials must evaluate in determining the appropriate penalty to impose in cases of sustained employee misconduct. The specific Douglas factors are as follows: 1 • The nature and seriousness of the offense; • The employee's job level and type of employment; • The employee's disciplinary record; • T he employee's past work record, including length of service and duty performance; • The effect of the offense on the employee's ability to perform and its effect on the supervisor's confidence in such ability; • The consistency of the penalty with penalties imposed upon others for like or similar misconduct; • The consistency of the penalty with the BOP's table of penalties (Program Statement 3420.11 , Standards of Employee Conduct); • The notoriety of the offense or its impact on the BOP's reputation; • The clarity with which the employee was on notice of any rules violated or warned about the conduct in question; • The employee's potential for rehabilitation; See Douglas vs. Veterans Administration, 5 M.S.P.R. 280 (1981). 13 Closed/Sustained Misconduct • Any and all mitigating circumstances smTounding the offense (e.g., job stress/tension, personality problems, mental impairment, harassment or bad faith, malice or provocation on the part of others involved); • The adequacy and effectiveness of alternative sanctions. The CEO is required to consider only relevant Douglas factors, and need not consider all the Douglas factors in every case. In addition, some of the Douglas factors may weigh in favor of a serious penalty, while others may weigh in favor of mitigation. It is incumbent upon the CEO to choose the appropriate penalty within these guidelines. Statistics As of March 17, 2021, the following actions were taken for those BOP employees with a sustained finding in Fiscal Year 2020 (including findings on allegations that were made in prior fiscal years): Written Reprimand .................................. ............... ................ 92 Resignation ...................... ....................................................... 60 Suspension .............................................................................. 196 No Action ................. ............... ....................................... ......... 17 Retirement. ........ ....................................... ............................... 26 Termination ............................................................................. 34 Combined With Action in another OJA Matter ..................... 6 Demotion ...................................................................................... 5 Other ........................ ............................................................... 9 The specific type of misconduct most frequently sustained against those individuals for whom no disciplinary action was taken was Misuse of Travel Charge Card ($1,000). 14 Closed/Sustained Misconduct Gender Tables 3 and 4 (on the following pages) reflect the categories of sustained allegations for male and female BOP employees as of March 17, 2021. The most frequent! y sustained category of misconduct among male BOP employees was Failure to Follow Policy. The most frequently sustained category of misconduct among female BOP employees was Failure to Follow Supervisor's Instructions. 15 Closed/Sustained Misconduct Table 3: Types of Sustained Misconduct l'or Male BOP Employees - Fiscal Year 2020 With 31.6 Percent Closed Number of Sustained Allegations Type of Misconduct Non Inmate Related Inmate Related Off-Duty TOT,U Abuse of Inmates 3 3 Sexual Abuse of l nma1es 0 0 Introduction o f Contraband 3 15 18 Discrimination 0 0 0 Fiscal Improprieties I 16 17 Bribery I 0 I Inappropriate Relationships With Inmates 7 7 [nvestigative Violations 8 Personnel Prohibitions 76 8 4 80 0 I I Inattention to Duty 29 33 62 Breach of Security 8 7 15 Unprofessional Conduct 7 28 35 Failure to Follow Policy 28 62 90 () 70 70 26 40 66 Unauthorized Release of Information Failure Lo Follow Supervisor's lns1ruc1ions Other On-Duty Misconduct 23 Other Off-Duty M isconduct Those categories of misconduct highlighted in pink were sustained with greater frequency among male BOP staff than among female BOP staff. 16 23 Closed/Sustained Misconduct Table 4: Types of Sustained Misconduct for Female BOP Employees - Fiscal Year 2020 ·with 31.6 Percent Closed Number of SIL~taincd Allegations Type of Misconduct Non Inmate Related Inmate Related Off-Duty TOTAL Abuse of Inmates 0 0 Sexual Abuse of Inmates 2 2 Introduction of Contraband 2 8 10 Discrimination 0 0 0 Fiscal Improprieties 0 5 5 Bribery I 0 I lnappropriate Relationships With Inmates 19 19 Investigative Violations 3 Personnel Prohibitions 25 3 I 26 Unauthorized Release of Information l 2 3 Inattention to D uty 7 7 14 Breach of Security l I 2 Unprofessional Conduct 2 7 9 Failure to Follow Policy 9 16 25 Failure to Follow Supervisor' s Instructions 0 31 31 O ther On-Duty Misconduct 8 12 20 2 Other Off-Duty Misconduct Those catego1i es of misconduct highlighted in pink were sustained with greater frequency among female BOP staff than among male BOP staff. 17 2 Closed/Sustained Misconduct Job Discipline As of March 17, 2021, 445 BOP employees identified as misconduct subjects during Fiscal Year 2020 had a sustained decision. Table 5 reflects the rate of misconduct among the various job disciplines. Tables: Discipline of BOP Employees With Sustained Misconduct - FY 2020 With 31.6 Percent Closed Total Number of Employees With Rate Per 100 Total Discipline Employees Sustained Misconduct Employees Human Resources 497 6 1.21 M echanical Services 2.462 13 0.53 Psychology Services 1, 179 6 0.5 1 Recreation 8 16 4 0 .49 C EOs Office and Sta ff 775 6 0 .77 1,774 18 0 .02 249 2 080 Correctional Services 16, 18 1 3 13 1.93 Health Services/Safety 2,854 23 0 .8 1 Unit Management 2,960 17 0.57 Religious Services 334 I 0 .30 Records/Inmate S ystems 1, 145 3 0 .26 Education & Vocational T raining 1,0 10 LO 0 .99 Financ ial Management 1,461 10 0 69 Central O ffice/Staff Training Centers 1,932 5 0 .26 UNICOR 526 2 0 .38 Inmate Services 492 2 0 .4 1 Other* 228 I 0 .44 Food Service Compuler Services • "Other" staff includes those assigned to work areas other than those listed (e.g. NIC). 18 Closed/Sustained Misconduct Residential Reentry Center Employees and Drug Treatment Contractors There were 112 contract/residential reentry center employees identified as misconduct subjects in Fiscal Year 2020. As of March 17, 2021 , OIA closed cases for 71.4 percent of those 112 contractors. Of the 71.4 percent (or 80 contractors), 7.1 percent (or 9 contractors) had a sustained decision. There were no drug treatment contractors identified as misconduct subjects during Fiscal Year 2020. Table 6: Sustained Misconduct - Residential Reentry Center Employees/ Dru!! Treatment Contractors - FY 2020 Allegation Inmate Related Non Inmate Related 9 Inappropriate Relationship with Inmates 2 Investigative Violations Unauthorized Release of Information 0 0 Inattention to Dutv 0 0 Failure to Follow Policy 0 I Unprofessional Conduct I 0 I Personnel Prohibitions 1 Other On-DUiy Misconduct Off-Duty Misconduct 1 0 19 Off-Duty Closed/Sustained Misconduct Contractors in Privatized Facilities There were 279 contractors working in privatized facilities identified as misconduct subjects during Fiscal Year 2020. As of March 17, 2021 , OIA closed cases for 64.5 percent of those 279 contractors. Of the 64.5 percent (or 180 contractors), 26.2 percent (or 73 contractors) had a sustained decision. Table 7 provides a breakdown of the categories of misconduct sustained against employees working in privatized facilities. The most frequently sustained category of misconduct for staff working in privatized facilities was Unprofessional Conduct. Table 7: Types of Sustained Misconduct for Staff in Privatized Facilities• Fiscal Year 2020 With 64.S Percent Closed Number of' Sustained Allegations Type of Misconduct Non Inmate Related Inmate Related Off-Duty TOTAL Abuse of Inmates I I Sexual Abuse oflnmates 1 I Introduction of Contraband 2 I 3 Discrimination 0 0 0 Fiscal Improprieties 0 0 () Bribery () () () Inappropriate Relationships With Inmates 10 10 Investigative Violations 7 Personnel Proh ibitions 3 7 0 3 Unauthorized Release of In formation 0 0 0 lnauention to Duty 1 2 3 Breach of Security 4 0 4 Unprofessional Conduct 6 11 17 Failure to Follow Policy 6 16 22 2 Failure to Follow Supervisor's lnstrnctions Other On-Duty Misconduct 2 Other Off-Duty Misconduct 6 4 31 20 2 31 Closed/Sustained Misconduct Contractors and Volunteers Working in BOP Facilities There were 26 contractors and two volunteers working in BOP facilities identified as misconduct subjects during Fiscal Year 2020. As of March 17, 2021, OIA closed cases for nine contractors and two volunteers. Five contract employees had a sustained decision. Table 8: Sustained Misconduct• Contract Employees/Volunteers - FY 2019 Allegation Inmate Related Non lnmatc Related Sexual Abuse of Inmates 2 0 Introduction of Contraband 4 0 Inappropriate Relat ionship with Inmates 2 l nanention to Duty 0 0 Breach of Security 0 0 Other On-Duty Misconduct 0 0 Other Off-Duty Misconduct OfT-Duty () 21 Closed/Sustained Misconduct PHS Employees Working in BOP Facilities Of the approximately 593 PHS employees working in BOP facilities, 42 were identified as misconduct subjects during Fiscal Year 2020. As of March 17, 2021, OIA closed 16.7 percent of cases involving those 42 PHS employees. Of the 23.8 percent (or IO PHS employees), two had a sustained decision. Table 9: Sustained Misconduct - PHS Employees - FY19 Allegation Inmate Related Non Inmate Related Off-Duty Breach of Security 0 0 Unprofessional Conduct 0 0 Failure to Follow Policy 0 0 Fiscal Improprieties 0 l Other Off-Duty Mjscooduct 1 22 Physical Abuse of Inmates Title 18, United States Code, Chapter 13 - Civil Rights §241 Conspiracy against rights If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any inhabitant of any State, Territory, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having exercised the same; or If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured -- They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kiJl, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death. §242 Deprivation of rights under color of law Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfuJly subjects any inhabitant of any State, Territory, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such inhabitant being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both. If bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or may be sentenced to death. 23 Physical Abuse of Inmates Statistics During Fiscal Year 2020, 608 allegations of Physical Abuse of Inmates were either reported to the OIA, or detected during the course of an investigation. As of March 17, 2021, OIA closed cases for 35.0 percent (or 213) of those allegations. Allegations of Physical Abuse are tracked by the degree of injury sustained by the inmate(s)-Jife threatening injury, serious injury, minor/slight injury, minor/no injury (harassment), and superficial injury (injuries associated with the normal use of restraints). Three allegations of Physical Abuse reported during Fiscal Year 2020 were sustained as of March 17, 2021, stemming from three separate incidents. One inmate involved sustained minor/slight injury. Two inmates involved sustained minor/no injuries (harassment). Three subjects with a sustained allegations of Physical Abuse of Inmates were BOP employees. Two BOP employees were suspended, and one was given a written reprimand, as a result of the sustained allegations. One subject was a contractor in a privatized facility, and was terminated as a result of the sustained allegation. None of the involved subjects were criminally prosecuted. 24 Introduction of Contraband Title 18, United States Code, Chapter 87 - Prisons § 1791 Providing or possessing contraband in prison (a) Offense.-Whoever( 1) In violation of a statute or a rule or order issued under a statute, provides to an inmate of a prison a prohibited object, or attempts to do so; or (2) being an inmate of a prison, makes, possesses, or obtains, or attempts to make or obtain, a prohibited object; shall be punished as provided in subsection (b) of this section. (b) Punishment-The punishment for an offense under this section is a fine under this title or(1) imprisonment for not more than 20 years, or both, if the object is specified in subsection (d)( 1)(C) of this section; (2) imprisonment for not more than 10 years, or both, if the object is specified in subsection (d)(l)(A) of this section; (3) imprisonment for no more than 5 years, or both, if the object is specified in subsection (d)( 1)(B) of this section; (4) imprisonment for no more than one year, or both, if the object is specified in subsection (d)(l)(D) or (c)(l)(E) of this section; and (5) imprisonment for not more than six months, or both, if the object is specified in subsection (d)(l)(F) of this section. (c) Any punishment imposed under subsection (b) for a violation of this section by an inmate of a prison shall be consecutive to the sentence being served by such inmate at the time the inmate commits such violation. (d) Definitions.-As used in this section(!) the te1m "prohibited object" means: (A) A firearm or destructive device or a controlled substance in Section I or II, other than marijuana or a controlled substance referred to in subparagraph (C) of this subsection; 25 Introduction of Contraband (B) marijuana or a controlled substance in schedule ill, other than a controlled substance refened to in subparagraph (C) of this subjection, ammunition, a weapon (other than a firearm or destructive device), or an object that is designed or intended to be used as a weapon or to facility escape from a prison; (C) a narcotic drug, methamphetamine, its salts, isomers, and salts of its isomers, lysergic acid diethylamide, or phencyclidine; (D) a controlled substance (other than a controlled substance referred to in subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of this subsection) or an alcoholic beverage; (E) any United States or foreign cmrnncy; and (F) any other object that threatens the order, discipline, or security of a prison, or the life, health, or safety of an individual; (2) the terms "ammunition," "firearm," and "destructive device" have, respectively, the meanings given those terms in section 921 of this title; (3) the terms "controlled substance" and "narcotic drug" have, respectively, the meanings given those terms in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 USC, §802); and (4) the term "prison" means a Federal correctional, detention, or penal facility or any prison, institution, or fac ility in which persons are held in custody by direction of our pursuant to a contract or agreement with the Attorney General. 26 Introduction of Contraband Statistics During Fiscal Year 2020, 351 allegations of Introduction of Contraband were either reported or detected during the course of an investigation. As of March 17, 2021, OIA closed cases for 28.8 percent (or 101) of those allegations. Of the 28.8 percent, 10.0 percent (35) were sustained: Table 10: Introduction of Contraband Inmate Related Type of Contraband Non Inmate Relate d Soft Item 3 0 Weapons () 13 Unauthorized Electronic Device 2 10 C igarellesffobacco 4 Heroi.n and Derivatives 0 1 A Jrnholi~ r>~v~raops l 0 Creatine/Weiohtliftin° Sunnlemcnt I 0 There were 34 individuals involved in the sustained allegations of Introduction of Contraband. Twenty-eight of these individuals were BOP employees (18 male and 10 female). Seventeen of the BOP employees worked in Correctional Services, four worked in Health Services/Safety, three worked in Food Service, two worked in Recreation, one worked in Unit Management, one worked in the CEO's Office, five were contractors working in Privatized facilities, and one was a contractor working in a BOP facility. 27 Sexual Abuse of Inmates Title 18, United States Code, Chapter 109A - Sexual Abuse §2241 Aggravated Sexual Abuse (a) By force or threat. - Whoever, in the special maritime or territorialjmisdiction of the United States or in a Federal prison, or in any prison, institution, or facility in which persons are held in custody by direction of or pursuant to a contract agreement with the head of any Federal department or agency, knowingly causes another person to engage in a sexual act (1) by using force against that other person, or (2) by threatening or placing that other person in fear that any person will be subjected to death, serious bodily injury, or kidnapping; or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned for any tenn of years or life, or both. (b) By other means. - Whoever, in the special maritime and teITitorialjurisdiction of the United States or in a Federal prison, or in any prison, institution, or facility in which persons are held in custody by direction of or pursuant to a contract or agreement with the head of any Federal department or agency, knowingly (1) renders another person unconscious and thereby engages in a sexual act with that other person; or (2) administers to another person by force or threat of force, or without the knowledge or permission of that person, a drug, intoxicant, or other similar substance and thereby (A) substantia11y impairs the ability of that other person to appraise or control conduct; and (B) engages in a sexual act with that other person; or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned for any term of years or life, or both. §2242 Sexual Abuse Whoever, in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States or in a Federal prison, or in any prison, institution, or facility in which persons are held in custody by direction of or pursuant to a contract or agreement with the head of any Federal department or agency, knowingly(1) causes another person to engage in a sexual act by threatening or placing that other person in fear (other than by threatening or placing that other person in fear that any person 28 Sexual Abuse of Inmates will be subjected to death, serious bodily injury, or kidnapping); or (2) engages in a sexual act with another person if that other person is (A) incapable of appraising the nature of the conduct; or (B) physically incapable of declining participation in, or communicating unwillingness to engage in, that sexual act; or attempts to do so shall be fined under this title and imprisoned for any term of years or for life. §2243 Sexual Abuse of a Ward (b) Of a ward - Whoever, in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States or in a Federal prison, or in any prison, institution, or facility in which persons are held in custody by direction of our pursuant to a contract or agreement with the head of any Federal department or agency, knowingly engages in a sexual act with another person who is (1) in official detention; and (2) under the custodial, supervisory, or disciplinary authority of the person so engaging; or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15 years, or both. §2244 Abusive Sexual Contact (a) Sexual contact in circumstances where sexual acts are punished by this chapter. - Whoever, in the special maritime and territorial j urisdiction of the United States or in a Federal prison, or in any prison, institution, or facility in which persons are held in custody by direction of or pursuant to a contract or agreement with the head of any Federal department or agency, knowingly engages in or causes sexual contact with or by another person, if so to do would violate (1) subsection (a) or (b) of section 2241 of this title had the sexual contact been a sexual act, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; (2) section 2242 of this title had the sexual contact been a sexual act, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than three years, or both; (3) subsection (a) of section 2243 of this title had the sexual contact been a sexual act, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than two years, or both; (4) subsection (b) of section 2243 of this title had the sexual contact been a sexual act, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than two years, or both. (5) subsection (c) of section 2241 of this title had the sexual contact been a sexual act, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned for any term of years or for life. 29 Sexual Abuse of Inmates (b) In Other Circumstances. - Whoever, in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States, or a Federal prison, or in any prison, institution, or facility in which persons are held in custody by direction of our pursuant to a contract or agreement with the head of any Federal department or agency, knowingly engages in sexual contact with another person without that other person's permission shall be fined under this title, imprisoned no more than two years, or both. § 2246 Definitions (1) the term "prison" means a correctional, detention, or penal facility; (2) the term "sexual act" means (A) contact between the penis and the vulva or the penis and the anus, and for the purposes of this subparagraph, contact involved the penis occurs upon penetration, however slight; (B) contact between the mouth and the penis, the mouth and the vulva, or the mouth and the anus; or (C) the penetration, however slight, of the anal or genital opening by another by a hand or finger or by any object, with an intent to abuse, humiliate, harass, degrade, or arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person; (D) the intentional touching, not through the clothing, of the genitalia of another person who has not attained the age of 16 years with an intent to abuse, humiliate, harass, degrade, or arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person; (3) the term "sexual contact" means the intentional touching, either directly or through the clothing, of the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks of any person with intent to abuse, humiliate, harass, degrade, or arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person; (4) the term "serious bodily injury" means bodily injury that involves a substantial risk of death, unconsciousness, extreme physical pain, protracted and obvious disfigurement, or protracted loss or impairment of the function of a bodily member, organ, or mental faculty. (5) the term "official detention" means (A) detention by a Federal officer or employee, or under the direction of a Federal officer or employee, following arrest for an offense; following surrender in lieu of an arrest for an offense; following a charge or conviction of an offense, or an allegation or finding of juvenile delinquency; following commitment as a material witness; following civil commitment in lieu of c1iminal proceedings or pending resumption of criminal 30 Sexual Abuse of Inmates proceedings that are being held in abeyance, or pending extradition, deportation, or exclusion; or (B) custody by a Federal officer or employee, or under the direction of a Federal Officer or employee, for purposes incident to any detention described in subparagraph (A) of this paragraph, including transpo1tation, medical diagnosis or treatment, comt appearance, work, and recreation; but does not include supervision or under control ( other than custody during specified hours or days) after release on bail, probation, or parole, or after release following a juvenile delinquency. The BOP's policy concerning compliance with the Prison Rape Elimination Act is in Program Statement 5324.12, Sexually Abusive Behavior Prevention and Intervention Program. 31 Sexual Abuse of Inmates Statistics During Fiscal Year 2020, 554 allegations of Sexual Abuse were either reported to the OIA or detected during the course of an investigation. Of the 554 allegations, 483 involved BOP employees, one involved a PHS employee working in a BOP facility, 30 involved contract staff working in residential reentry facilities, 33 involved contractors working in p1ivatized facilities, five involved contract staff working in a BOP facility, one involved a volunteer, and one involved an "other" staff (assigned to a work area other than listed, e.g. NIC). The allegations that appeared with the most frequency were Unprofessional Conduct of a Sexual Nature between male staff and male inmates, with 165 allegations reported, and Abusive Sexual Contact between male staff and male inmates, with 164 allegations reported. As of March 17, 2021, five allegations of Sexual Abuse reported during Fiscal Year 2020 were sustained. These allegations involved two BOP employees, two contract/residential reentry employees, and one employee working in a privatized facility; 2 15 allegations were not sustained; 304 allegations were pending. 32 Representative Case Summaries The following are brief summaries of some of the cases which were completed recently: • Falsification of Documents A local investigation revealed a female BOP Co1Tectional Officer indicated that she had made a round as per policy, but she had not made a round at 2:56 a.m., as she documented on the 30-minute round sheet. Accordingly, due to her admission, there was sufficient evidence to sustain the allegation of Falsification of Documents against her. The subject received a received a 21-day suspension. (OIA-2020-02366) • Physical Abuse of an Inmate - Minor/Slight Injury; Unprofessional Conduct; Providing Inaccurate Information Other Than During an Official Investigation A local investigation revealed that a male staff member in a Privatized Facility called an inmate an "asshole," pushed him causing a slight injury to the head, and illegitimately claimed that the inmate assaulted him. The allegations of Physical Abuse, Unprofessional Conduct, and Providing an Inaccurate Statement Other Than During an Official Investigation were sustained. The subject was terminated. (OIA-2020-00238) • Unauthorized Release of Information; Inattention to Duty A local investigation revealed a male BOP Human Resource Manager sent an email containing another individual's credit report to an applicant. He admitted that he inadvertently released a credit report to an applicant that was not that applicant's credit report. Additionally, he admitted to knowing what is contained in a credit report and that he should have safeguarded the information, as well as doubled checked his email to verify what he was sending to the applicant. Accordingly, there was sufficient evidence to sustain the allegations of Unauthorized Release of Information and Inattention to Duty against him. The subject received a written reprimand. (OIA-2020-02487) • Sexual Abuse of Inmates - Female Staff/Male Inmate; Appearance of an Inappropriate Relationship; Improper Contact with an Inmate/Inmate's Family; Offering/Giving Anything of Value; Preferential Treatment of Inmates An OIG investigation revealed a female Teacher engaged in a sexual relationship with a male inmate. The subject admitted to picking the inmate up, upon his release, and having sexual intercourse. The subject admitted to providing financial support to the inmate, to include the purchase of stereo equipment for his recording studio, a seven-day cruise to Belize, concert tickets, and the purchase of two vehicles. The subject also provided financial support to the inmate's mother and the inmate's children. Additionally, the subject admitted to being Facebook friends with and providing financial support to other former inmates. Based on her admission and supporting statements, the allegations of Sexual Abuse of Inmates - Female Staff/Male Inmate, Appearance of an Inappropriate Relationship, Improper Contact with an Inmate/Inmate's Family, and Offering/Giving Anything of Value were sustained against the subject, who resigned from the BOP. (OIA-2020-03898) 33 Representative Case Summaries • Weapons Introduction - Handgun A local investigation revealed a male BOP Correctional Officer introduced a handgun into the facility. Specifically, on March 1, 2020, at approximately 4:03 p.m., as the Front Lobby Officer was processing the subject's backpack through the X-Ray machine, he observed a picture of what appeared to be a handgun on the X-Ray monitor. The Front Lobby Officer stopped the X-Ray machine and asked the subject if he had a handgun inside of his backpack. The subject claimed ownership of the handgun and expressed his apologies for forgetting to take it out of his backpack before coming into work. The subject stated his daughter was sick earlier in the day, he switched vehicles with his wife, and he rushed into work which caused him to forget to remove his handgun from his backpack prior to coming inside of the Front Lobby. The subject stated he understood firearms are not allowed on the property without proper approval. There was sufficient evidence to sustain the allegation of Weapons Introduction - Handgun against subject. The subject was terminated. (OIA-2020-02905) • Appearance of an Inappropriate Relationship, Improper Contact with an Inmate/Inmate's Family, Offering/Giving Anything of Value, Unprofessional Conduct of a Sexual Nature - Female Staff/Male Inmate An OIG investigation revealed a female Correctional Officer corresponded with a male inmate via phone and email. The staff member gave the inmate's daughter money to place on the inmate's commissary account. The allegations of Appearance of an Inappropriate Relationship, Improper Contact with an Inmate/Inmate's Family, and Offering/Giving Anything of Value were sustained. The subject resigned and declined to be interviewed by OIG. (OIA-2020-00894) • Failure to Pay Just Debts A local investigation revealed a male Privatized Facility Correctional Officer failed to pay a past due medical bill in the amount of $524.00. A female Privatized Facility Human Resource Manager stated that during the subject's five-year periodic re-investigation process, a credit report revealed he had an outstanding unpaid debt of $524.00, which was confirmed by a Discovery Services, LLC, investigation, Case #2019276009, Background Screening Report. The subject signed an Acknowledgment of Financial Responsibility on October 15, 2019, and on August 29, 2014. The subject acknowledged the $524.00 debt was for a medical bill, and that he was aware of the debt prior to the background investigation. The subject stated he had overlooked the debt and did not notify Human Resomces or a supervisor prior to the background investigation. There was sufficient evidence to sustain the allegation of Failure to Pay Just Debts against the subject. The subject received a written reprimand. (OIA Case No. 2020-03291) • Threatening an Inmate/Verbal Abuse; Unprofessional Conduct A local investigation revealed that a male Cook Foreman used obscene language and threatened to defecate in an inmate' s food, if he/she talked during count. The subject received a ten-day suspension. (OIA-2020-00620) 34 Representative Case Summaries • Use/Abuse of Illegal Drugs/Alcohol A local investigation revealed that a male Contract Specialist used prescription medication not prescribed to him. Independent lab results from Quest Diagnostics revealed the subject tested positive for use of Amphetamines, during a random urinalysis. The subject received a seven-day suspension and also received a proposal for removal, which was suspended due to subject's placement on a Last Chance Agreement. (OIA-2020-02042) • Breach of Computer Security, Failure to Follow Policy, and Inattention to Duty A local investigation revealed that a male Correctional Officer plugged an unauthorized elecu·onic device into a government computer located at the rear gate. The subject also failed to exit the rear gate and search a vehicle that was departing institution grounds. The allegations of Breach of Computer Security, Failure to Follow Policy, and Inattention to Duty were sustained. The subject retired, prior to the completion of the disciplinary process. (OIA2020-00078) • Endangering the Safety of Others; Failure to Follow Policy A local investigation revealed a male BOP Lieutenant assigned a male Correctional Officer to disperse less than lethal munitions on a Calculated Use of Force against an inmate during an Evening Watch shift. The Correctional Officer stated he reported to the Use of Force and was instructed by the Lieutenant to be the #5 man on the second use of force team. The Correctional Officer stated he assumed that position, but he was not told by the Lieutenant to don any protective gear, as the teams were ready to enter the cell. The Correctional Officer stated that he participated in the Use of Force without any of the required protective gear. The Lieutenant stated that when the Use of Force teams were ready to enter the cell, he observed that he was short one team member and instructed the Correctional Officer to assume that position. The Lieutenant stated that he did not tell the Correctional Officer to put on the required protective gear and allowed him to enter the cell without it. The video revealed that the Correctional Officer was seen entering the cell without the protective gear and during the debriefing, the Co1Tectional Officer identified himself. Therefore, the allegations of Endangering the Safety of Others and Failure to Follow Policy were sustained against the Lieutenant. The subject received a three-day suspension. (OIA-2020-03609) • Inattention to Duty A local investigation revealed that a male Correctional Officer was discovered to be asleep in a chair, while on duty. The subject admitted he had fallen asleep, briefly. The subject received a written reprimand. (OIA-2020-00236) 35 Representative Case Summaries • DWI/DUI A local investigation revealed that a male Public Health Service staff member was arrested and charged with Driving While Intoxicated (DWI). The staff member admitted he had been drinking and pied guilty to the court and the BAC breath sample registered at .207. The subject received a written reprimand. (OIA-2020-00727) • Failure to Follow Supervisor's Instructions A local investigation revealed a male BOP Correctional Officer did not follow his supervisor's instructions. Specifically, a male Lieutenant stated he told a male Conectional Officer that he was #7 on the mandatory overtime list and he would therefore be required to work mandatory overtime. The Lieutenant stated the subject refused to work the overtime. The Lieutenant explained that five of the staff members listed ahead of the subject were already working double shifts, one staff member refused, and another staff member was on his Friday. The subject stated the Lieutenant only asked him, "What if I told you, you were next on the mandatory overtime list." The subject stated he replied, "I would have to tell you no." The subject stated the Lieutenant never told him to work the mandatory overtime, the Lieutenant just asked the question. The allegation of Failure to Follow Supervisor's Instructions was sustained against the subject. The subject received a one-day suspension. (OIA-2020-03873) • Unauthorized Release of Information; Failure to Follow Policy; Inattention to Duty A local investigation revealed a female BOP Human Resource Manager notified a female Union President that a two-day suspension was being issued to a bargaining unit employee for Conduct Unbecoming a Law Enforcement Officer. The subject included the letter with the name of the employee as an attachment to an email. The subject was not the deciding official for this disciplinary action, and she was not given approval from the Warden to release this information to the staff member nor to render the decision. The subject admitted she forwarded the letter to the Union and the bargaining unit staff member. The subject stated she was "under pressure," "got in a hmTy," and "did not pay attention" to what she was doing. There was sufficient evidence to sustain the allegations of Unauthorized Release of Information, Failure to Follow Policy, and Inattention to duty against the subject. The subject received a demotion. (OIA-2020-03900) • Absent Without Leave; Failure to Follow Supervisor's Instructions A local investigation revealed that a male Correctional Officer, failed to produce medical documentation for his consecutive absences, after having been instructed to do so in a memorandum addressing his abuse of sick leave. The subject as removed from his position effective December 29, 2020. (OIA-2020-04486) 36 Representative Case Summaries • Unauthorized Electronic Device Introduction; Breach of Security A local investigation revealed that a male Correctional Officer brought his personal cellphone into the institution. The subject stated that he did not realize that he brought it in, until he heard it ring in his jacket pocket, at which point he immediately returned the cellphone to his personal vehicle. Further, it was revealed that the male Correctional Officer assigned to the Front Lobby failed to properly screen the subject's belongings thereby allowing the cellphone to be introduced into the institution. The allegation of Unauthorized E lectronic Device was sustained against the subject, and the allegation of Breach of Security was sustained against the Front Lobby Officer. The Con-ectional Officer who introduced the cellphone received a one-day suspension, and the Front Lobby Officer received a written reprimand. (OIA-2020-02862) • Breach of Computer Security; Failure to Follow Policy A local investigation revealed that a male Correctional Officer plugged his cellular telephone into the USB port of the computer located in the tower. He stated that he was not aware he could not use his cellular telephone to listen to music. The allegations of Breach of Computer Security and Failure to Follow Policy were sustained. T he subject was issued a written reprimand. (OIA-2020-01326) • Unprofessional Conduct of a Sexual Nature A local investigation revealed a male BOP Correctional Officer was unprofessional toward a female BOP Correctional Officer. Specifically, the subject stated that he handed a note to the female Co1rnctional Officer on May 25, 2020, while she was working in the Front Lobby. The note read, "I have an overwhelming desire to give you a FBSM with some c-lingus." The subject stated FBSM stood for "full body sexual massage" and the c-lingus referred to oral sex. The subject stated he had not spoken to the female Correctional Officer in this manner previous!y. Therefore, the allegation of Unprofessional Conduct of a Sexual Nature was sustained against the subject. The subject received a 2 1-day suspension. (OIA-2020-04585) • Failure to Follow Supervisor's Instructions; Unprofessional Conduct; Lack of Candor A local investigation revealed a female Accounting Technician was issued a letter of counseling by her supervisor, but refused to sign it as she did not have Union representation present. Her supervisor allowed her to depart the meeting, in order to obtain Union representation. The subject originally claimed that she went back to her office and attempted to contact the Union President and Union Vice President; however, during the course of the investigation, the subject admitted that she did not actually attempt to contact a Union representative, as that was management's job. When her supervisor called to see if she had obtained one, the subject hung up the phone, claiming that he was speaking in an aggressive tone. The allegations of Failure to Follow Supervisor's Instructions, Unprofessional Conduct, and Lack of Candor were sustained. The subject retired, prior to the completion of the disciplinary process. (OIA-2020-00986) 37 Representative Case Summaries • Failure Misuse of Travel Charge Card A local investigation revealed sufficient evidence to sustain the allegation of Misuse of Travel Charge Card against a male staff member. He admitted to inadvertently making a charge of under ten dollars to his government charge card. He further admitted he was the holder of the card in question, and he was not on official travel status when the transaction was made. The subject received a one day suspension as discipline. (OIA-2020-01005) • Workplace Violence; Threatening/Intimidating Employees A local investigation revealed a female Correctional Officer threatened to come to the institution with a gun and shoot her ex-husband, a male BOP Correctional Officer, a second male BOP Correctional Officer, and a female Contractor. The subject 's sister called and informed the institution that the local police department had been contacted. Another female Correctional Officer also reported receiving a phone call from the subject, who stated that she was also going to kill the female Contractor's four children and then herself. The local police department responded to the subject's residence and convinced her to surrender. A Threat Assessment was completed and the subject received a thirty-day suspension. (OIA-202003576) • Unprofessional Conduct A local investigation revealed a male Unit Secretary called a male Con-ectional Systems Officer to inquire about the travel itinerary for an inmate who was scheduled for release and allegedly asked, "Have you see your stupid cunt ass supervisor?" Another female Case Management Coordinator was in close enough range to witness the s ubject' s comment. The subject received a five-day suspension. (OIA-2020-04050) • Falsification of Documents; Failure to Follow Policy; Inattention to Duty A local investigation revealed that a male Correctional Officer failed to conduct a count on the upper tier in the housing unit. After being given the opportunity to review video surveillance, the subject admitted to failing to count inmates on the entire upper tier for the official 3:00 a.m. count. In addition, the subject signed the 3:00 a.m. official count slip, signifying he properly conducted the 3:00 a.m. count. The subject also failed to sign Post Orders, prior to assuming his post as the # 1 officer for the Morning Watch shift. The subject's employment with the Bureau of Prisons was terminated. (OIA-2020-00455) 38 Appendices Table 11: Types of Sustained Misconduct for BOP Employees - FY 2019 With 63.70 Percent Closed (4,421 Total Opened) Number of Sustained Allegations Type of Misconduct Inmate Related Total Non Inmate Related 348 Off-Duty 1,065 TOTAL 111 1,524 Abuse of Inmates 21 21 Sexual Abuse of Inmates 11 11 Introduction of Contraband 8 29 37 Discrimination 0 0 0 55 55 110 2 l 3 Fiscal Improprieties Bribery 49 Inaooropriate Relationshi ps With Inmates 49 Investigative Vio lations 23 Personnel Prohibitions 264 23 8 272 7 5 12 Inattention to Duty 46 80 126 Breach of Security 11 16 27 Unprofessional Conduct 17 92 109 Failure to Follow Policy 64 132 196 0 263 263 57 105 162 Unauthorized Release of Information Failure to Follow Supervisor's Instructions Other On-Duty Misconduct 103 Other Off-D uty Misconduct 39 103 Appendices Table 12: Types of Sustained Misconduct for BOP Employees - FY 2018 With 78.80 Percent Closed (4,670 Total Opened) Number of Sustained Allegations Type of Misconduct Inmate Related Total Non Inmate Related 690 Off-Duty 1,447 TOTAL 168 2,305 Abuse of Inmates 43 43 Sexual Abuse of Inmates 22 22 Introduction of Contraband 24 51 75 0 0 0 Fiscal Improprieties 13 88 101 Bribery 10 l 11 Inaooropriate Relationshi ps With Inmates 79 Discrimination 79 Investigative Vio lations 44 Personnel Prohibitions 323 44 14 337 7 16 23 Inattention to Duty 124 147 271 Breach of Security 45 75 120 Unprofessional Conduct 37 152 189 Failure to Follow Policy 153 177 330 0 221 221 133 152 285 Unauthorized Release of Information Failure to Follow Supervisor's Instructions Other On-Duty Misconduct 154 Other Off-Duty Misconduct 40 154 Appendices Table 13: Types of Sustained Misconduct for BOP Employees - FY 2017 With 89.76 Percent Closed (4,392 Total Opened) Number of Sustained Allegations Type of Misconduct Tota l Inmate Related Non Inmate Related 1,410 Off-Duty 3,616 TOTAL 150 5,176 Abuse of Inmates 73 73 Sexual Abuse of Inmates 44 44 Introduction of Contraband 67 163 230 0 0 0 Fisca l Improprieties 28 383 4 1I Bribery 26 6 32 Discrimination 247 247 Inappropriate Relationships With Inmates Investigative Vio lations 155 Personnel Prohibitions 765 155 30 795 27 24 51 Inattention to Duty 185 374 559 Breach of Security 119 278 397 Unprofessional Conduct 129 384 513 Failure to Follow Policy 349 530 879 0 365 365 116 189 305 Unauthorized Release of Information Failure to Follow Supervisor's Instructions Other On-Duty Misconduct 120 Other Off-Duty Misconduct 41 120 Appendices Table 14: Types of Sustained Misconduct for BOP Employees - FY 2016 With 94.68 Percent Closed (5,128 Total Opened) Number of Sustained Allegations Type of Misconduct Inmate Related Non Inmate Related 829 Total Off-Duty 2,109 TOTAL 222 3,160 Abuse oflnmates 40 40 Sexual Abuse of Inmates 26 26 Introduction of Contraband 40 88 128 0 0 0 Fiscal Improprieties 18 254 272 Bribery 20 3 23 Discrimination 129 Inaooropriate Re lationships With Inmates 129 Investigative Violations 89 Personnel Prohibitions 394 89 16 410 Unauthorized Re lease oflnformation 14 16 30 Inattention to Duty 97 229 326 Breach of Security 72 172 244 Unprofessional Conduct 71 228 299 Failure to Follow Policy 201 302 503 0 177 177 101 157 258 Failure to Follow Supervisor's Instructions Other On-Duty Misconduct 206 Other Off-Duty Misconduct 42 206 Appendices Table 15: Types of Sustained Misconduct for BOP Employees - FY 2015 With 96.04 Percent Closed (5,206 Total Opened) Number of Sustained Allegations Type of Misconduct Inmate Related Total Non Inmate Related 887 Off-Duty 2,124 TOTAL 316 3,327 Abuse of Inmates 37 37 Sexual Abuse of In.mates 31 31 Introduction of Contraband 40 87 127 0 0 0 Fiscal Improprieties 18 237 255 Bribery 21 2 23 Discrimination 148 Inapprop1iate Relationships With Inmates 148 Investigative Violations 88 Personnel P rohibitions 483 88 21 504 17 11 28 Inattention to Duty 129 223 352 Breach of Security 66 187 253 Unprofessional Conduct 91 259 350 Failure to Follow Policy 181 279 460 0 176 176 108 92 200 Unauthorized Release oflnfonnation Failure to Follow Supervisor' s Instructions Other On-Duty Misconduct 295 Other Off-Duty Misconduct 43 295 Appendices Table 16: Types of Sustained Misconduct for BOP Employees - FY 2014 With 98.35 Percent Closed (5,201 Total Opened) Number of Sustained Allegations Type of Misconduct Inmate Related Total Non Inmate Related 962 Off-Duty 2,033 311 TOTAL 3,306 Abuse oflnmates 26 26 Sexual Abuse of Inmates 36 36 Introduction of Contraband 42 65 107 0 0 0 Fiscal Improprieties 20 308 328 Bribery 19 2 21 Discrimination 152 Inaooropriate Re lationships With Inmates 152 Investigative Violations 88 Personnel Prohibitions 374 88 30 404 16 11 27 Inattention to Duty 146 281 427 Breach of Security 96 110 206 Unprofessional Conduct 95 282 377 Failure to Follow Policy 222 220 442 0 156 156 92 136 228 Unauthorized Re lease oflnformation Failure to Follow Supervisor' s Instructions Other On-Duty Misconduct 281 Other Off-Duty Misconduct 44 281 Appendices Table 17: Types of Sustained Misconduct for BOP Employees - FY 2013 With 99.58 Percent Closed (5,503 Total Opened) Number of Sustained Allegations Type of Misconduct Inmate Related Total Non Inmate Related 936 Off-Duty 1,952 366 TOTAL 3,254 Abuse oflnmates 33 33 Sexual Abuse of Inmates 36 36 Introduction of Contraband 52 63 115 l 0 l Fiscal Improprieties 18 213 231 Bribery 21 I 22 Discrimination 165 Inaooropriate Re lationships With Inmates 165 Investigative Violations 110 Personnel Prohibitions 394 110 21 415 23 17 40 Inattention to Duty 123 236 359 Breach of Security 82 159 241 Unprofessional Conduct 114 250 364 Failure to Follow Policy 186 226 412 0 150 150 82 133 215 Unauthorized Re lease oflnformation Failure to Follow Supervisor's Instructions On-Duty Misconduct 345 Off-Duty Misconduct 45 345 Appendices Types of Misconduct Abuse of Inmates Physical Abuse of Inmates Excessive Use of Force Threatening an Inmate/Verbal Abuse Retaliation Sexual Abuse of Inmates Aggravated Sexual Abuse - §2241 Sexual Abuse/Sexual Abuse of a Ward - §2242/2243 Abusive Sexual Contact - §2244 Unprofessional Conduct of a Sexual Nature Introduction of Contraband Soft Item Introduction Weapons Introduction Escape Paraphernalia Introduction Money Introduction Marijuana Introduction Heroin & Derivatives Introduction Cocaine Introduction Other Unspecified Drugs Introduction Alcoholic Beverages Introduction Unauthorized Electronic Device Introduction Creatine/Weightlifting Supplement Introduction Cigarettes/Tobacco Introduction Discrimination Discrimination Fiscal Improprieties Time and Attendance Irregularities Abuse of Sick Leave Voucher Falsification Theft/Misuse of Government Funds Theft/Misuse of Government Property Misuse of Government Computers Improper Procurement Procedures Failure to Pay Government Charge Card Misuse of Travel Charge Card 46 Appendices Fiscal Improprieties (Cont.) Misuse of Purchase Charge Card Misuse of SmartPay 2 Credit Card Theft/Misuse of Employees' Club Funds Theft/Misuse of AFGE/Union Funds Theft of Inmate Funds Theft/Destruction of Inmate Property Theft/Misuse of Contractor Funds Theft/Misuse of Contractor Property Failure to Account for Inmate Funds/Property Theft of Employee Funds/Property Misuse of UNICOR Resources Contract Fraud Bribery Bribery Inappropriate Relationship With Inmates Soliciting/Accepting Anything of Value Offering/Giving Anything of Value Improper Contact With an Inmate/Inmate's Family Appearance of an Inappropriate Relationship Misuse of Inmate Labor Preferential Treatment of Inmates Conduct Unbecoming a Correctional Worker Investigative Violations Concealing a Material Fact Refusing to Cooperate Lying During an Investigation Providing a False Statement Altering/Destroying Evidence/Documents Refusing to Submit to a Search Interfering With/Impeding an Investigation Advising Someone to V iolate Policy Conducting an Unauthorized Investigation Lack of Candor 47 Appendices Personnel Prohibitions Threatening/Intimidating Employees (relates to personnel actions) Failure to Report Violation of Rules/Regulations Falsification of Employment Records Misuse of Official Position/Badge Inappropriate Supervisor/Subordinate Relationship Engaging in Prohibited Personnel Practices Use/Abuse of Illegal Drugs/Alcohol Absent Without Leave Failure to Follow Leave Procedures Retaliation Refusing to Take a Drug Test Unauthorized Release of Information Unauthorized Release of Information Violation ofFOWPrivacy Acts Other On-Duty Misconduct Unprofessional Conduct of a Sexual Nature 1• 2 Inattention to Duty1 Failure to Respond to an Emergency Failure to Properly Supervise Inmates Breach of Security1 Breach of Computer Security I. 3 Falsification of Documents Unprofessional Conduct1 Failure to Follow Policy 1 Gambling/Promotion of Gambling Endangering the Safety of an Inmate Endangering the Safety of Others Providing False Information Other Than During an Official Investigation Insubordination Accidental Discharge of a Firearm Soliciting/Sale of Goods on Government Property Job Favoritism Workplace Violence Failure to Meet Performance Standards Failure to Follow Supervisor's Instructions 1 Fraudulent Workers' Compensation Claims Conduct Unbecoming a Management Official 48 Appendices Off-Duty Misconduct Arrest and Conviction Failure to Report Arrest Failure to Pay Just Debts Failure to Obtain Outside Employment Approval DWI/DUI Domestic Violence Traffic Citation Canying an Unregistered/Concealed Firearm Discreditable Behavior Falsification of Records/Documents Other Citation (Hunting, etc.) Conflict of Interest Other Off-Duty Misconduct 1 Due to the frequency of this type of misconduct, it is identified distinctly throughout this report. 2 The data for Unprofessional Conduct of a Sexual Nature (Non-Inmate Related) is combined with Unprofessional Conduct throughout this report. 3 The data for Breach of Computer Security is combined with Breach of Security throughout this report. 49 Monitoring Assignments Alderson, WV ....................... Aliceville, AL ...................... . Allen wood, PA .................... . Ashland, KY ........................ . Atlanta, GA ...... .................... . Atwater, CA ......................... . Bastrop, TX ............ ............ .. Beaumont, TX ..................... . Beckley, WV ........................ Bennettsville, SC ................. . Berlin, NH .. ........................ .. Big Sandy, KY..................... . Big Spring, TX .................... . Brooklyn, NY ...................... . Bryan, TX ... ............ ............. . Butner, NC ........................... . Canaan, PA ............. ..... ........ . Carswell, TX........................ . Chicago, IL .......................... . Coleman, FL ........................ . Cumberland, MD ................. . Danbury, CT ........................ . Devens, MA ............ ............ .. Dublin, CA .......................... . Duluth, MN .......................... . Edgefield, SC ....................... . El Reno, OK ........................ . Elkton, OH .. ......................... . Englewood, CO ................... . Estill, SC .............................. . Fairton, NJ .. ............ ............. . Florence, CO ........................ . Forrest City, AR .................. . Fort Worth, TX .................... . Fort Dix, NJ ......................... . Gilmer, WV ......................... . Grand Prairie, TX ............... .. Greenville, IL ...................... . Guaynabo, PR ...................... . Hazelton, WV ..................... .. Herlong, CA ........................ . Honolulu, HI.. ...................... . Houston, TX ........................ . Jesup, GA ... ............ ............ .. La Tuna, TX ........................ . Leavenworth, KS .................. . Lee, VA................................. . Lewisburg, PA ...................... . Lexington, KY ..................... . Lompoc, CA .... ..................... . Loretto, PA ........................... . Los Angeles, CA ..... ............ .. . Manchester, KY .................... . Marianna, FL ... ..................... . Marion, IL ............................. . Mendota, CA......................... . McCreary, KY ...................... . McDowell, WV ..................... . McKean, PA ......................... . Memphis, TN ... ....... .............. . Miami (FDC & FCI), FL ...... . MXRO,MD ............ .............. . Milan, Ml .............................. . Montgomery, AL ................ .. . Morgantown, WV ................. . New York, NY ............. ......... . NCRO, KS ............................ . NERO,PA ............................ . Oakdale, LA ......................... . Oklahoma, OK .................... .. . Otisville, NY ......................... . Oxford, WI.. ............ .............. . Pekin, IL ............................... . Pensacola, FL ........................ . Petersburg, VA ..................... . Philadelphia, PA ................... . Phoenix, A'Z .......................... . Pollock, LA ............. .............. . Ray Brook, NY ..................... . Rochester, MN ...................... . Safford, AZ ........................... . San Diego, CA ........ .............. . Sandstone, MN .................... . Schuylkill, PA ......... ............ .. . Seagoville, TX ..................... . SeaTac, WA .......................... . Sheridan, OR......................... . SCRO, TX... .......................... . SERO,GA ............................ . Springfield, MO .................... . (b)(6); (b)(7)(C); (b)(7)(F) 50 (b){6); (b)(7)(C); (b)(7)(F) Monitoring Assignments Talladega, AL .................... . Tallahassee, FL. ................. . Terminal Island, CA ........... Tene Haute, IN .................. . Texarkana, TX ................... . Thomson, IL ..................... . Three Rivers, TX ............... . Tucson, AZ ...................... .. Victorville, CA .................. . Waseca, MN ..................... .. WRO,CA ... ............ ........... . Williamsburg, SC ............. .. Yankton, SD ...................... . Yazoo City, MS ................ .. (b)(6); (b)(7)(C); (b)(7)(F) 51 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK