American Jails May-June 2017

American Jails The Magazine of the American Jail Association

AMERICAN

THE MAGAZINE OF THE AMERICAN JAIL ASSOCIATION May | June 2017

A lot has changed in corrections, but one thing remains the same: our commitment to delivering innovative solutions and exceptional customer service. From all of us at Keefe Group, thank you for allowing us to be of service throughout the years.

NONPROFIT ORG.

PAID

U.S. POSTAGE

PERMIT NO. 30

HAGERSTOWN, MD

800.325.8998 • keefegroup.com

May | June 2017

Commissary | Package Programs | Inmate Phone | Kiosk Technology Inmate Banking | Inmate eMail | Deposit Services | MP4s & Tablets Debit Release Cards | Parole, Probation & Court-Ordered Payments Investigative Tools | Offender Management Software

KEEPING OPERATIONS CLEAN.

Falcon_AJA_1pg_Ad_Freedom_R4.pdf

1

3/24/17

1:49 PM

Because Freedom from Mental Illness Can’t Wait for Release Dates

C

M

Y

CM

MY

CY

CMY

K

Falcon Helps You Open Doors and Change Minds.

We earn your trust from day one.

Falcon brings a visionary new approach to behavioral health care in jails and prisons. We reimagine the treatment and reentry of detainees suffering from mental illness. We are committed to sustainable results that bolster families, communities and society as a whole.

NaphCare does things differently. Unlike other correctional healthcare providers, we make sure new patients receive a complete evaluation within 24 hours so we can provide better care, and start saving you money, from day one.

We believe trust still matters.

2090 Columbiana Rd. / Ste. 4000 Birmingham, AL 35216 800.834.2420 naphcare.com

Learn more at: falconimpact.com

If you’re ready for change, call a Falcon expert today to discuss what we can do for you. 312.803.5666

Where is the justice in overpaying for correctional health care?

If you think health care costs are excessive, come talk to us. We provide you with discounts through our national provider networks. Our state-of-the-art telehealth capabilities can save you hundreds of thousands of dollars in transportation, security, and meal costs. We also have programs that can save you millions by protecting you against fraud, overpayment, and unnecessary services. To learn more about a company that treats you fairly, visit wexfordhealth.com.

QUALITY CARE

PROVEN STAFFING EXPERTISE

EXPERIENCED MANAGEMENT TEAM

TECHNOLOGICALLY ADVANCED SERVICES

COST CONTROL

AMERICAN

THE MAGAZINE OF THE AMERICAN JAIL ASSOCIATION May | June 2017 | Volume XXXI | NUMBER 2

features

19

8

The Proper Cleaning of Jails Matt Montag

Core Competencies and Jail Leadership: Critical Thinking Susan W. McCampbell, CJM, and Malik Muhammad, CJM

Alternative Housing and Mentally Ill Inmates: An Essential Need Albert DeAmicis

52

19

Peer Groups, Separate Dorms Power Kentucky Jail’s Substance Abuse Programs Charlie Ban

Managing and Defusing Inmate Conflicts with Communication Elvis Slaughter

31

Body Armor Safety & Program Refinements from NIJ Becky Lewis

8

2

|

MAY | JUNE 2017

Examining the Administrative Liability Issues of Correctional Tactical Teams Darrell L. Ross

45

13

23

34

AMERICANJails

The 24th Graduating Class of the National Jail Leadership Command Academy

61

Parting Reflections Rev. Carmen Warner-Robbins

In This Issue This issue covers strategies and tasks in order to maintain correctional facility wellness. Topics include disinfecting and cleaning your jail, restrictive housing, and conflict resolution through communication.

Executive Director and Publisher Robert J. Kasabian, MBA Managing Editor Steve Custer

departments

Editor Sandra L. Lunsford

4 President’s Commentary

Director of Advertising Nicole Gentile

5 Guest Editorial

E x e c u t i v e C o m m i t t ee

7 Executive Director’s Remarks

President John W. Johnson, Sr., MBA, CJM, CPM Miami, Florida President Elect Ronaldo D. Myers, MA, CJM, CCT Hampton Roads, Virginia

63 In the Federal Courts 72 Board Profile—Jeffery L. Newton, CJM

1st Vice President Elias Diggins, CJM, CCE Denver, Colorado

74 Notes from the Field

2nd Vice President Marsha P. Travis, CJM, CCM Nashville, Tennessee

77 Chaplain’s Corner

3rd Vice President Amanda Lambert, CJM Manassas, Virginia

79 Good Time Served

Secretary Darren Sieger, MS Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

80 Index to Advertisers

Treasurer Jeffery L. Newton, CJM North Prince George, Virginia

AJA Items of Interest

Immediate Past President Wayne Dicky, CJM, CCE Bryan, Texas

6 Congratulations to AJA’s New Board Members

Statements contained in American Jails are the personal views of the authors and do not constitute AJA policy unless so indicated. AJA does not assume responsibility for the content of American Jails as submitted by contributors.

Material may be edited at the association’s discretion. We will consider for publication all previously unpublished photographs and manuscripts and particularly seek material that has a value to staff who work in jails. AJA is not responsible for loss or damage of any submissions.

55 2018 AJA Conference 56 Call for AJA Board Nominations for 2018–19 57 Recognizing the Best of the Best: 2018 Award Nominations

American Jails (Library of Congress ISSN 10560319) is published bimonthly by the American Jail Association, 1135 Professional Court, Hagers­ town, MD 21740-5853, Phone 301–790–3930 or fax 301–790–2941. The publication of advertisements does not represent an endorsement of those products or services by the association.

Copyright 2017, by the American Jail Association.

Subscription rate to AJA members is included in the annual membership dues. Single copy, current issue $10.50. Past issues $15 each.

59 Call for 2018 Conference Presentations 60 Jail Manager Certification Commission Vacancy 69 Certification Commissions 73 AJA 2017–2018 Officers & Board of Directors

www.aja.org

78 Affiliate Members

Printed in the U.S.A. by HBP, Inc. Design by Lori Schulman, HBP, Inc.

13

AMERICANJails

PEX Award Winner A 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 MAY | JUNE 2017

| 3

president’s commentary

It Is a Privilege!

John W. Johnson, CJM

It is with immeasurable gratitude that I thank you for granting me the opportunity to serve as President of the American Jail Association (AJA). I recognize that serving in this position is a privilege; one that requires me to uphold the exemplary standards established by the 36 individuals who preceded me in the office of President. I assure you—having been briefed on the expectations of this office, I feel safe in saying that I hope to meet these standards.

As I work beside the Board of Directors to best serve AJA, I will draw from my 21 years of experience to establish strategies and priorities that will advance the mission of AJA. After serving on the Board for the past nine years, I can assure you the aforementioned course of action will result in substantial rewards with the support and assistance of the Board, the most qualified and dedicated group of individuals with whom I have ever had a pleasure of working.

It goes without question that I have learned so much from the relationships I have established with both members of the Board and the many AJA members I have had the pleasure to meet during conferences and trainings. What has become evident to me is that the corrections profession is comprised of a large diverse group of individuals, who are responsible for the care and safety of persons (charged with crimes) who often do not share any ethnic, religious or cultural similarities. Considering the current climate in this country, the significance of those willing to serve in the corrections profession cannot be understated.

Accordingly, as one of my first official acts as AJA President, I would like to thank you for answering the call to serve. For believing in the altruistic principles that guide the humane detention of individuals remanded to the institutions we manage.

Although you may never hear it, please know that society has been enhanced by your service!

…please know that society has been enhanced by your service!

4

|

MAY | JUNE 2017

AMERICANJails

I would like to share a quote attributed to John F Kennedy: “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men [and women] do nothing.” This quote is relevant in the correctional professions because we depend on each other for our literal well-being.

More specifically, correctional professionals rush into unknown, violent situations, unarmed in most cases, to ensure the well-being of our brothers and sisters. I would go as far as saying our desire to render aid is parallel to breathing; we do it without even thinking about it.

I have personally retrieved fellow officers from dangerous situations, and I too have been pulled from a scenario where my life was in danger. On the surface, this may register as “just what we do;” however, there is often a bond that results from these types of circumstances. This code of protection serves us well and helps to better perform our responsibilities and fulfill our mission. We need to remain diligent and true to our calling.

Together, we can work toward “triumphing against evil.”

C ontinued

on page

69

guest editorial

In Keeping Justice Accountable In the criminal justice system, the ideals of “accountability,” “deterrence,” “retribution,” “security,” and “rehabilitation” are some of the primary components of the comprehensive systemic work. However, as crucial as these component ideals may be, it is important to remind ourselves that they are not principles. “Justice” is the principle that needs to be relied upon to consistently guide our criminal justice system’s decision-making and action. The individual contributing ideals, if not properly deliberated and prudently dispensed, can be at odds not only with one another, but more importantly at odds with the overarching principle of justice.

To paraphrase Ben Franklin, “the independent pursuit of such ideals, unlike the pursuit of justice, is neither self-justifying nor self-limiting.” We need something else to give context to the advancement and limitation of such ideals, to determine whether a particular measure is in keeping with the principle of justice. Confusing these significant contributing ideals with the principle of justice invites well-intending legislators or criminal justice practitioners to advance extreme, often parochial positions.

For example, high bails are often lauded as an effective method to further community “safety and security.” But how is this justice for those who cannot afford to pay the bail?

Applying overly stringent, uniformly applied probation supervision rules and remanding people to serve lengthy jail time for technical violations may be supported by the ideals of “accountability and deterrence.” But is that justice? Or sentencing people to lengthy terms of confinement for selfdestructive behavior as “retribution” for their crimes against society—is that justice?

The field of corrections is not exempt from similarly noble, but often misguided pursuits. Turning a blind eye to assaultive behavior against those charged with particular offenses could easily fit into the baskets of “deterrence”

Like the often depicted scale of justice, balance is the effective control to guide our decision-making.

or “retribution,” but not justice. Failing to consider a person’s mental health status when dispensing misconductrelated discipline may well be defended as instilling “accountability,” but can we call it justice? Who could argue that “security” is not enhanced if those in our custody are routinely confined in cells for 22 or 23 hours per day? But is this really justice?

Justice is parsimonious and imposingly sufficient, but not greater than necessary action to achieve a fully deliberated purpose. And lest we forget, the same measuring stick—the furtherance of justice—is also applicable to “rehabilitative” initiatives. Is it justice to use tax payer money to fund program initiatives that are commonly beyond the reach of law-abiding citizens? What about costly recreational programs or rehabilitative initiatives without proven outcomes and without individualized prescriptive assessments? Is it justice to continue the funding of these as well?

Like the often depicted scale of justice, balance is the effective control to guide our decision-making. As a point of emphasis I note that the symbol of justice is not a swinging pendulum, driven by public outcry, financial expedience, or political whim. As criminal justice practitioners we have a collective responsibility to promote a deliberate and balanced approach to the management C ontinued

AMERICANJails

on page

Edward Sweeney, CJM

76

MAY | JUNE 2017

| 5

Congratulations to the newly elected and appointed American Jail Association’s New Officers and Board of Directors for 2017–18.

3rd Vice President Amanda Lambert, CJM Major/Director of Support Services Prince William-Manassas Regional Adult Detention Center Manassas, Virginia Secretary Darren Sieger, MS Classification Manager Broward Sheriff’s Office Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

3–Year Term Sam L. Davis, MA, CJM Major/Jail Administrator Ingham County Sheriff’s Office Mason, Michigan

Sergeant-At-Arms Robert Leslie Hood, CJM Lieutenant Shelby County Sheriff’s Office Vincent, Alabama

Mark Foxall, PhD, CJM Director Douglas County Department of Corrections Omaha, Nebraska

Parliamentarian Darwin Long Lieutenant/Facility Administrator Oglala Sioux Tribe Department of Corrections Pine Ridge, South Dakota

Penny Perry Chief of Corrections Franklin County Sheriff’s Office—Corrections Columbus, Ohio Robert Schlegel, CJM, CCT, CIT Captain Broward Sheriff’s Office Pompano Beach, Florida

Chaplain James K. Martin Chaplain Miami Dade Corrections and Rehabilitation Department Miramar, Florida

executive director’s remarks

Visit from an Old Friend Recently, Dick Ford stopped by the AJA headquarters for a visit and to tell a few AJA stories. It was unexpected, but not unusual as Dick lives in Hagerstown and drops in from time to time. If you never had the pleasure to meet him, then allow me to introduce you.

Francis R. “Dick” Ford was the first Executive Director of the American Jail Association. A former sheriff in Washington County, Maryland, he was instrumental at establishing the association. In fact, AJA is located in Hagerstown, Maryland (approximately 70 miles west of Washington, D.C.), because this is where Dick has always lived.

Some 36 years ago, Dick helped to establish AJA because of the lack of training available for jail personnel. Too often, deputies were assigned to the jail with little or no training. As those of you who work in jails can imagine, this can lead to problems. To answer this need, Dick and his colleagues labored to create training materials and offer classes and technical assistance to the deputies assigned to the jail.

Back then, not many agencies had the resources or materials to adequately train their staffs, but AJA was there to help.

Dick has many stories to tell about those early days, but he could also be talking about AJA today.

For more than 36 years, AJA has been training thousands of jail officers annually. This was our root in 1981, and it continues today. Among the differences between then and now, perhaps, are the multiple platforms that we offer the jail community for training. Allow me to hit on just a few.

We’ve just completed our 36th Annual Conference & Jail Expo of which the highlights will be published in the next magazine. Jail professionals traveled across the country to share ideas and find solutions to the everyday challenges in operating a jail. Some 72 workshops were offered over the course of four days. Both large and small agencies—from all parts of the country and beyond—sent representatives to the event, held in Orlando, Florida.

Although AJA’s Annual Conference & Jail Expo is the largest single gathering for jail training, AJA has always worked with agencies to provide co-hosted training onsite regionally. Recently, we began a new webinar series that delivers inexpensive and effective training to staff on an individual or group basis. The sessions are recorded and archived— and can be recalled on demand from our new AJAccess, found at aja.org. In fact, there is a lot of content on this platform that can be accessed via the internet, including a few workshops from past conferences.

Leadership development has been a focus of AJA recently. Since the launch of our National Jail Leadership Academy (NJLCA) several years ago, approximately 1,000 jail professionals nationwide have attended and graduated from the program. NJLCA has also spawned several additional training opportunities; last year, AJA launched the Jail Executive Development Program (JEDP), an intensive course aimed at senior jail personnel. Another class begins this fall. In addition, we’ve launched a number of regional academies from Virginia to California. And more are in the works.

Wikipedia defines training like this: “Training is teaching, or developing in oneself or others, any skills and knowledge that relate to specific useful competencies. Training has specific goals of improving one’s capability, capacity, productivity, and performance…”

This could also be defining AJA’s training role in the criminal justice system.

Thanks, Dick, for your vision. And for your stories.

Robert J. Kasabian

ROBERT J. KASABIAN, MBA

Executive Director American Jail Association

AMERICANJails

MAY | JUNE 2017

| 7

A report released by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) in February 2015 stated that “prisoners and jail inmates were more likely than the general population to report ever having a chronic condition or an infectious disease.”

After studying inmate conditions from 2011–2012 in Federal, State, and local correctional facilities, the DOJ found the following: 8

|

MAY | JUNE 2017

AMERICANJails

• As many as 40% of inmates reported having a current chronic medical condition, while about half reported ever having a chronic medical condition.

• Inmates in both prisons and jails were more likely than the general population to report ever having a chronic medical condition or infectious disease. The same

finding held true for each specific condition or infectious disease.

• Approximately 66% of inmates in prison and 40% of jail inmates with a current chronic health condition reported taking prescription medication.

• The majority of prison (74%) and jail inmates (62%) were overweight, obese, or morbidly obese.

• Among prison and jail inmates, females were more likely than males to report ever having a chronic medical condition.

There are a number of conclusions that can be drawn from these and other findings in the report, but what the report makes strikingly clear is just how important proper cleaning and disinfecting are in correctional facilities. The fact that inmates have

AMERICANJails

MAY | JUNE 2017

| 9

more chronic health conditions and infections indicates that inmates are more prone to sickness and infections than the general population.

The reason for this is rather simple: Persistent health problems can impact the strength of one’s immune system. And because the immune systems of many inmates are impaired before they are even incarcerated—and because of their existing chronic medical conditions—the likelihood of inmates contracting new ailments and infections in an overcrowded correctional environment is very high.

This has been verified in studies, including one reported in Oxford’s journal Clinical Infectious Diseases.

This study reported that “compared with the general public, newly incarcerated inmates have an increased prevalence of human immunodeficiency virus infection, hepatitis B virus infection, hepatitis C virus infection, syphilis, gonorrhea, chlamydia, and Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection” (Bick, 2007).

The Value of Clean A few years ago, ISSA, the worldwide cleaning association, published a white paper about the value of proper cleaning in protecting human

the h c a Re and d e ifi Qual zed i l a i Spec ts. n a c i Appl

10

|

MAY | JUNE 2017

health (ISSA, 2012). Although ISSA’s studies were conducted in schools and office environments, much of what it found applies to correctional facilities as well. The paper concluded that proper cleaning “can reduce the probability of infection for common cold and influenza by approximately 80% and can reduce the number of surfaces contaminated with viruses by 62%.”

In essence, what researchers found is that proper cleaning helps to keep people healthy. And when it comes to proper cleaning in correctional facilities, the need is even greater due to both the overcrowded conditions as well as the likely compromised immune systems of many inmates.

So, will more cleaning in jails and correctional facilities help protect the health of inmates? Should we use more powerful cleaning solutions, such as disinfectants and sanitizers, even though they may have a negative impact on the environment?

Although these may seem like good answers to the problem, the best solution to this situation has actually already been mentioned.

It’s not more or more powerful cleaning that is needed to help promote health in a correctional facility, but

Advertise your employment ads with AJA. Contact Jackie at jackier@aja.org or 301–790–3930, ext. 202, for information on print and advertising for your agency.

AMERICANJails

proper cleaning. With proper cleaning, very often germs and bacteria are actually removed from the surface, thus eliminating the need for sanitizers and disinfectants.

Proper Cleaning: A Two-Step Process To explain what we mean by proper cleaning, let’s picture the following scenario. Because of a wave of infections, correctional administrators have increased the disinfection of tables and chairs in all eating areas and commissaries for both inmates and staff alike. Disinfectant is sprayed onto all table surfaces daily as well as the tops and sides of chairs. All areas are then wiped clean.

At first glance, this sounds like it should help. However, this is not proper cleaning, at least when using a disinfectant or in attempting to disinfect a surface. What the staff is forgetting is the need to clean the surface first and then disinfect. It’s a two-step process. First, soils and contaminants must be removed from the surface, and then the areas can be disinfected.

According to the U.S. Environ­ mental Protection Agency (EPA): “Clean first before you disinfect.

Germs can hide underneath dirt and other material on surfaces where they are not affected by the disinfectant. Dirt and organic material can also reduce the germ-killing ability of some disinfectants” (UCSF Institute for Health & Aging, 2013).

We can apply this two-step process to our own hands. While a disinfectant hand sanitizer can help kill surface-level germs and bacteria, typically it cannot reach pathogens located in the folds, cracks, and creases of the skin. This is why hands must be washed first, with soap and warm water, and then a sanitizer applied if needed.

Before discussing this two-step cleaning process in jails and prison facilities, we need to discuss why this process of cleaning first and then disinfecting is often not performed

in correctional facilities as well as in schools, offices, and all types of locations. Among the reasons are the following: • Lack of awareness. Many cleaning professionals are simply not aware that surfaces must be cleaned first. While some professional disinfectants indicate on their product use labels that cleaning first is necessary, many disinfectants do not. Instead, the emphasis on most product labels is its “kill claims,” listing the types of pathogens the disinfectant is designed to attack.

• Time. Cleaning takes time; requiring that surfaces be cleaned first and then disinfected can add a considerable amount of time to the cleaning process. However, if the goal is to protect health, it is time well spent.

• Unaware of new technologies.

Related to both of these issues is the fact that many correctional administrators are unaware of new technologies that can help clean surfaces effectively and even help minimize or eliminate the need for disinfectants.

As for proper cleaning methods, as discussed previously, surfaces must always be cleaned first to remove soils. First, wipe surfaces clean using an all-purpose cleaning solution and a fresh cloth, then follow with a disinfectant.

Some newer cleaning technologies may eliminate the need for a disin-

fecting step altogether. For example, indoor pressure washing and vapor systems have been developed to effectively remove pathogens, to the point that a disinfectant may not be necessary. Additionally, aqueous ozone cleaning systems—already used to clean commercial buildings as well as fruits and vegetables and to treat water—have cleaning and sanitizing qualities so effective that they also can minimize or eliminate the need for sanitizers and disinfectants. However, it is important to note that although aqueous ozone cleaning systems have been shown to be as effective as disinfectants in some cleaning situations, they are not yet registered as disinfectants and should not be used in areas where an EPA-registered disinfectant is required.

Testing Results to Promote Health To ensure that proper cleaning is being performed and before experimenting with new cleaning technologies, correctional administrators need to have on hand ATP monitoring systems.

ATP, or adenosine triphosphate, monitoring systems are designed to detect universal energy molecules found in all animal, plant, bacteria, yeast, and mold cells. Microscopic amounts of bacteria and pathogens found on surfaces may contain hundreds, if not thousands, of ATP molecules. Although the presence of ATP on a surface (such as a commissary table) does not necessarily

mean it harbors disease-causing pathogens, it serves as a warning—a red flag—that contaminants may be present and should be eradicated with proper cleaning. These systems are invaluable when there is a health concern in the facility.

Administrators can use ATP monitors (now available through a variety of manufacturers) to see if surfaces might be contaminated.

They should test surfaces before cleaning and then test them once again after cleaning. This double testing will indicate whether proper cleaning has been performed. Taking these steps—performing proper cleaning and measuring for results— helps to protect the health of the inmate population.  References ISSA. (2012). The value of clean: How cleaning improves your bottom line.

Lincolnwood, Ill.: Author.

UCSF Institute of for Health and Aging.

(2013). Green cleaning, sanitizing, and disinfecting: A curriculum for early care and education. San Francisco: UCSF School of Nursing.

Retrieved from https://www.epa. gov/sites/production/files/documents/ece_curriculumfinal.pdf

Matt Montag has been involved in the professional cleaning industry for more than 25 years. He is now the national sales director for Cleancore Technologies, a leading manufacturer of aqueous ozone cleaning system. He can be reached through his company website at http://cleancoretech.com.

AMERICANJails

MAY | JUNE 2017

| 11

JEDP Class #2 SEPTEMBER 24–29, 2017 Experts agree: Tomorrow is too late to begin planning

for the eventual departure of senior leaders.

In answer, the American Jail Association and the Correctional Management Institute of Texas at Sam Houston State University have partnered to create the JEDP Program to further the development of future Jail Administrators. This intensive course helps the correctional industry to create the leaders of tomorrow.

The second class of the Jail Executive Development Program is scheduled for September 24–29, 2017.

Applications are now being accepted. Apply now!

Core Competencies to be covered include: ▼ Managing Power and Influence ▼ Leveraging the Role of the Jail in the CJS ▼ Building and Maintaining Positive Relationships with External Stakeholders ▼ Engaging in Strategic Planning ▼ Communicating Effectively ▼ Anticipating, Analyzing, and Resolving Organizational Challenges and Conflicts ▼ Managing Human Resources ▼ Assuring Organizational Accountability ▼ Developing and Maintaining a Positive Organizational Culture that Promotes Respect for Diverse Staff

For more details, visit JEDP.org.

ALTERNATIVE HOUSING AND MENTALLY ILL INMATES:

An

Essential Need A lbert D e A micis Currently, a highly controversial issue exists between corrections administrators, inmates, and inmate advocate groups: the use of restrictive housing units (RHUs). Some of these groups believe that RHUs should be closed because of the security conditions that exist when these units function as disciplinary housing for both high-risk inmates and those suffering from mental illness. This article addresses the RHU issue and also discusses how correctional systems can act with due diligence and regard to fair treatment of this special needs population.

AMERICANJails

MAY | JUNE 2017

| 13

Allegheny County Bureau of Corrections.

The Issue The mentally ill were never intended to be housed in correctional facilities. Unfortunately, this often occurs when mental health facilities “dump” patients from State hospitals back into society. This was highlighted in 2013 when the city of San Francisco sued the State of Nevada over allegations of patient-dumping. The class action lawsuit concerned the Rawson-Neal Psychiatric Hospital in Nevada, which secretly bused hundreds of homeless patients into San Francisco. In this particular case, the patients were provided with only enough medication to last them for a few days. And upon their arrival, they were allegedly instructed to call 911 (Carlson, 2013). Without a proper system to help them ease back into society, former mental health patients stand a high probability of coming into contact with the justice system and quickly turning into a major issue for correctional facilities.

When these mental health inmates enter a correctional facility, they can become very recalcitrant and highly assaultive toward both inmates and correctional staff.

This is why they may be assigned to RHUs and other mental health alternative housing within the local, State, and Federal correctional facilities. In corrections, the three “C’s”—care, custody and control—are the main components used to safe guard both the inmates and the correctional staff. Because the mentally ill can become dangerous, the use of RHUs is essential for the safety of inmates and the correctional staff inside the institution.

14

|

MAY | JUNE 2017

AMERICANJails

Importance of RHUs The correctional environment can consist of the most predatory, violent, and uncontrollable inmates that exist in any general population, which is why correctional facilities need RHUs. For example, let’s look at the Allegheny County Jail, located in downtown Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Closed in 1995, its old linear-style design was replaced by a newer facility, the Allegheny County Bureau of Corrections, which is a direct supervision facility.

Back in the 1970s, the old linear-style facility had an infamous reputation as one of the more dangerous county jails in the northern part of the country. Twentyfive percent of its male inmate population were from the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections and the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) who housed inmates there temporarily during their court proceedings. These inmates were sentenced to some very significant prison time; and some were even doing “life without the possibility of parole for murder.”

During those days, there were no RHUs at the facility. At the time, there were a couple ranges designated for these disciplinary inmates. Unfortunately, due to overcrowding conditions, they were never used for their original purpose which, in turn, created a highly dangerous environment for both staff and inmates. These State and Federal inmates were seldom in a controlled environment, allowing predators to prey upon the weaker inmates through every violent act imaginable. In those

days, these inmate violators were not punished and disciplinary housing was non-existent.

For the mental health inmates who were housed in former Allegheny County Jail during the early 1970s, no immediate court commitments to State hospitals existed.

Due to the danger these individuals often presented to correctional staff and inmates, they were placed in the jail hospital in four-point restraints, where they stayed until they were sentenced or released back into society.

In 1976, a significant change occurred with the passing of the Mental Health Procedures Act. This act requested the following criteria: • Assurance of “adequate treatment” for individuals with mental illness.

• Identification of exclusionary groups.

• Provision for: — Voluntary (201) and involuntary (302) treatment.

— Inpatient and outpatient treatment.

— Rights to individuals subject to treatment (Rock, 2013).

This act also enabled medical staff to use a 302-immediate commitment for severely mentally challenged inmates and allowed us to transfer them to State-secure hospitals or a secure treatment mental health facility.

Until the Mental Health Procedures Act, dark times existed in our corrections system.

New Government Reforms Fast forward to the 21st century. In 2015, President Obama directed the U.S. Attorney General to review solitary confinement and its overuse. This review led to a report written with the Department of Justice (DOJ).

This report discusses 50 guiding principles on Federal, State and local correctional levels. Covering a blanket of reforms, these principals were developed by the best practices of the Association of State Correctional Administrators and the American Correctional Association. Here is a sample of several principals: • Inmates should be housed in the least restrictive setting necessary to ensure their own safety, as well as the safety of staff, other inmates, and the public.

• Correctional systems should always be able to clearly articulate the specific reason(s) for an inmate’s placement and retention in restrictive housing.

• For every inmate in restrictive housing, correctional staff should develop a clear plan for returning the inmate to less restrictive conditions as promptly as possible. The plan should be shared with the inmate, unless doing so would jeopardize the safety of the inmate, staff, other inmates, or the public.

• An inmate’s initial and ongoing placement in restrictive housing should be regularly reviewed by a multidisciplinary staff committee, which should include not only the leadership of the institution where the inmate is housed, but also medical and mental health professionals.

• All correctional staff should be regularly trained on restrictive housing policies. Correctional systems should ensure that compliance with these policies is reflected in employee-evaluation systems.

Secure Mental Health Units Administrators on all correctional levels continue to address mental health issues and the use of RHUs. In the following example, the BOP addresses how to manage mental health inmates who require assignment to RHUs (DOJ, 2015): “The BOP is diverting inmates with serious mental illness to alternative forms of housing. BOP will be expanding “secure mental health units” for inmates with serious mental illness who cannot function in the general prison population, and hire additional staff psychologists to provide mental health services to inmates who require restrictive housing. The President’s Fiscal Year 2017 budget will include a request for $24 million to support these efforts.”

On Federal, State and local level correctional systems, those of us who work in a RHU environment know firsthand how difficult it can be to manage these individuals in this environment. Presently, training in corrections is at a very high level for those who work with inmates in RHUs and special mental health housing units. These correctional officers are vetted for this dangerous, stressful, and very important duty in any correctional facility.

Still, it is the responsibility of the correctional system to ensure their environment is as safe as possible so that correctional officers can return to their families at the end of their shift.

Another concern for correctional professionals is the evaluation of inmates who suffer from mental illness.

Often, these inmates fit a special criterion when they are placed in special secure units. Fortunately, our mental health professionals are highly trained and instructed to evaluate these inmates for a different classification when they are placed inside these units.

The DOC’s Procedure The Superintendent for the State Correctional Institution of Pittsburgh, Mark Capozza, was asked about the DOC’s procedure in managing mental health inmates, especially when they commit a disciplinary infraction (personal communication, October 27, 2016).

According to Capozza, the mental health inmates are first assessed and provided with a “mental health roster status,” which are indicated using the following letters: A—Inmate has no history of mental health treatment.

B—Inmate is on the inactive mental health roster, implying that he or she received treatment at one time, but no longer requires services.

AMERICANJails

MAY | JUNE 2017

| 15

C—Inmate is receiving some kind of mental health treatment, but is not seriously mentally ill.

D—Inmate generally suffers from a serious mental illness/intellectual disability and is followed and monitored closely by the facility’s multi-disciplinary team.

Capozza also defined the breakdown of the more seriously mentally ill inmate who requires disciplinary placement. For example, an inmate in general population, who is labelled “D” (seriously mentally ill) on the roster engages in an assaultive behavior. Instead of placing him in a RHU (which previously had been the practice), he is now placed in a DTU (diversionary treatment unit). Alternatively, he may actually meet the commitment criteria, as outlined by the Mental Health Procedures Act of 1976, and be involuntarily committed to an inpatient mental health treatment provided at a licensed mental health unit.

DTUs are a secure unit placement where the inmates are offered a minimum of 20 hours out-of-cell activity per week. Of these hours, a minimum of 10 hours are structured (staff facilitated) and a minimum of 10 are unstructured (yard/dayroom). Inmates in the DTU are reviewed weekly by administrative and treatment staff. Inmates who are seriously mentally ill (“D” on the roster) and who also develop a history of maladaptive or assaultive behavior may be referred to a SRTU (secure residential treatment unit). This is a longer termed phase program for those individuals who demonstrate an increased need for security and an increased need for mental health services because of their serious mentally illness.

All individuals in a DTU or SRTU have an Individualized Recovery Plan (IRP), which addresses the reasons why the individual was placed in the DTU or SRTU (e.g., if the individual assaulted a corrections officer, the individual’s IRP might address violence prevention, anger management, impulse control, or medication compliance, if appropriate). After a referral-and-review process, inmates are typically referred to a specialized assessment unit prior to assignment to this unit. Within this unit, the 20 hours of out-of-cell activity is offered as described above in addition to a phased program system. Additionally, there is a multidisciplinary team assigned to staff this unit consisting of: • corrections officers (who receive specialized training).

• corrections counselor(s).

• psychologist(s).

• social worker.

• therapeutic activities worker(s).

• psychiatrist.

• psychiatric nurse.

• unit manager.

16

|

MAY | JUNE 2017

AMERICANJails

Part of the inmate’s completion requirement for the SRTU is a probationary period in the institution’s RTU (Residential Treatment Unit), which is a specialized unit in the general population.

On a final note, Capozza stated that: “When an inmate in general population receives a misconduct—prior to placement in the RHU—the shift commander reviews the mental health roster to determine if he or she should be placed in the DTU or RHU—and also notifies our licensed psychology manager if the inmate is on the mental health roster.”

Conclusion Advocates who want the RHUs closed need to remember the danger that mentally ill inmates may present to the general population of inmates, especially as these inmates can become preyed upon by more aggressive inmates as described earlier in the article.

Alternative housing units for the mentally ill inmate can provide a much safer environment for the officers who work in the RHUs as well as the inmates who are incarcerated in those units. With the use of alternative secure mental health unit houses, this specialized population can receive proper treatment and still be secured from the general population, in lieu of being housed in the RHU. References Carlson, J. (2013). San Francisco sues Nevada over alleged patient dumping. Modern Healthcare, Retrieved from www.modernhealthcare. com/article/20130910/NEWS/309109937/ san-francisco-sues-nevada-over-alleged-patient-dumping Department of Justice. (2015). Fact Sheet: Department of justice Review of Solitary Confinement. Retrieved from, https:// www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2016/01/25/ fact-sheet-department-justice-review-solitary-confinement Obama, B (2015). Remarks by the President at the NAACP Conference, White House, Office of the Press Secretary. Retrieved from https://www. whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/07/14/ remarks-president-naacp-conference Rock, K.M. (2013). The Mental Health Procedures Act Demystifying the 302 Process. Retrieved from http://c. ymcdn.com/sites/www.pacnp.org/resource/resmgr/ imported/Rock%20302.pdf

Albert DeAmicis was employed at the Allegheny County Bureau of Corrections for 29 years and retired on June 30, 2004. Prior to his retirement, he was an assistant shift commander and held the rank of captain. He holds two master’s degrees from the University of Pittsburgh, and presently, he is a faculty member for LaRoche College’s Justice, Law and Security Criminal Justice Program, and he teaches criminal justice programs in other universities. He can be contacted at Albert.DeAmicis@ laroche.edu.

The Video Visitation Authority HomeWAV now offers The Sharpshooter™, a complimentary evaluation of your entire inmate visitation process!

The Sharpshooter™ Step 1: DISCOVERY - “Identify The Target” HomeWAV will collect a variety of visitation data, including inmate population, pod breakdowns, and current visitation policies. We will also ask for any specific goals you are looking to accomplish.

Step 2: EVALUATION - “Take Aim” Our team of visitation experts will conduct a comprehensive visitation analysis. This includes individually evaluating all data gathered and determining how specific factors could be positively or negatively affecting the overall visitation process.

Step 3: RECOMMENDATIONS - “Fire!”

A visitation expert from the HomeWAV Management Team will schedule a personal appointment to review our findings. Keeping your goals in mind, our expert will present recommendations for improved efficiency, maximizing staff hours, and creating new revenue streams.

CONTACT THE VIDEO VISITATION AUTHORITY: HomeWAV, LLC | Brian Spinner — Marketing Manager | 314-258-1119 | b.spinner@homewav.com

AJAccess Education Portal Live Events On Demand Product Bundles Training Resources

AJAccess is live!

AJAccess is our newest professional development tool. If you missed any of our webinars on PREA, Legal Issues, Human Resources, Special Populations or Leadership, you can now view these sessions—AND selected workshops from AJA’s 2016 and 2017 Conferences!

It’s user-friendly, convenient, cost-effective, and available per your own schedule. Visit www.aja.org under the Education tab for the link, which becomes your portal for AJA Live Events and Training Resources.

For more information, contact Patty Vermillion at 301-790-3930, ext. 302.

Peer Groups, Separate Dorms Power Kentucky Jail’s Substance Abuse Program C harlie B an

Editor’s Note: This article was first published in County News (September 19, 2016), Volume 48, No. 18 and is reprinted with permission. ©2016, National Association of Counties, Washington, D.C.

With heroin moving deeper into Northern Kentucky, landing in the Kenton County Detention Center could be as much of an opportunity as it is a punishment for addicts.

Dedicated substance abuse treatment dorms for men and women just celebrated their first year of operation, and the staff is using momentum from its successful three-tiered approach to treatment to continue to help keep inmates healthy after their release. A combination of biological, psychological, and social approaches are helping dozens of ready and willing inmates break their addictions.

Members of the NACo-NLC Opioid Task Force toured that facility Aug. 19, viewing the programming as a model for rehabilitation. It’s the first medication-assisted treatment program in Kenucky; 14 other county jails have followed suit.

“We have a captive audience,” said Jason Merrick, the director of inmate addiction services. “They have plenty of time and now they have the resources to stand a good chance of success when they get out.”

AMERICANJails

MAY | JUNE 2017

| 19

Vidya Kora, LaPorte County, Indiana commissioner and member of the National City-County Task Force on the Opioid Epidemic, speaks to inmates at the Kenton County, Kentucky Detention Center. The 70 men involved in the substance abuse treatment program live together, participate in peer mentoring and receive medication to help fight drug dependence after their release. Photo by Charlie Ban.

Programming began in September 2015, funded by the detention center and drawing a few part-time staffers along with Merrick. By Feb. 1, 2016, the jail received State funding—a $9 per diem for each of the 107 inmates in the program, enough to fund operations and support three fulltime positions, four part-timers, and supplies.

Inmates take a questionnaire as part of the intake screening process, with several questions designed to look beyond just the charges to see why they’ve wound up in jail.

“They might be in on an assault charge or a robbery charge, and that wouldn’t be a big red flag, but when you dig deeper and ask if that was directly or indirectly related to alcohol or substance abuse and they volunteer it, it’s a start for them taking advantage of what we have to offer.”

There is room for 70 men and 37 women in the program, each gender getting an entire dorm.

20

|

MAY | JUNE 2017

“Having that kind of space is crucial,” Merrick said. “It sets the participants apart from the general population, helps build communities, and keeps them focused.”

The psychological aspect of the program involves a six-month process following an evidencebased cognitive behavioral therapy.

It includes socialization, relapse prevention, drug and alcohol education, and breaking down criminal and addictive thinking. In the fifth month, inmates start transitioning towards life outside, with release and reintegration preparation.

The sixth month bleeds into the socialization component of the program, with resume building, budget planning, and plans of action for setting the right tone for post-release life. That includes establishing links to service providers outside of the jail.

“I’ve driven some of them over to treatment facilities so they know

AMERICANJails

exactly where they need to go,” Merrick said.

Throughout the program, all participants take part in peer group therapy.

“It’s a chance to get to the root causes of why people act the way they do,” Merrick said. “When they talk about their problems, their peers are asking questions to dig a little deeper.”

Merrick offered an example of the kind of perspective peer therapy lends: “Say something in their home life is out of their control.

They might try too hard to fix and manage those situations, and that’s making things difficult. And their peers can offer suggestions on how to improve those conditions and deal with those stresses. It’s a change from ‘what’s going on out there’ and more ‘what’s going on in here.’ ”

• Assessment items that address culturally and gender-informed responsivity factors—such as mothering concerns and adult victimization

MHS.com/LSCMI

• Guidelines that instruct users to consider gender-specific factors, as well as, the importance of minor risk/need factors and non-criminogenic needs • Evaluates positive offender attributes so that offender strengths may be highlighted and built upon in service delivery

Multi-Health Systems Inc. USA Tel: 1.800.456.3003 / CAN Tel: 1.800.268.6011

mhs.com • customerservice@mhs.com

Asked by a task force member what makes the program work, one male inmate said, “Our fellowship from one addict to another.

“It’s our goodwill and our spiritual growth and the willingness to come to a program (like this) and ask for help.”

Mike Greenwell, one of the jail’s clinical navigators, said the programming bridges a gap for inmates between the world they know and one they aspire to reach.

“Education only goes so far, but you have to teach them there is a world of recovery,” he said. “This allows criminals to break the chains of crime because they’re addicted.

They learn how recovery happens, long term.”

As inmates prepare for their release, they are given shots of naltrexone, which reverses the effects of opioid drugs and reduces dependence, giving inmates a phar-

macological advantage against the temptation to relapse for the first few months. A pharmaceutical company supplied several dozen free doses to help the Kenton County program get off the ground and now offers the medicine at the Medicaid rate.

“The State prison system gives them a dose earlier on and then another when they are about to leave, but we’re stretching our resources a little more,” Merrick said. “We don’t give them a maintenance shot, but we do test them out and see how they react to the drug.”

And it appears to be working.

Through June 1, with more than 200 people leaving the jail having successfully completed the program, only 17 had returned to the Kenton County Detention Center on drug charges, though other county jails’ statistics were not available. When figuring just the inmates who were

Help Build a Better Citizen, Not a Massive Inmate

given naltrexone, the success rate reaches 94 percent, Merrick said.

Greenwell said it all combines, along with the collective effort, to set inmates up for success when they are released. Individually they might not have the same motivation, but the program’s accountability makes a difference.

“They learn to care for each other and invest in their successes as a group,” he said. “These guys have really shown a lot of respect for little things in this dorm like making their beds, staying neat, learning how not to break the rules.

“Different small things that eventually transition into big things.” 

Charlie Ban is a senior staff writer and web editor for the National Association of Counties. He writes for County News and helps manage NACo website content. He can be contacted at cban@naco.org.

Outdoor Fitness Equipment

• Costs a fraction of traditional indoor exercise equipment.

• Most equipment is Zimmer Amendment compliant.

• Uses no electricity and installs easily.

• Has no removable parts.

• Detention grade, maintenance free.

• Can be installed outdoors or indoors.

• Also available @ www.GSAAdvantage.gov • Comes with a long term warranty.

Presently Installed at over 100 Correctional Facilities, Prisons, Jails, and Juvenile Justice Centers throughout North America www.TriActiveAmerica.com • 178 South 4th Street, Suite 101 • Grover Beach, CA 93433 Phone: 800.587.4228 • email: staff@triactiveamerica.com

22

|

MAY | JUNE 2017

AMERICANJails

Managing and Defusing Inmate Conflicts

n o i t a c i un

with

m m Co

E lvis S laughter As correctional institutions continue to face new challenges, there is a need for officers to be properly trained on how to manage conflicts in order to ensure that the primary goal of the agency—the protection and safety of staff, inmates, and the society—is achieved. It is also important that correctional officers improve their overall knowledgebase in crises intervention, proper use of force, and the de-escalation of incidents so that they may effectively handle these issues as they encounter them.

AMERICANJails

MAY | JUNE 2017

| 23

First Day Lesson My first day as an officer at Cook Sheriff’s Office is a day I will never forget. I quickly learned that respectful communication with inmates was not the norm. I was in a tier with 50 inmates, (including some who had committed murder) and was just 23-years-old. At this point, I needed training and mentoring to assist me on the job; however, in those days, there was no mentoring and training within the first few months of employment, and no supervisors were available to help. While contemplating my next action, an inmate introduced himself to me and proceeded to teach me the daily routine of an officer: what I should have learned through an orientation or on-the-job-training. (This incidence reminded me of the Golden Rule, because the inmate once lived on a block behind our home and we had attended grammar school together.)

There are several lessons that every correctional officer can learn from my experience: • It is very important to respect both the staff and inmates.

• Most inmates are smart and wellversed in the practice of the correctional facility—which could be information used against a naive officer.

• It is important to be fair to others, because you may need their help in the future.

• New officers require training to fully function in correction facilities. This was a wake-up call for the officers and managers of my correctional institution as it exposed a lax in security (Slaughter, 2016).

Handling Conflict Conflict is a normal, and the correctional institution is bound to witness a lot of conflict, especially with inmates. Because conflict is inevitable, learning how to manage it effectively is crucial. When conflict among inmates is not properly managed, it could escalate and possibly 24

|

MAY | JUNE 2017

As soon as you move one step up from the bottom, your effectiveness depends on your ability to reach others through the spoken or written word.

—Peter F. Drucker

lead to injuries—and even the death of either inmates or officers.

My first serious crisis was in 1984.

As the last visitor exited the correctional facility, operations appeared to be normal like any other day. Then suddenly, I was surprised when the alarm sounded. Two inmates were attempting to escape from the facility; they were armed and had taken an officer hostage. I had never witnessed such an incident before.

The two inmates with the hostage were moving toward me, dressed in staff uniforms, but they were unable to escape because I was pointing an unloaded shotgun at them and had secured the gate seconds before it was breached. This incident is an indication that conflicts will always occur in the correctional facility, and knowing how to resolve crises and conflicts could save a life and

AMERICANJails

possibly restore peace to the warring parties (Slaughter, 2016).

When encountering a conflict situation, officers need to focus on three things: • Be conscious of your surroundings.

• Defuse the situation.

• Maintain control of the situation.

Be Conscious of Your Surroundings One of the crucial aspects of preventing conflicts and avoiding danger is the awareness of a possible threat. When correction officers perceive a possible threat from inmates, they have more time to access the situation and make a better decision. Correction officers need to be conscious of their surroundings and other factors while making decisions on how to tackle the difficult situation. Such factors could be location of alarm bells, the nearness of colleagues and other inmates, and exits.

(HM Prison Service, 2005).

Defuse the Situation While trying to prevent a violent situation from escalating, correction officers need to use their communication and de-escalation skills as much as possible. When resolving conflicts, the best defensive weapons are verbal and non-verbal communication skills. Demonstrating that you are indeed listening to someone is called “attending behavior,” which is done through body language (a nonverbal behavior).

Officers who make use of effective communication skills may be able to defuse a potential conflict; however, in some cases, even the most reasonable approaches may not help the officer avoid the use of force.

It is important to note that threats should not be used when an officer is trying to defuse a situation. Once an ultimatum or a threat is given, all negotiations will cease, and could put the officer in a potential win-orlose situation. The following steps can help an officer to to defuse a violent situation:

• Appear confident and create the impression of being capable of handling the situation.

• Speak clearly, slowly, and gently to inmates.

• Do not argue with inmates.

• Listen to the inmates, but also let them know that they are being heard too.

• Always show calmness and observe their body language.

• Keep your voice low, and this could also lower the inmate’s voice.

• Ask questions.

• Give inmates personal space and provide a sense of safety for them (HM Prison Service, 2005).

Maintain Control of the Situation Correction staff need to adopt an assertive, positive, and confident approach in order to reduce the

possibility of becoming a victim of unwanted attention. It is also important that correction officers avoid being trapped in a corner, but rather encourage reasoning when they are dealing with inmates (HM Prison Service, 2005).

The Role of Correctional Managers and Officers An officer’s role needs to encompass a broader sense of peacekeeping as a conflict resolution, including: • improving communication between the parties.

• early intervention in order to manage inmates’ disputes by focusing on the values, interests, and needs at stake.

• looking for options for a win-win outcome.

Most managers have well-developed skills for managing conflicts

constructively. It is, therefore, important that managers promote social order by using objectives that address the underlying causes of conflicts. These objectives include: • Protecting inmates’ personal safety.

• Fulfilling inmates’ basic human needs.

• Establishing mechanisms for inmates to resolve conflicts.

• Providing the opportunity for inmates to exercise personal autonomy (Edgar, 2014).

Effective Use of Communication To Stop Violence Communication is a two-way process that allows feelings and ideas to be expressed by the sender of the message, which the receiver gets and clearly understands. Therefore, it is not surprising that effective communication is one of the core competen-

MARKET LEADING CONTRABAND DETECTION

SOTER RS

Full Body Security Scanning System BUY AMERICAN.

Selected as the Preferred System by Agencies in Alabama, California, Colorado, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Missouri, New Mexico, Ohio, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia and Wisconsin.

ODSecurityNA.com • 1-844-99-SOTER

AMERICANJails

MAY | JUNE 2017

| 25

Lawsuits: Cause and Effect Most lawsuits are the result of conflicts between inmates and officers or poorly resolved conflicts between inmates. Effective conflict resolution can help to reduce the number of lawsuits against officers and ensure that the correction facilities are more peaceful. Some of the reasons why inmates file lawsuits against correction officers include: • Damage to property • Use of force • Suicide prevention • Personal injury • Inmate-inmate violence • Crowding • Disciplinary procedures Another major cause of lawsuits is the inmate’s perception of justice and fairness in the procedures and policies of correctional facilities. It may appear discriminatory to inmates when correctional facilities lack fundamental fairness and fail to reach the appropriate balance on how to maintain safety, security, order,

and their obligation to ensure the offender’s rights. The following factors contribute to the inmate’s perceived lack of fairness and injustice: • Inability of the correctional facility to maintain a viable grievance process.

• Extremely restrictive policies that limit the inmate’s communication and access to the courts.

• Inability of the authorities in the facility to afford appropriate levels of due process in disciplinary issues.

• Lack of opportunity for inmates to satisfy court obligations or make restitution.

• A perceived discrimination in administration on the basis of race, gender, disability, national origin, religion, and sexual orientation.

• Absence of parity between male and female offenders in the access to services and programs.

Source: Martin, M.D. & Reiss, C.L. (2008). Managing risk in jails.

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Corrections. NIC Accession Number 022666. Retrieved from http:// static.nicic.gov/Library/022666.pdf

cies for supervisors and managers in correctional facilities, in addition to being one of the major factors in the de-escalation of crises.

Before stepping in, officers need to make a quick assessment of a situation. Also, the behavior of the inmates involved needs to be properly evaluated before any necessary action can be taken (Dufresne, 2003).

This is where empathic listening is very important. By listening with empathy, the officer can try to understand the inmate’s motivations. Empathic listening can also be learned (Dufresne, 2003). There are five stratgies to empathic listening: 26

|

MAY | JUNE 2017

• • • • •

Give your undivided attention.

Make room for silence.

Clarify your messages.

Be non-judgmental.

Provide personal space.

Undivided Attention People actually feel validated and important when they are paid attention to, and this also applies to inmates. The opposite is also true: inmates feel less important when they are not given attention, and they may “up the ante” when they require attention. Paying attention goes beyond listening to the inmate;

AMERICANJails

it also involves “listening” to the entire body language, looking at the person, and making eye contact, although eye contact may not be applicable in some correctional facilities. By paying undivided attention to the inmate, you take away the inmate’s reason for escalating the situation (Dufresne, 2003).

Room for Silence Sometimes when questioning inmates or individuals, the use of silence is a good choice. Silence gives the individual the opportunity to hear properly and think of an answer. Sometimes the inmate may show signs of confusion on his/her face when an officer allows a moment of silence. The officer may need to repeat the question again when a look of confusion is noticed on the inmate’s face. This ensures clarity of the question asked.

Another good reason for silence is that no one really likes silence; people usually start talking when silence is prolonged (Dufresne, 2003).

Message Clarification Sometimes, questions and statements can be misinterpreted as a challenge by inmates, causing the inmate to become defensive. In situations like this, restatement may be necessary. The ability of an officer to exercise self-control while dealing with violent offenders is also important (Dufresne, 2003). This is regarded as “rational detachment,” and it is a key factor that determines how possible it will be for an officer to de-escalate or escalate the situation. In order to detach rationally, officers can follow these steps: • Make use of positive self-talk.

• Develop a plan. It has been observed that the decisions made before the outbreak of violence or crises have proven to be more rational than the decisions made when an officer is on the receiving end of emotional outbursts.

Professionalism can be easily maintained when assistance is

CUSTOM ANALYTICS THAT SHOW YOUR BUSINESS DATA IN REAL-TIME. THAT’S AN EASY DECISION. Running a correctional facility is more than custody and care. In order to maintain a safe & secure environment, it’s important to have the right insights at your fingertips. Understanding which tools, programs and processes will have the greatest impact on your business, and keep offenders satisfied is crucial to this mission.

Signature Capture technology tracks purchases that tie directly to an offender & their trust fund. Information is uploaded to our CORE database and enables you to identify trends, promote accountability and reduce grievances.

As a decision-maker, you’ll have the necessary tools to offer the right product mix in commissary, ensure delivery accuracy and leverage the right retail programs for offenders - all which promote positive mood & behavior.

We are committed to providing tools to help you run your business.

W W W. A R A M A R K .CO M /CO R R E C T I O N S • 1 - 8 0 0 -A R A M A R K

close. Officers should strive to apply a team approach when handling conflicts.

• Acknowledge your personal limits. Being a correction officer does not erode the fact there are limitations, and officers need to know their limitations and allow others to sometimes take control.

• After a major incident, debrief your co-workers, supervisor, or team member. This helps to relieve some stress and provides a way to plan for future encounters (Dufresne, 2003).

Non-Judgmental It is important for correction officers not only to pay attention to what people say, but also to ensure that their own body language and tone are non-judgmental. They should avoid giving the impression that they have already made conclusions about what happened before hearing from the inmates involved. Inmates need to know that the officer fully understands what is happening and are focused on the inmate’s feelings.

Personal Space Showing inmates that you are listening is a great way to de-escalate conflicts. In order to show someone that you are listening, be conscious of their personal space. Standing too far away from inmates may indicate that officers do not want to connect with them; however, standing too close also indicates an invasion of personal space. Officers need to face the inmates and leave room for maneuvering. Most importantly, communicate with empathy and warmth; when officers show empathy, it will reflect in their facial expression and tone (“Use communication strategies”, 2008).

Nonverbal Strategies for Preventing and Defusing Conflict Oftentimes, correction officers are faced with either a potential or actual violent situation. It is important to send the appropriate non28

|

MAY | JUNE 2017

verbal signals to indicate that you are not hostile to the needs of the inmate. The following strategies can help with this: • Ensure that you do not invade the other person’s physical space.

• Avoid the use of threatening behavior of any kind.

• Ensure that you use a calm and quiet voice.

• Avoid being emotionally engaged in the situation.

• Maintain an open posture—arms uncrossed.

• Treat inmates with respect, treat their complaints and opinions seriously, and avoid disregarding their distress.

• As much as possible, resist arguing. Although it could be very tempting to respond, such response only escalates the conflicts.

• Avoid interrupting the individual.

A distressed or aggressive person needs to tell you the whole story.

• As much as possible, avoid being irritated or frustrated.

• Closely observe the individual for changes in behavior which might indicate that they are becoming less stressed. Look for a change in facial color and more regular breathing.

• Carefully listen to the person, hear what he/she is trying to tell you, and specifically take note of underlying feelings (“Use communication strategies”, 2008).

What are the options available for inmates who seek nonviolent ways of resolving their differences? It is important to note that correctional facilities can provide wing forums, impartial mediators who are properly trained, or formal opportunities to negotiate. Often these are better equipped to effectively resolve such conflicts before they result in assault or fights. It is the creation of a space where non-violent methods are respected, credible, and workable (Edgar, 2014).

AMERICANJails

Conclusion Safety is no doubt an essential requirement of an effective and humane correctional system, and reducing violence is a complex challenge. Understanding conflicts reveals the underlying causes of assaults and fights, and provides dynamic and effective tools that can be used for managing correctional facilities. Therefore, effective conflict resolution can actually refine violence reduction strategies and empower managers, officers, and inmates in their efforts toward making the correctional facility safer.  References Dufresne, J. (2003, August).

De-escalation tips. Law and Order Magazine. Retrieved from www. crisisprevention.com/Resources/ Knowledge-Base/De-escalation-Tips Edgar, K. (2014). Making prisons safe.

United Kingdom: Prison Reform Trust. Retrieved from www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk/Portals/0/ Documents/Making%20Prison%20 Safe.pdf HM Prison Service. (2005). Prison service order (PSO) 1600: Use of force.

Retrieved from www.justice.gov.uk/ downloads/offenders/psipso/pso/ pso-1600.doc Slaughter, E. (2016). Safer jail and prison matters: Effective ways to manage and reduce violence in correctional facilities.

Publisher: Author.

Use communication strategies to deescalate conflict. (2008). State of New South Wales, The Department of Education and Training. Retrieved from https://sielearning.tafensw. edu.au/MCS/9362/Sterilisation%20 disk%203/lo/7380/7380_00.htm

Elvis Slaughter is a criminologist, retired Sheriff’s Superintendent of Corrections with 30 years of experience in criminal justice and corrections. He has a master’s degree in criminal justice and has taught criminal justice and corrections. He is also a Fire and Police Commissioner, correctional auditor, and consultant. He is the author of several books, including Safer Jail and Prison Matters. He can be contacted at eslaugh108@aol.com.

--- National Voice of Local Corrections ---

WHY PARTNER WITH AJA The American Jail Association is a national, nonprofit organization dedicated to service those who work in and operate our Nation’s jails.

Assistance with career goals Access to experienced professionals Only organization dedicated to jails A YEAR WITH AJA

100+

Training, Webinars, and Conference Discounts

365

6

Days of Networking Opportunities

12+

Weekly AJAlert E-newsletters

3

Advocating at State and National Levels

Award-winning American Jails Magazines

50

Convenient Benefits & Rewards

24/7

AJA Certifications for promotion CJO, CJM, CCT

We invite you to join us:

$48 Yearly Investment

301.790.3930 I membership@aja.org I www.aja.org

STAY CONNECTED

Body Armor

Safety & Program Refinements from NIJ

 

B ecky L ewis

For more than 35 years, criminal justice professionals in the United States have looked to the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) and its Compliance Testing Program (CTP) to give them confidence that the body armor they wear while performing their duties will afford them protection against on-the-job threats. The CTP, on behalf of NIJ, oversees the testing of body armor model designs by certified laboratories and verifies that those models also meet specific workmanship and labeling requirements.

AMERICANJails

MAY | JUNE 2017

| 31

World Leader in

Solve your Administrative Challenges

Paperless Tracking

Interactive Training

Risk Mitigation

Policy Management

32

|

MAY | JUNE 2017

AMERICANJails

NIJ, with assistance from Special Technical Committees (STCs) comprised of criminal justice professionals, subject-matter experts and laboratory staff, is presently engaged in revising the standards against which ballistic-resistant and stab-resistant body armor models are tested, with draft documents expected to be released for public comment during 2017. NIJ also recently introduced a program to add the NIJ Certification Mark to body armor models that have successfully passed the CTP testing protocols.

Addressing Real-World Stab and Slash Threats Inmates are creative and inventive in fashioning improvised stab weapons from everyday objects or materials—even objects as simple as toothbrushes. They use these weapons to attack each other, and they also use them to attack officers. To help officers obtain the protection they need against those threats, NIJ is updating Stab Resistance of Personal Body Armor, NIJ Standard-0115.00, adapted in 2000 from a United Kingdom standard that addressed the threat from commercially made knives.

The end result will be a standard that will be more applicable to the environments in which many corrections officers work, without burdening them with protection against non-applicable threats. The standard will also maintain the commercial threat protection level for officers who work in uncontrolled environments.

The draft NIJ Standard 0115.01 addresses protection against the types of knife and spike threats that corrections officers face on a daily basis, and adds testing specific to female body armor models. An STC that includes corrections practitioners from multiple agencies worked diligently over an extended period to review the research and provide real world input.

NIJ Standard 0115.01 will provide two performance categories for stab/slash-resistant armor: • Commercially made weapons, typically found by corrections officers in facility intake and public areas and in uncontrolled areas.

• Improvised or inmate-made weapons, typically encountered inside controlled access areas of jails, detention centers, and prisons.

Both commercial and improvised tests will include knife and spike tests identified by the STC as representing prevalent threats, and female armor will be tested to ensure any stitching or forming of the bust cups continues to meet the same required level of protection afforded by unshaped armor. The test blades presently used for testing will continue to be used as test weapons for commercial threats, and the Justice Technology Information Center’s technical experts worked closely with academia to develop additional test weapons based on the types of improvised weapons confiscated or found within correctional facilities.

The standard also covers conditioning (tumbling the armors for many days) prior to testing to ensure they

continue to work as intended after being subjected to sustained mechanical damage, along with simple tests for label legibility and durability. The ability to continue to read the label as the armor is worn and used over time is significant for a number of reasons, including needing to know pertinent information such as model number (in the event of a recall) and the protection level.

Clarifying Threat Levels, Refining Ammunition Types, Adding Female Armor Testing In February 2013, an STC began meeting to discuss revisions needed to Ballistic Resistance of Body Armor, NIJ Standard-0101.06, and plans call for a draft of Standard 0101.07 to be released for public comment in 2017. The latest revision will consist mainly of refinements and clarifications, many of which will impact only test labs and the CTP. Changes impacting criminal justice

Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center [NLECTC] System. For more details and to apply to obtain access, visit https://justnet.org/NIJ_ASTM_ Standards_Portal.html).

Registered NIJ Certification Mark Indicates Compliance with Program Standards As of March 2017, the CTP requires the addition of the NIJ Certification Mark to the labels of ballistic-resistant body armor models certified by the NIJ CTP. Registered by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, the NIJ Mark indicates that a specific model of ballistic-resistant body armor has been tested by the NIJ CTP and found to comply with the current version of the NIJ ballistic-resistant body armor standard and the NIJ CTP program requirements. By placing the NIJ Mark on the label, a manufacturer clearly communicates that the armor is constructed

Inmates are creative and inventive in fashioning improvised stab weapons from everyday objects or materials. professionals fall mainly in the areas of protection levels, types of ammunition used in testing, vocabulary refinements, and testing of female armor.

Details on those changes include: • Development of a test protocol specific to female armors, based on input from several focus groups of female officers.

• Introducing the use of 7.62 x 39 mild steel core (MSC) or an equivalent threat round and 5.56 mm M855 ammunition into hard armor plate testing.

• Revisiting protection level names of both hard armor plates and soft armor vests, with a goal of ensuring clarity through nomenclature that instantly identifies the type of protection offered and provides demarcation between the new standard and previous iterations.

• Retiring Level IIA, the lowest level of soft armor protection.

• Reducing confusion caused by manufacturers, labs, practitioners and government agencies all using the same term to mean different things, or using different terms to describe the same thing, by including only a truncated section of definitions and additionally referencing the newly released ASTM E3005-15 Standard Terminology for Body Armor. (As a service to the criminal justice community, NIJ provides free access to this and other ASTM standards through a portal on JUSTNET, the website of the National Law

in the same manner as the original test items evaluated as compliant by the CTP, and that armor was assembled under the CTP’s surveillance program that periodically inspects and tests production samples.

Prior to implementation of the NIJ Mark, manufacturers indicated participation in the NIJ CTP by using the following NIJ CTP statement of compliance on their labels: “This model of armor has been determined to comply with NIJ Standard-0101.xx by the NIJ Compliance Testing Program and is listed on the NIJ Compliant Product List.” The CTP began phasing out use of that statement in October 2016, and all armor manufactured after March 1, 2017, must carry the Mark rather than the statement.

For more information on the CTP, to check the Compliant Product Lists of compliant stab- and ballisticresistant armors, and to get the latest information on the progress of the standards revisions, visit www.justnet.org or call 800–248–2742. 

Becky Lewis is a senior writer/editor with the Justice Technology Information Center and the lead writer for e-TechBeat, the monthly online newsletter of the National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center System.

The NLECTC System is a program of the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice. She can be contacted at rebecca.l.lewis@leidos.com.

AMERICANJails

MAY | JUNE 2017

| 33

e h t g n i n i m a x E

e v i t a r t s i n i Adm s e u s s I y t i l i Liab l a n o i t c e r r o of C s m a e T l a c i Tact

D arrell L. R oss

Editor’s Note: This article was originally published in American Jails, November/December 1996.

Responding to an emer­gency in the correctional facility was historically unsystematic and uncoordinated. Traditionally, critical incidents were handled by the “goon” squads which were portrayed as “enforcers” of the facility’s rules and regulations, ready to “bust heads” when the situation called for restoration of a violent incident. Frequently, these squads responded to situations with little or no preplanned strategy, no prior training, no safety equipment, and no forethought to the potential legal issues which may result from such an incident. Consequently, the officer as well as the inmate was frequently injured during the inci­dent.

This type of response, which has out­lived its usefulness as today’s response to emergency situations, requires a supervised professional 34

|

MAY | JUNE 2017

response, specialized tactical train­ ing, and proper equipment.

Since the 1971 Attica prison riot, which left numerous correctional officers and inmates injured and dead , and resulted in $2 million worth of property damage (Gray, 1994), tremendous strides have been made regarding the proper response to riots, disturbances, and other emergency situations in cor­rectional facilities. The Attica prison riot as well as other emergency inci­dents has spawned legal actions against correctional officials. This has required administrators to evalu­ate response procedures and develop specialized units to respond to emergency situations.

The concept of establishing a tactical response team to deal with high intensity conflict is not a new idea.

AMERICANJails

During the 1960s and 1970s numerous police departments designed “Special Weapons and Tactics” (SWAT) or “Emergency Service Units” (ESU). These highly trained and well­-equipped units provide law enforcement agencies with a dis­ciplined and coordinated means of responding to extraordinary situations that are beyond the patrol officers’ normal duties (Kappeler, 1993).

Borrowing from the concept from law enforcement, many correctional agencies in the past 10 to 15 years have developed similar tactical units to respond to emer­ gency situations. Various titles for these correctional units range from “Emergency Response Teams” (ERT), “Special Operations Response Teams” (SORT), to “Special Tactics

and Response” (STAR). These specialized tactical teams are designed to respond to critical emergencies on a moment’s notice and are often supported by law enforcement agencies when a major disturbance occurs.

The functions of a tactical unit may vary, but normally include such tasks as facility searches, preplanned forced cell extractions, handling riots/disturbances, conducting mass inmate arrests, mass bookings, escape attempts, gang activities, breaking up inmate fights, hostage/ barricade situations, quelling disruptive inmate behavior, executive protec­tion, and escorting high-risk or dangerous inmates (Lucas, 1992; Web & Alicie, 1994; Bryan, 1995).

Correctional agencies who have established emer­gency tactical teams have been effective in handling smaller incidents and the teams

have acted as a deter­rent to larger scale disturbances (Gessinger, 1986).

The Federal Bureau of Prisons’ tactical team along with the FBI’s tactical unit effectively quelled a riot in August 1991 at the Talladega Correctional Institution (Useem et al., 1995). Ohio’s emergency response team assisted in terminating a riot in their Lucasville institution in April 1993 after an 11-day siege. After the riot, correctional officials in Ohio intensified their efforts to maximize their response in future situations (Bryan, 1995 ). Detention facilities utilizing special response teams have also observed success in situations involving forced cell moves and disturbances (Drapkin & Klugiewicz, 1994).

Maintaining the continued operation or considering the development of a special response team requires the correctional administrator to evaluate the organiza­tional, logistical, personnel, and legal issues which impact the unit. The purpose of this article is to identify civil liability issues that are directly associated with the establishment and maintenance of correctional tactical units. This discussion analyzes liability under Title 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 relative to the administration and performance of specialized tactical teams in corrections.

Issues addressed include select­ ing, equipping, assigning, super­ vising, and training of personnel for these units. The primary emphasis will center around county detention facilities, although many of these issues apply to State prison systems as well.

Methodology Extensive Section 1983 litiga­tion in corrections dates back to the early 1970s. Bryan (1995) conducted a survey of State cor­rectional tactical units and found that of the 41 States responding, 27 percent have encountered civil litigation from the utilization of tactical units. The content of 53 Section 1983 correctional cases representing both deten­tion and prison facilities from 1974 to 1994

was exam­ined through the content analysis methodology. Of the sample of cases analyzed, 26 are presented for this dis­cussion. While a perfect precedent was not discovered, cases were found to be peripherally applicable to the function of correctional response teams and those who supervise them. Analysis of these cases revealed issues emerge from claims of excessive force (largely from cell extractions), failure to protect, denial of medical services, poor/deficient policies and procedures, failing to train, failure to direct, and failure to supervise.

Initial analyses of these cases were reviewed in the Detention and Corrections Caselaw Catalog (Miller & Walter, 1995). This document annually publishes case summaries on 50 different correctional law topics and includes over 4,000 Shepardized cases. Each case used in this article was further analyzed by reviewing it in its entirety through the West Publishing Company’s Federal Supplement and in the Supreme Court Reporter. Only those cases which were associated with administrative liability were analyzed.

Subsequent cases and literature were also reviewed, and the findings are integrated and applied to currently accepted principles of correctional management in the field of tactical response teams.

Under Section 1983 administrative litigation is associ­ated with several common theories of liability (Collins, 1982; Robbins, 1985; Silver, 1990; del Carmen, 1991; Kappeler, 1993; Barrineau, 1994). Typically an adminis­trator will be identified in the claim of a Section 1983 lawsuit and the following theories underscore potential administrative liability: 1. Negligent assignment 2. Negligent entrustment 3. Failure to train 4. Failure to direct 5. Failure to supervise 6. Negligent retention 7. Negligent hiring

AMERICANJails

MAY | JUNE 2017

| 35

Because these theories of liability are not mutually exclusive, a common strategy for the plaintiff is to com­bine several theories into one claim, alleging that the administrator failed to train, supervise, and direct officers to determine the grounds for lia­bility. The plaintiff’s hope is to prove all or any of the adminis­ trative theories during trial to support the claim. Utilizing sev­eral of these theories provides the methodological framework in which various cases will be discussed relative to tactical response teams’ liability issues.

Deliberate Indifference and Liability The legal concept of deliberate indifference is often difficult to determine, not self-defining, and is a high standard of culpability for a plaintiff to overcome. Liability under Section 1983 attaches where a deliberate choice to follow a course of action is made from among various alternatives by governmental policy makers (City of Canton, Ohio, v. Harris, 1989). This principle in correc­tions applies to policy makers who acted or whose failure to act amounted to more than negligence and is decided on a case by case basis, depending upon the actions of correctional personnel. Deliberate indifference involves a conscious intentional decision or choice to inflict unnecessary and wanton pain toward an inmate (Estelle v. Gamble, 1976). It may involve actions or omissions of actions which violate the inmate’s constitutional pro­tected rights. The court in Young v. Quinlan (1992) found deliberate indifference to mean when an official knows or should have known of a sufficiently serious sit­uation which poses danger to an inmate. In Farmer v. Brennan (1994) the U.S. Supreme Court held that delib­erate indifference exists when the official is subjectively aware of the risk of injury or harm to an inmate(s) in his care, and disregards that risk by failing to take reason­able measures to abate it. In Stokes v. Delcambre (1983) the 36

|

MAY | JUNE 2017

court awarded $205,000 against the sheriff, $105,000 in punitive damages against a correctional officer, and $70,000 in compensatory damages against both defendants for failing to protect an inmate from sexual attacks from fellow inmates. While in a dayroom the inmate was beaten and forced to engage in sexual acts by other inmates. His yells and screams were ignored by jail officers.

The court ruled that was sufficient evidence to support an indifference to the safety of the inmate and that the officers were wanton, malicious, and oppressive in their actions toward the inmate.

Frequently, a claim of deliberate indifference attaches itself in corrections to issues of cruel and unusual pun­ishment under the Eighth Amendment. For example, in Green v. Carlson (1978) the court found the prison system’s medical equipment to be nonoperational. The prison had no emergency medical plan nor staff trained in emergency first aid. These conditions constituted deliberate indifference to known medical needs of an inmate who died as a result.

However, in Friends v. Moore (1991) the court did not find that the prison officials used excessive force against an inmate when a “movement” team entered his cell to strip him in light of the security risk present in the prison at the time, and the fact that the defendant’s only injury appeared to be a bloody nose which could have easily occurred during the scuffle with the “team” in attempting to place the inmate in restraints.

The inmate also failed to show that prison officials were deliberately indifferent to his medical needs as a nurse examined him and found he did not sustain any injuries beyond his bloody nose.

Historically, Section 1983 lawsuits are the most popu­lar remedy for challenging actions or omissions of gov­ernmental entity. Individual as well as administrative actions stemming from “official policies” pave the road to successful litigation supported with claims of alleging that correctional officials

AMERICANJails

were deliberately indifferent to the protected constitutional rights of the inmate. While deliberate indifference is a judicial gloss, appear­ing neither in the Constitution nor in statute (Farmer v. Brennan, 1994), it is an important concept for adminis­ trators to recognize and provides the basis for the follow­ing discussion on administrative liability regarding the operations and maintenance of special response teams.

Liability Issues Relevant To Tactical Team Operations Several Section 1983 cases were examined for their relevance to tactical operations. Application of these cases as they relate to special response teams is discussed and represents both administrative issues and/or poten­tial response team liability issues.

Negligent Assignment Negligent assignment involves an administrator’s knowing or making efforts to know officers’ level of competence or fitness to handle a particular assignment (Silver, 1991 ).

Cases arising from this area collectively state that the administrator must be aware of the weak­ness of subordinates and therefore must not assign them to assignments or to perform tasks in which they lack skill or proficiency. In Moon v.

Winfield (1974) liability was imposed for a failure to place a police officer who was unfit for his assignment into a nonsensitive position. The court held the supervisor liable as he had authority to assign or suspend the officer. Assignment to a tactical unit or requesting an officer to perform a specialized task must be carefully evaluated. Skills needed to per­form tactical procedures are not normally possessed by most officers. Under this theory of liability administra­tors must be aware of the inadequacies and capabilities of their employees to learn and develop these skills before actual assignment to the tactical response team.

It is obvious that the management of a detention facility must follow

an appropriate course of action once a decision is made to develop, staff, or expand a tactical response team.

Management must first identify the pur­pose of the unit and then specify the skills and behaviors needed to perform the tasks as a tactical member. Management must then identify the personal characteristics needed to develop these skills and behaviors. Finally, supervisors must develop and administer a valid and reliable mechanism that will identify the personnel who possess these desired characteristics. Team

ing (Parker v. District of Columbia, 1988).

As a preventive measure officers who are not physi­cally or emotionally fit for assignment as a tactical team member should not be allowed, either through inade­quate testing mechanisms or through a policy of indif­ference, to be assigned to the tactical unit. Managers must also be sure to effectively reevaluate team members who may develop violent propensities and to remove them from the unit as warranted.

indifference could be based on a pattern of officer misconduct, which should have been obvious or foreseen by correctional officials who fail to provide the necessary remedial training.

This theory of liability is critical to the operations of the tactical response team from a managerial perspec­tive. The correctional officer generalist must have knowl­edge and training to perform the generic functions of the job. But what of the officer who has been assigned the duties as a special response team

Negligent assignment involves an administrator’s knowing or making efforts to know officers’ level of competence or fitness to handle a particular assignment (Silver, 1991 ). Cases arising from this area collectively state that the administrator must be aware of the weak­ness of subordinates and therefore must not assign them to assignments or to perform tasks in which they lack skill or proficiency. mem­bers should be selected from tenured employees who have shown an interest in the team and are able to meet predetermined standards (Lucas, 1992).

Various task analyses have revealed that emotional sta­bility (Kolman, 1982), a nonargumentative personality (Jacobs, 1983), an above average intellectual capacity (Adams et al., 1989), and the ability to properly manage stress (Scrivner, 1994) are some of the characteristics desired in tactical officers.

Moreover, since tactical oper­ations often require a great deal of strenuous activity that normally involves extraordinary muscular response, physical fitness standards are commonly employed crite­ria for the selection of tactical personnel. The concept of administrative liability has historically been directed toward excessive use of force, brutality, or other issues of cruel and unusual punishment. However, the concept has been expanded to include a failure to establish, maintain, and enforce standards of physical fitness among officers through proper train-

Failure To Train Lawsuits alleging a constitutional injury resulting from the department’s policy of failing to provide train­ing to its employees are highly common today. In City of Canton, Ohio, v. Harris (1989) the U.S. Supreme Court held that inadequate training may serve as the basis for liability only where the failure to train amounts to delib­erate indifference by policy makers of the agency.

In adopting the deliberate indifference standard, the Court explained that inadequate training meets the standard only when the need for more or different training is obvious and the failure to implement such training is likely to result in a constitutional violation ( Callahan, 1989).

The Court further noted that officers must receive ongoing training to usual, and recurrent, situa­tions that face the officer on a regular basis. In correc­tions this would include when administrators know that officers are required to use force in controlling resistful or violent inmates and training to properly use force is so obvious that failing to do so amounts to deliberate indifference. Deliberate

member? Correctional managers responsible for emergency response units, a group whose expressed purpose is to respond to situations involving the highest probabilities of danger and varying degrees of force, must develop and provide regular training for situations in which team members will be utilized. Failing to foresee the needs of the tactical team could be dangerous for the correctional supervisor and the department alike. The subject matter covered in training should be “content” valid in order to meet the standard of “adequate” training. A task analysis of the tasks to be performed should be conducted (del Carmen, 1991) and specific learning objectives, behavioral skills, and minimum levels of acceptable performance should be identified in advance of the training (Fyfe, 1995).

Tactical teams by their inherent function will utilize varying types of equipment. Therefore, the administrator must adopt a philosophy of providing realistic training in restraints, lethal and less-than-lethal weapons/procedures, equipment, and various types of chemical

AMERICANJails

MAY | JUNE 2017

| 37

agents, including OC spray. In Hill v. Shelancler (1993) a prison sergeant was not immune from an excessive force claim when an inmate successfully sued him. The inmate refused to exit his cell. Upon refusal the sergeant pulled the inmate from the cell by his hair and shoulder, slammed his head into the cell bars, struck him in the face twice, and kneed him in the groin. The court held that a reasonable prison sergeant should have known that such conduct violated the Eighth Amendment.

The proactive correction administrator must be able to identify and select personnel who can perform the physical and mental tasks of tactical operations under extremely difficult and provocative conditions.

Personnel assigned to tactical operations must receive extremely close scrutiny in the selection and training process. Failure to anticipate and prepare for these events subjects the administrator to potential allegations of deliberate indifference.

Negligent Entrustment Negligent entrustment involves the supervisor’s fail­ing to properly supervise or control an employee’s

cus­tody, use, or supervision of equipment or facilities entrusted to him or her (del Carmen, 1991).

This theory of liability is different from negligent assignment in that negligent entrustment goes beyond employee incompe­tence, but rather incompetence in the proper utilization of the equipment entrusted to the employee—for exam­ple, failure to supervise the proper use of an impact weapon in a disturbance situation which later results in a serious injury or death of an inmate.

In Slahen v. Porter (1984) the court awarded an inmate $32,000 when evidence supported a claim of excessive force by correction officers when they used high­pressure hoses, tear gas, and billy clubs to subdue him while he was confined in a one-man cell. The officers as well as supervisory personnel were found to be deliber­ately indifferent to the inmate’s constitutional right to be free from a known risk of harm. Supervisors were liable as they should have been aware of the propensities of brutality of officers and had the duty to ensure that instruments of control were not misused. In Soto v. Cacly (1983) the court

Cases Cited City of Canton v. Harris, 489 U.S. 378, 109 S. Ct. 1197 (1989) Farmer v. Brennan, 114 S. Ct. 1970, 128 (1994) Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97 (1976) Friends v. Moore, 776 F. Supp. 1382 (E.D. MO 1991) Giroux v. Sherman, 807 F. Supp. 1182 (E.D. PA 1992) Green v. Carlson, 581 F. Supp. 669 (7th Cir. 1978) Hill v. Shelander; 992 F. 2d 714 (7th Cir. 1993) Hudson v. McMillian, 112 S. Ct. 995 (1992) Leach v. Shelby County Sheriff, 891 F. 2d 1241 (6th Cir. 1989) Overbay v. Lilliman, 572 F. Supp. 174 (W .D. MO 1983) Marchese v. Lucas, 758 F. 2d 181 (6th Cir. 1985) Moon v. Winfield, 388 F. Supp. 31, (N.D. IL 1974) Parker v. District of Columbia, 271 F. 2d. 708 (1988) Slaken v. Porter, 737 F. 2d 368 (4th Cir. 1984) Soto v. Cady, 566 F. Supp. 773 (E.D. Wisc. 1983) Stokes v. Delcambre, 710 F. 2d 1120 (5th Cir. 1983) Valencia v. Wiggins, 981 F. 2d 1440 (5th Cir. 1993) Vineyard v. County of Murray, GA, 990 F. 2d 1207 (11th Cir. 1993) Young v. Quinlan, 960 F. 2d 351, 360-361 (CA3 1992) 38

|

MAY | JUNE 2017

AMERICANJails

found that the practice of using mace too fre­quently on inmates whose behavior was only passive in nature was excessive and violated the rights of inmates.

The liability standard for negli­ gent entrustment is deliberate indifference. Tactical teams by their function will utilize varying weapons to accomplish a specific task. In order to reduce the risk of administrative liability, supervi­sors of these units should provide competencybased and ongoing training in all equipment and weapons the team will be using to prevent the reckless misuse of the equipment.

Supervisors must document that each tactical team member has been properly trained and supervised in accordance with the proper use of the equipment prior to its actual use.

Failure To Direct Failure to direct involves failing to inform employees of the specific requirements and limits of the job to be performed (del Carmen, 1991). Frequently this is inter­preted as a failure of an administrator to promulgate policies and procedures which direct personnel in the specific task of their job. On several occasions sheriffs have been found to be the agency policy makers. In Marchese v. Lucas (1985) the court awarded $125,000 to an inmate who was beaten upon entering the deten­ tion facility. The sheriff was found liable for failing to train and discipline the officers. Because the sheriff is the law enforcement arm of the county and makes poli­cies regarding police matters, liability was assessed.

The court in Vineyard v. County of Murray, GA (1993) found the sheriff and several deputies liable for beating an inmate. Evidence supported a finding that the county’s policy on force was inadequate and was the moving force of the constitutional violation. In Leach v. Shelby County Sheriff (1989) the court ruled as admissible evi­dence that the sheriff had failed to investigate allega­ tions that the plaintiff, a paraplegic, had been mistreated in the jail. The

failure to investigate was viewed as ratification of the illegal acts and evidence of the official policy.

In Valencia v. Wiggins (1993) liability existed when officers decided to act outside the boundaries of established policy. An inmate was awarded $2,500 in dam­ages and $27,000 in attorney’s fees when the court found the officer used excessive force against him in a jail disturbance. The officer struck the handcuffed, non­resisting inmate and placed him in a choke hold. The court found that the force and choke hold used by the officer were outside the jail’s policy and constituted malicious and sadistic harm.

The best defensible position for a correctional agency to be in is to establish and maintain current written poli­cies and procedures (Borum & Stock, 1992). Policies and procedures utilized by the response team should be contained in a manual and distributed to team mem­bers. Officers should receive training in the policies in order to understand how to implement them in the detention facility. As well, team members should also be tested about their knowledge of the policies. Specific policies and procedures should be written which cover aspects of the team’s responding to riots, disturbances, forced cell moves, escapes, hostage situations, and other functions in which the team will be utilized. Procedures need to specify the appropriate and accepted tactics and equipment that are authorized in varying situations. Procedures should be written consistent with State stan­dards and professional industry approaches to respond­ing to emergency situations.

Recognizing these standards and establishing policies and training in them will enhance an administrator’s position of not being deliberately indifferent to inmates’ rights.

Failure To Supervise Failure to supervise involves abdication of the respon­sibility of overseeing employee activity (del

Carmen, 1991). Failing to properly supervise employees can bring on a lawsuit for failing to know about employee behav­ior. Examples may include tolerating a pattern of physi­ cal abuse of inmates, racial discrimination, and pervasive deprivation of inmate rights and privileges. The usual standard is whether the supervisor knew of a pattern of behavior, but failed to act on it (Silver, 1991).

The question becomes: What constitutes knowledge of a pattern of behavior of the employees? Many courts have established that actual knowledge is required, while other courts state knowledge can be inferred if a history of violations is established and the official had direct and close supervisory control over the employee com­mitting the violation.

to the officers “not to have too much fun.” The U.S. Supreme Court held the use of excessive physical force may constitute cruel and unusual punishment even though the inmate does not suffer seri­ous injury.

Tactical team members, supervisors, and the tac­tics they employ must be supervised carefully to avoid a heightened level of liability. All complaints of abuse of force should be investigated by a neutral investigatory body to ensure policies and tactics were properly followed.

Debriefing of all call-outs of the team is encouraged to closely direct and monitor the unit’s tactics in controlling resistful inmate behavior so that claims of the existence of a “clandestine goon squad” are not successfully raised.

In Giroux v. Sherman (1992) an inmate was awarded $36,000 in punitive damages, claiming on four occa­sions at least eight correction officers beat and tor­mented him without provocation. On one occasion three officers beat the inmate in the kitchen which ulti­mately led to kidney damage requiring surgery.

Later, while in the hospital, other officers hit and jabbed the inmate in the injured kidney and punched him in the throat. Supervisory liability also attached when the court stated that supervisors failed to identify and correct such behavior of the officers. Overbay v. Lilliman (1983) dealt with a sheriff’s failure to train and supervise a deputy who assaulted an inmate. The court ruled that the sheriff knew of the past violent behavior of the deputy and had failed to train and supervise the deputy properly.

The tactical team is in a position where using force against a violent inmate could potentially lead to “cell­ block justice” later in an isolation cell. In Hudson v. McMillian (1992) two officers beat a nonresisting hand­ cuffed inmate in the head with such force that his den­tal plate flew out of his mouth and broke when it landed on the floor. A lieutenant observed the officers’ behavior and remarked

Conclusions Tactical operations are among the most high profile and potentially dangerous tasks performed by correc­tional personnel. Since inmate behaviors are highly unpredictable, decisions must be carefully weighed prior to a specific course of action. Maintaining or considering developing a tactical team requires careful delibera­tion of the ability points addressed in this discussion.

In order to be in the best defensible position, the correc­tional administrator needs to thoroughly assess the agen­cy’s resources and personnel and to adopt some preventive measures. First, it is incumbent upon the administrator to analyze all available options to accom­plish the organizational objective. Moreover, due to the standard of deliberate indifference it becomes a legal duty as well.

As technology and subject control methods have changed, a whole new industry has been created with various manufacturers offering a variety of methods to control inmate behavior. Administrators are encour­aged to take the needed time to carefully evaluate new innovations prior to implementing them in the field.

AMERICANJails

C ontinued

on page

MAY | JUNE 2017

68

| 39

Her opioid dependence got her here.

VIVITROL® (naltrexone for extended-release injectable suspension) is a non-narcotic, non-addictive, once-monthly medication indicated for1: • Prevention of relapse to opioid dependence, following opioid detoxification.

• Treatment of alcohol dependence in patients who are able to abstain from alcohol in an outpatient setting prior to the initiation of treatment with VIVITROL. Patients should not be actively drinking at the time of initial VIVITROL administration.

• VIVITROL should be part of a comprehensive management program that includes psychosocial support.

For additional Important Safety Information, please see Brief Summary of Prescribing Information on adjacent pages.

Now help her get on a path to treatment.

Learn more about a non-addictive, non-divertible treatment option.

Visit TreatWithVIVITROL.com to learn more about how VIVITROL and counseling can help.

Important Safety Information Contraindications VIVITROL is contraindicated in patients: • Receiving opioid analgesics • With current physiologic opioid dependence • In acute opioid withdrawal • Who have failed the naloxone challenge test or have a positive urine screen for opioids

• Who have exhibited hypersensitivity to naltrexone, polylactide-co-glycolide (PLG), carboxymethylcellulose, or any other components of the diluent

Prior to the initiation of VIVITROL, patients should be opioid-free for a minimum of 7-10 days to avoid precipitation of opioid withdrawal that may be severe enough to require hospitalization.

Reference: 1. VIVITROL [prescribing information]. Waltham, MA: Alkermes, Inc; 2015.

VIVITROL® (naltrexone for extended-release injectable suspension) Intramuscular BRIEF SUMMARY See package insert for full prescribing information (rev. Dec. 2015).

INDICATIONS AND USAGE: VIVITROL is indicated for the treatment of alcohol dependence in patients who are able to abstain from alcohol in an outpatient setting prior to initiation of treatment with VIVITROL. Patients should not be actively drinking at the time of initial VIVITROL administration. In addition, VIVITROL is indicated for the prevention of relapse to opioid dependence, following opioid detoxification. VIVITROL should be part of a comprehensive management program that includes psychosocial support.

CONTRAINDICATIONS: VIVITROL is contraindicated in: patients receiving opioid analgesics, patients with current physiologic opioid dependence, patients in acute opioid withdrawal, any individual who has failed the naloxone challenge test or has a positive urine screen for opioids, and patients who have previously exhibited hypersensitivity to naltrexone, polylactide-co-glycolide (PLG), carboxymethylcellulose, or any other components of the diluent.

WARNINGS AND PRECAUTIONS: Vulnerability to Opioid Overdose: After opioid detoxification, patients are likely to have reduced tolerance to opioids. VIVITROL blocks the effects of exogenous opioids for approximately 28 days after administration.

However, as the blockade wanes and eventually dissipates completely, patients who have been treated with VIVITROL may respond to lower doses of opioids than previously used, just as they would have shortly after completing detoxification.

This could result in potentially life threatening opioid intoxication (respiratory compromise or arrest, circulatory collapse, etc.) if the patient uses previously tolerated doses of opioids. Cases of opioid overdose with fatal outcomes have been reported in patients who used opioids at the end of a dosing interval, after missing a scheduled dose, or after discontinuing treatment. Patients should be alerted that they may be more sensitive to opioids, even at lower doses, after VIVITROL treatment is discontinued, especially at the end of a dosing interval (i.e., near the end of the month that VIVITROL was administered), or after a dose of VIVITROL is missed. It is important that patients inform family members and the people closest to the patient of this increased sensitivity to opioids and the risk of overdose. There is also the possibility that a patient who is treated with VIVITROL could overcome the opioid blockade effect of VIVITROL. Although VIVITROL is a potent antagonist with a prolonged pharmacological effect, the blockade produced by VIVITROL is surmountable. The plasma concentration of exogenous opioids attained immediately following their acute administration may be sufficient to overcome the competitive receptor blockade. This poses a potential risk to individuals who attempt, on their own, to overcome the blockade by administering large amounts of exogenous opioids. Any attempt by a patient to overcome the antagonism by taking opioids is especially dangerous and may lead to life-threatening opioid intoxication or fatal overdose. Patients should be told of the serious consequences of trying to overcome the opioid blockade. Injection Site Reactions: VIVITROL injections may be followed by pain, tenderness, induration, swelling, erythema, bruising, or pruritus; however, in some cases injection site reactions may be very severe. In the clinical trials, one patient developed an area of induration that continued to enlarge after 4 weeks, with subsequent development of necrotic tissue that required surgical excision. In the post marketing period, additional cases of injection site reaction with features including induration, cellulitis, hematoma, abscess, sterile abscess, and necrosis, have been reported. Some cases required surgical intervention, including debridement of necrotic tissue. Some cases resulted in significant scarring. The reported cases occurred primarily in female patients. VIVITROL is administered as an intramuscular gluteal injection, and inadvertent subcutaneous injection of VIVITROL may increase the likelihood of severe injection site reactions. The needles provided in the carton are customized needles. VIVITROL must not be injected using any other needle. The needle lengths (either 1 1/2 inches or 2 inches) may not be adequate in every patient because of body habitus. Body habitus should be assessed prior to each injection for each patient to assure that the proper needle is selected and that the needle length is adequate for intramuscular administration. Healthcare professionals should ensure that the VIVITROL injection is given correctly, and should consider alternate treatment for those patients whose body habitus precludes an intramuscular gluteal injection with one of the provided needles. Patients should be informed that any concerning injection site reactions should be brought to the attention of the healthcare professional. Patients exhibiting signs of abscess, cellulitis, necrosis, or extensive swelling should be evaluated by a physician to determine if referral to a surgeon is warranted.

Precipitation of Opioid Withdrawal: The symptoms of spontaneous opioid withdrawal (which are associated with the discontinuation of opioid in a dependent individual) are uncomfortable, but they are not generally believed to be severe or necessitate hospitalization. However, when withdrawal is precipitated abruptly by the administration of an opioid antagonist to an opioid-dependent patient, the resulting withdrawal syndrome can be severe enough to require hospitalization. Review of postmarketing cases of precipitated opioid withdrawal in association with naltrexone treatment has identified cases with symptoms of withdrawal severe enough to require hospital admission, and in some cases, management in the intensive care unit. To prevent occurrence of precipitated withdrawal in patients dependent on opioids, or exacerbation of a pre-existing subclinical withdrawal syndrome, opioiddependent patients, including those being treated for alcohol dependence, should be opioid-free (including tramadol) before starting VIVITROL treatment. An opioidfree interval of a minimum of 7–10 days is recommended for patients previously dependent on short-acting opioids. Patients transitioning from buprenorphine or methadone may be vulnerable to precipitation of withdrawal symptoms for as long as two weeks. If a more rapid transition from agonist to antagonist therapy is deemed necessary and appropriate by the healthcare provider, monitor the patient closely in an appropriate medical setting where precipitated withdrawal can be managed. In every case, healthcare providers should always be prepared to manage withdrawal symptomatically with non-opioid medications because there is no completely reliable method for determining whether a patient has had an adequate opioid-free period. A naloxone challenge test may be helpful; however, a few case reports have indicated that patients may experience precipitated withdrawal despite having a negative urine toxicology screen or tolerating a naloxone challenge test (usually in the setting of transitioning from buprenorphine treatment). Patients should be made aware of the risks associated with precipitated withdrawal and encouraged to give an accurate account of last opioid use. Patients treated for alcohol dependence with VIVITROL should also be assessed for underlying opioid dependence and for any recent use of opioids prior to initiation of treatment with VIVITROL. Precipitated opioid withdrawal has been observed in alcohol-dependent patients in circumstances where the prescriber had been unaware of the additional use of opioids or co-dependence on opioids. Hepatotoxicity: Cases of hepatitis and clinically significant liver dysfunction were observed in association with VIVITROL exposure during the clinical development program and in the postmarketing period.

Transient, asymptomatic hepatic transaminase elevations were also observed in the clinical trials and postmarketing period. Although patients with clinically significant liver disease were not systematically studied, clinical trials did include patients with asymptomatic viral hepatitis infections. When patients presented with elevated transaminases, there were often other potential causative or contributory etiologies identified, including pre-existing alcoholic liver disease, hepatitis B and/or C infection, and concomitant usage of other potentially hepatotoxic drugs. Although clinically significant liver dysfunction is not typically recognized as a manifestation of opioid withdrawal, opioid withdrawal that is precipitated abruptly may lead to systemic sequelae including acute liver injury. Patients should be warned of the risk of hepatic injury and advised to seek medical attention if they experience symptoms of acute hepatitis. Use of VIVITROL should be discontinued in the event of symptoms and/or signs of acute hepatitis. Depression and Suicidality: Alcohol- and opioiddependent patients, including those taking VIVITROL, should be monitored for the development of depression or suicidal thinking. Families and caregivers of patients being treated with VIVITROL should be alerted to the need to monitor patients for the emergence of symptoms of depression or suicidality, and to report such symptoms to the patient’s healthcare provider. Alcohol Dependence: In controlled clinical trials of VIVITROL administered to adults with alcohol dependence, adverse events of a suicidal nature (suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, completed suicides) were infrequent overall, but were more common in patients treated with VIVITROL than in patients treated with placebo (1% vs 0). In some cases, the suicidal thoughts or behavior occurred after study discontinuation, but were in the context of an episode of depression that began while the patient was on study drug. Two completed suicides occurred, both involving patients treated with VIVITROL. Depression-related events associated with premature discontinuation of study drug were also more common in patients treated with VIVITROL (~1%) than in placebo-treated patients (0). In the 24-week, placebo-controlled pivotal trial in 624 alcohol-dependent patients, adverse events involving depressed mood were reported by 10% of patients treated with VIVITROL 380 mg, as compared to 5% of patients treated with placebo injections. Opioid Dependence: In an open-label, long-term safety study conducted in the US, adverse events of a suicidal nature (depressed mood, suicidal ideation, suicide attempt) were reported by 5% of opioid-dependent patients treated

with VIVITROL 380 mg (n=101) and 10% of opioid-dependent patients treated with oral naltrexone (n=20). In the 24-week, placebo-controlled pivotal trial that was conducted in Russia in 250 opioid-dependent patients, adverse events involving depressed mood or suicidal thinking were not reported by any patient in either treatment group (VIVITROL 380 mg or placebo).

When Reversal of VIVITROL Blockade Is Required for Pain Management: In an emergency situation in patients receiving VIVITROL, suggestions for pain management include regional analgesia or use of non-opioid analgesics. If opioid therapy is required as part of anesthesia or analgesia, patients should be continuously monitored in an anesthesia care setting by persons not involved in the conduct of the surgical or diagnostic procedure. The opioid therapy must be provided by individuals specifically trained in the use of anesthetic drugs and the management of the respiratory effects of potent opioids, specifically the establishment and maintenance of a patent airway and assisted ventilation. Irrespective of the drug chosen to reverse VIVITROL blockade, the patient should be monitored closely by appropriately trained personnel in a setting equipped and staffed for cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

Eosinophilic Pneumonia: In clinical trials with VIVITROL, there was one diagnosed case and one suspected case of eosinophilic pneumonia. Both cases required hospitalization, and resolved after treatment with antibiotics and corticosteroids.

Similar cases have been reported in postmarketing use. Should a person receiving VIVITROL develop progressive dyspnea and hypoxemia, the diagnosis of eosinophilic pneumonia should be considered. Patients should be warned of the risk of eosinophilic pneumonia, and advised to seek medical attention should they develop symptoms of pneumonia. Clinicians should consider the possibility of eosinophilic pneumonia in patients who do not respond to antibiotics. Hypersensitivity Reactions Including Anaphylaxis: Cases of urticaria, angioedema, and anaphylaxis have been observed with use of VIVITROL in the clinical trial setting and in postmarketing use. Patients should be warned of the risk of hypersensitivity reactions, including anaphylaxis. In the event of a hypersensitivity reaction, patients should be advised to seek immediate medical attention in a healthcare setting prepared to treat anaphylaxis. The patient should not receive any further treatment with VIVITROL. Intramuscular Injections: As with any intramuscular injection, VIVITROL should be administered with caution to patients with thrombocytopenia or any coagulation disorder (eg, hemophilia and severe hepatic failure). Alcohol Withdrawal: Use of VIVITROL does not eliminate nor diminish alcohol withdrawal symptoms. Interference with Laboratory Tests: VIVITROL may be cross-reactive with certain immunoassay methods for the detection of drugs of abuse (specifically opioids) in urine. For further information, reference to the specific immunoassay instructions is recommended.

ADVERSE REACTIONS: Serious adverse reactions that may be associated with VIVITROL therapy in clinical use include: severe injection site reactions, eosinophilic pneumonia, serious allergic reactions, unintended precipitation of opioid withdrawal, accidental opioid overdose and depression and suicidality. The adverse events seen most frequently in association with VIVITROL therapy for alcohol dependence (ie, those occurring in ≥5% and at least twice as frequently with VIVITROL than placebo) include nausea, vomiting, injection site reactions (including induration, pruritus, nodules and swelling), muscle cramps, dizziness or syncope, somnolence or sedation, anorexia, decreased appetite or other appetite disorders. The adverse events seen most frequently in association with VIVITROL therapy in opioid dependent patients (ie, those occurring in ≥ 2% and at least twice as frequently with VIVITROL than placebo) were hepatic enzyme abnormalities, injection site pain, nasopharyngitis, insomnia, and toothache. Clinical Studies Experience: Because clinical trials are conducted under widely varying conditions, adverse reaction rates observed in the clinical trials of a drug cannot be directly compared to rates in the clinical trials of another drug and may not reflect the rates observed in practice. In all controlled and uncontrolled trials during the premarketing development of VIVITROL, more than 1100 patients with alcohol and/or opioid dependence have been treated with VIVITROL. Approximately 700 patients have been treated for 6 months or more, and more than 400 for 1 year or longer. Adverse Events Leading to Discontinuation of Treatment: Alcohol Dependence: In controlled trials of 6 months or less in alcoholdependent patients, 9% of alcohol-dependent patients treated with VIVITROL discontinued treatment due to an adverse event, as compared to 7% of the alcoholdependent patients treated with placebo. Adverse events in the VIVITROL 380-mg group that led to more dropouts than in the placebo-treated group were injection site reactions (3%), nausea (2%), pregnancy (1%), headache (1%), and suicide-related events (0.3%). In the placebo group, 1% of patients withdrew due to injection site reactions, and 0% of patients withdrew due to the other adverse events. Opioid Dependence: In a controlled trial of 6 months, 2% of opioid-dependent patients treated with VIVITROL discontinued treatment due to an adverse event, as compared to 2% of the opioid-dependent patients treated with placebo.

DRUG INTERACTIONS: Patients taking VIVITROL may not benefit from opioidcontaining medicines. Naltrexone antagonizes the effects of opioid-containing medicines, such as cough and cold remedies, antidiarrheal preparations and opioid analgesics.

USE IN SPECIFIC POPULATIONS: Pregnancy: There are no adequate and wellcontrolled studies of either naltrexone or VIVITROL in pregnant women. VIVITROL should be used during pregnancy only if the potential benefit justifies the potential risk to the fetus. Pregnancy Category C: Reproduction and developmental studies have not been conducted for VIVITROL. Studies with naltrexone administered via the oral route have been conducted in pregnant rats and rabbits. Teratogenic Effects: Naltrexone has been shown to increase the incidence of early fetal loss when given to rats at doses ≥30 mg/kg/day (11 times the human exposure based on an AUC(0-28d) comparison) and to rabbits at oral doses ≥60 mg/kg/day (2 times the human exposure based on an AUC(0-28d) comparison). There was no evidence of teratogenicity when naltrexone was administered orally to rats and rabbits during the period of major organogenesis at doses up to 200 mg/kg/day (175- and 14-times the human exposure based on an AUC(0-28d) comparison, respectively). Labor and Delivery: The potential effect of VIVITROL on duration of labor and delivery in humans is unknown. Nursing Mothers: Transfer of naltrexone and 6-naltrexol into human milk has been reported with oral naltrexone. Because of the potential for tumorigenicity shown for naltrexone in animal studies, and because of the potential for serious adverse reactions in nursing infants from VIVITROL, a decision should be made whether to discontinue nursing or to discontinue the drug, taking into account the importance of the drug to the mother. Pediatric Use: The safety and efficacy of VIVITROL have not been established in the pediatric population. The pharmacokinetics of VIVITROL have not been evaluated in a pediatric population. Geriatric Use: In trials of alcohol-dependent subjects, 2.6% (n=26) of subjects were >65 years of age, and one patient was >75 years of age. Clinical studies of VIVITROL did not include sufficient numbers of subjects age 65 and over to determine whether they respond differently from younger subjects. No subjects over age 65 were included in studies of opioid-dependent subjects. The pharmacokinetics of VIVITROL have not been evaluated in the geriatric population.

Renal Impairment: Pharmacokinetics of VIVITROL are not altered in subjects with mild renal insufficiency (creatinine clearance of 50-80 mL/min). Dose adjustment is not required in patients with mild renal impairment. VIVITROL pharmacokinetics have not been evaluated in subjects with moderate and severe renal insufficiency.

Because naltrexone and its primary metabolite are excreted primarily in the urine, caution is recommended in administering VIVITROL to patients with moderate to severe renal impairment. Hepatic Impairment: The pharmacokinetics of VIVITROL are not altered in subjects with mild to moderate hepatic impairment (Groups A and B of the Child-Pugh classification). Dose adjustment is not required in subjects with mild or moderate hepatic impairment. VIVITROL pharmacokinetics were not evaluated in subjects with severe hepatic impairment.

OVERDOSAGE: There is limited experience with overdose of VIVITROL. Single doses up to 784 mg were administered to 5 healthy subjects. There were no serious or severe adverse events. The most common effects were injection site reactions, nausea, abdominal pain, somnolence, and dizziness. There were no significant increases in hepatic enzymes. In the event of an overdose, appropriate supportive treatment should be initiated.

This brief summary is based on VIVITROL Full Prescribing Information.

Information (rev.

2015) Information (rev.December December 2015) ALKERMES and VIVITROL are registered trademarks of Alkermes, Inc. ALKERMES and VIVITROL are registered trademarks of Alkermes, Inc. Manufactured and marketed by Alkermes, Inc. Manufactured and marketed by Alkermes, Inc. ©2016 Alkermes, Inc. ©2016 Inc. All rightsAlkermes, reserved. VIV-002611 Printed in U.S.A. All rights reserved VIV-002317 Printed in U.S.A.

www.vivitrol.com

#Americanjail

Invest in Yourself with

CERTIFICATIONS

designed specifically for jail personnel

CERTIFIED JAIL OFFICER

TOP

BENEFITS OF CERTIFICATION

Application and testing NOW online!

Peer Recognition

14%

Internal Promotions

26% CERTIFIED JAIL MANAGER Benefits Jail Administrators

Employer Incentives

15%

and Managers

Added Compensation

CERTIFIED CORRECTIONAL TRAINER Benefits Training Officers

AJA Membership = BIG SAVINGS AJA members receive exclusive discounts on education and training—application fees for our

20%

New Job Offers

25%

Helping you become a better, smarter, and more effective correctional professional.

Get started today!

Visit americanjail.org/certification

or contact Kendra Thompson at 301-790-3930, kendrat@aja.org

Certified Jail Manager, Certified Jail Officer, and Certified Correctional Trainer programs.

AMERICAN JAIL ASSOCIATION 301.790.3930 | www.aja.org

AN ONGOING SPECIAL REPORT

AND

Core Competencies Jail Leadership Susan W. McCampbell, CJM, and Malik Muhammad, CJM, CCT What skills, knowledge, and abilities do jail leaders need in order to be credible and successful? Beginning with the July/August 2015 issue of American Jails, we are exploring the 22 core competencies as identified by jail administrators across the country. Welcome to the 12th installment on core competencies and jail leadership.

In this issue of American Jails, we take a closer look at the core competency identified as “Anticipate, analyze, and resolve organizational challenges and conflicts� and recommend several valuable resources related to leadership.

l a c i t Cri hinking T

AMERICANJails

MAY | JUNE 2017

| 45

Critical Thinking: Solving the Real Problem Description: Use critical thinking skills, evidence-based practices, and information analysis to inform decision-making and address organizational problems; proactively identify pending crises or opportunities.

Rationale: Jail leaders must be able to not only chart their organization’s future course, but also to navigate the present. Dealing with current organizational challenges must be predicated on a sound knowledge of the past and a clear vision of the future, including strategies for preventing organizational conflicts.

Knowledge of: • Elements of critical thinking.

• Organization’s vision, mission, and values.

• Existing and potential organizational conflicts.

• Organization’s internal culture.

Skills in: • Accurately identifying the jail’s emerging organizational conflicts.

• Gather information to analyze the conflicts.

• Anticipate potential challenges and conflicts.

• Effectively overcome challenges and resolve conflicts.

• Understand and manage the agency’s internal culture.

• Mentor subordinates to engage in critical thinking and organizational self-analysis.

Abilities to: • Think critically to identify challenges and conflicts.

• Maintain the confidence of the employees.

• Instill a positive attitude within the organization.

• Possess the courage to lead change.

• Be guided by an ethical moral compass.

• Think logically and creatively.

• Be proactive.

• Involve internal stakeholders in problem-solving.

• Cultivate patience and persistence.

• Avoid procrastination in addressing controversial issues.

A jail leader makes hundreds of decisions in a week; some critical, others not. Yet how often do we find that our decision didn’t resolve the problem? In our haste to make decisions, we often don’t seek or assess relevant information. The result: the problem was not fixed, resources were wasted, and there exists the possibility of staff and inmates’ safety being jeopardized. In an earlier discussion of the 13th core competency (McCampbell, 2015), three steps were suggested for the decision-making process: preparation, the “call” phase, and execution.

This article discusses the first core competency on critical thinking, which requires the administrator to focus on the preparation phase of the 13th core competency.

22 Core Competencies for Jail Leaders • Anticipate, analyze, and resolve organizational challenges and conflicts.

• Develop and maintain a positive organizational culture that promotes respect for diverse staff.

• Assure organizational accountability.

• Develop and sustain organizational vision/mission.

• Build and maintain positive relationships with external stakeholders.

• Engage in strategic planning.

• Build and maintain teamwork; mentor and coach others.

• Communicate effectively, internally and externally.

• Comprehend, obtain, and manage fiscal resources.

• Enhance self-awareness; maintain proactive professional commitment.

• Establish organizational authority, roles, and responsibilities.

• Leverage the role of the jail in the criminal justice system.

• Make sound decisions.

• Manage change.

46

|

MAY | JUNE 2017

AMERICANJails

• Manage labor relations.

• Manage power and influence.

• Manage time.

• Obtain and manage human resources.

• Oversee inmate and facility management.

• Oversee physical plant management.

• Reduce jail-related liability risks.

• Understand and manage emerging technology.

Critical-Thinking Skills Preparation involves asking questions and assessing the information to form the basis for a better decision.

Educational experts report that critical-thinking skills are not part of most school’s curriculum, as preparing students to pass high stakes tests has become the priority rather than teaching them how to critically evaluate material (Goodwin, 2013). So often we, and our staff, arrive at leadership positions without the benefit of critical-thinking skills.

Critical thinking requires leaders to: • Identify the root cause, not just find the “symptoms.”

• Define the extent and nature of the issue.

• Evaluate the accuracy and completeness of the information.

• Identify the motives and agenda of those providing the information.

• Examine other options, data, approaches, or solutions that may be new or nontraditional.

• Weigh the information by applying expertise and experience.

• Assess your biases regarding the issue.

• Make a decision and communicate a course of action.

These steps in the process are not meant to delay or obfuscate a decision, but rather can be part of any quick assessment when the decision is not urgent or important. Ask yourself these two questions: Do I know what will be a good decision in this situation? Am I relying on persons who may not have the agency’s mission, vision, and values in their decision-making equation? While relying on subordinate staff or peers to help in decisionmaking, critical thinkers are responsible for assuring that the decision is the “right” one, given what is known and the possible impacts.

Before exploring the steps in the process, let us briefly consider two programs operating in many criminal justice agencies and how critical thinkers might assess them: DARE and correctional boot camps. Why are these two programs relevant to a discussion of critical thinking in jails? The research and data for these programs clearly indicate that both are relatively ineffective, yet agencies cling to the programs because… why? Because they are popular with the public or are politically expedient?

Critical thinkers could decide to retain these programs, based on their public support even as they recognize the shortcomings and limitations of these programs (West & O’Neal, 2004; Parent, 2003). Do we challenge the status quo about our jail’s operations and ask if we should continue, expand, or end initiatives and programs? Or is it just less chaotic and personally careful to continue without asking questions and avoid irritating someone higher in the organization or the community?

Most jails hold onto practices and programs that would wilt under the scrutiny of critical thinking. Yet we

continue to hold onto them—whether these are hiring practices, inmate management initiatives, inmate programming, or staff training. We won’t change the current practice because that’s how we’ve always done it. Or we find that the energy and will to change just isn’t there.

Those who ask critical questions are sometimes seen as “rocking the boat,” rather than seeking a better way to operate. How can we do better? With the use of criticalthinking skills.

Improving Your Critical-Thinking Skills: Steps in the Process Identify the Root Cause, Not Just the Find the “Symptoms” A jail manager recently reported that his facility had multiple uses of force involving inmates on the mental health caseload. The reason: these inmates just didn’t “listen” to staff. Although this may be an extreme example of ignorance and failing to determine the root cause of a jail’s problem, sadly this is reflective of the desire to find quick solutions to vexing problems. Jail leaders may find themselves operating in systems that were most likely implemented before their arrival, and therefore based on the “history” and traditions of the jail. Seeking the root cause is the first step in critical thinking. This may be a painful process as it may overturn commonly held—but erroneous—agency beliefs.

For example, a high turnover rate or the low morale of staff may be attributed to the nature of Generations X or Y; however, the causes are actually deficits in the leadership of the jail. To discover the root of the problem, you need to keep asking the “why” questions, peeling back the proverbial layers of an onion to get to the center. Understand also during the “why” phase that your staff may find this very uncomfortable, and even believe you are questioning their integrity. This is yet another opportunity to model the behavior you want in your employees—no matter their rank. Continue to ask why.

Consider the five most difficult issues you have worked on in the last six months. In retrospect, did you identify the root cause or were you simply addressAMERICANJails

MAY | JUNE 2017

| 47

ing the symptom? (For an in-depth discussion of conducting root cause analysis and critical incident reviews, see the core competency discussion on “Organizational Accountability” in American Jails, July/August 2016.)

Define the Extent and Nature of the Issue There are plenty of jail staff who represent the “chicken littles” in our world. They are good at exploding an issue, then generalizing it to the entire jail operation—yet they never take a closer look. For example, as agencies seek to fill vacant positions, it is easy to attribute staff attrition to lack of pay or the tough jail work environment. After all, why would staff leave one agency just to go to another if not for more pay or a better work environment?

The issue of staff retention must be viewed from a 360-degree perspective, absent the uninformed

Leader’s Library Developing Critical Thinkers: Challenging Adults to Explore Alternative Ways of Thinking and Acting Stephen D.Brookfield, 1987 Jossey-Bass Publishers Asking the Right Questions: A Guide to Critical Thinking, 5th edition Neil M. Brown and Stuart M. Keeley, 1998 Prentice Hall The Stay Interview: A Manager’s Guide to Keeping the Best and the Brightest Richard P. Finnegan, 2015 American Management Association Thinking, Fast and Slow Daniel Kahneman, 2011 Farrar, Straus and Giroux 48

|

MAY | JUNE 2017

opinions, and with the data.

Throwing money at the problem does not effectively address or define the issues that may hinder retention. However, a closer look at demographics of departing staff may assist in developing a comprehensive plan. When was the last time supervisors received training on how to work with employees, instead of how to fill out forms?

How about instituting “stay interviews” to find out what’s on the mind of staff before they quit? What does your staff think about the employee recognition program? The issue is more complex than just giving everyone a 5% raise, no matter how welcome.

Evaluate the Accuracy and Completeness of the Information Critical thinking means that information must be accessed. The leader needs to know: • Is there information or data available?

• Is there enough data to identify a trend?

• Is there more data that is relevant?

• What is missing?

As noted above, the critical-thinking process is not meant to require a comprehensive data collection effort before a decision is made; however, too often we act with incomplete data or information.

For example, your staff are asserting that the jail’s mental health provider is not seeing inmates in a timely manner. Before holding the medical provider accountable, look at the data on the corrections staff who deliver the inmates to their appointments. Is there sufficient space in which to conduct inmate assessments? If you act on the information that the providers weren’t doing their job before looking at the entire picture, then the outcome would be unproductive and possibly destructive to an important relationship.

AMERICANJails

Identify the Motives and Agenda of Those Providing the Information Another part of critical thinking is accurately identifying the motives and agenda of those who bring problems, provide data, and propose changes. If the employees’ representatives provide data that the jail’s potential change to 12-hour shifts will result in 30% of staff resigning, the leader needs to ask: what questions were asked to arrive at this conclusion? How was information gathered and how many staff participated?

This is a perhaps an obvious example of how data needs to be subject to scrutiny—less obvious circumstances present themselves to the jail leader every day. A local public health volunteer group may document the need to provide inmates with HIV/AIDS education in exchange for distributing condoms in the jail. The local funding authority may wish to eliminate overtime and instead authorize more staff, but then they fail to fund those positions. The day is replete with the opportunity to identify positive and negative motives. This approach is not meant to make cynics of jail leaders, but rather to equip them with the evaluative tools.

Examine Other Options, Data, Approaches or Solutions that May Be New or Nontraditional When time is available, critical thinkers need to research for additional answers or better options. An increase in staff injuries could result in a proposal to purchase and deploy pepper spray or electroshock equipment. However, the leader needs to ask if crisis intervention training is just as effective. If staff are being injured, then there may be policy, supervision, or training issues that need to be evaluated.

A new idea in many of our organizations is often viewed with suspicion and sometimes as unfavorable—no changes please! This is where the leader’s ability to involve staff in conducting research and expanding their horizons is invalu-

AMERICANJails

MAY | JUNE 2017

| 49

able. Visiting other jails, attending conferences, and networking can help defray the stigma of a new approach.

Weigh the Information by Applying Expertise and Experience The jail leader is paid to make tough decisions. Using experience, intuition, and knowledge to arrive at a decision is a part of finalizing the critical-thinking process. The administrator should, if time permits, ask subordinates and peers to provide their opinions, and then listen to their ideas. However, at the end of the day, a decision needs to be made and it is the leader who is ultimately held accountable. In other words, it is a journey to trust one’s self. “Valid intuitions develop when experts have learned to recognize familiar elements in a new situation and to act in a manner that is appropriate to it” (Kahneman, 2011). Only the jail leader knows how their previous decisions have resulted in the positive or negative—and the political impact.

Assess Your Biases Regarding the Issue At the end of the critical-thinking process, we often forget the need to ask ourselves on the objectiveness of

Why Critical Thinking Is Important?

If you want to be good at: • Strategic planning.

• Effective decision-making.

• Creative problem-solving.

• Situational leadership.

• Entrepreneurial risk taking.

• Research and development.

• Organizational team building.

You must be a critical thinker.

Source: Brookfield, S. D. (1987) Developing critical thinkers.

San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

50

|

MAY | JUNE 2017

our decision-making. We all hold innate beliefs which sometimes we can’t fully name. We expect our staff—and those whom we ask for recommendations—to be honest and objective, and we should ask that of ourselves as well. If we are biased in favor of or against a concept, we need to recognize and filter that through our internal thought processes. We, ourselves, deep down inside may also resist change or unconsciously try to derail new ideas.

For example, a new program aimed at reduced recidivism among protected populations of inmates is introduced for possible implementation at your facility. The program comes highly recommended and has been vetted in local and State facilities with proven success. Without leader objectivity, an internal bias has the potential to disrupt this project, which may otherwise prove to be a viable option.

Make a Decision and Communicate a Course of Action At the end of the day, jail leaders must model the critical-thinking process for their peers and subordinates.

When delegation is appropriate, delegate. When micro-managing can be avoided, avoid it. Making good decisions, no matter where in the chain-of-command, can be achieved in large measure by: • Being transparent about the process.

• Communicating how decisions are made in this jail.

• Recognizing who is responsible.

• Highlighting the outcomes.

If the leader makes uninformed, biased, and untimely decisions, then those decisions become the script for the agency. This does not mean that the leader forgets or fails to acknowledge that the process didn’t yield the desired result or that midcourse corrections aren’t needed.

When leaders make mistakes, they acknowledge their mistakes and move on. No one said it was easy. A

AMERICANJails

process that involves critical-thinking skills to help decision-making can only improve the organization.

Using these steps helps the jail leader to make better decisions.

Being critical does not translate into negativity, which is often the perception. By practicing critical-thinking, you are expanding the options for correct decisions and helping others to do the same in their careers.

Politics?

This discussion of the criticalthinking process does not naively ignore the impact of local politics or the beliefs and direction of the organization’s leaders under whom the jail administrator works. For example, if the sheriff wants a boot camp, then it is most likely futile and counterproductive to discuss the research. If there is little hope for salary increases for corrections staff to keep pace with the local economy, then it is a waste of time and energy to continue raising the issue before the funding authority. If the leadership doesn’t appreciate analytical questions, root cause analyses, or critical incident reviews, then why persist in providing this type of data?

These are the types of decisions that jail leaders must make themselves. Preserving credibility, performing the job professionally, and knowing when to be silent and when to act are traits of a mature leader. With critical-thinking skills, tough choices can be made less tough, and provide a better outcome of decision-making.

Conclusion Critical thinking is an essential job requirement for jail administrators in the 21st century. Decisions that affect staff and inmate populations are sometimes made under hurried time constraints or with limited knowledge. These decisions require the skill set of a leader experienced in objective thinking. Administrators at all levels need to understand the steps associated with critical think-

ing. And better yet, they need to see it modeled in their supervisors and managers. Critical-thinking skills represent the crucial building blocks needed to form a solid decision.

When leaders follow the principles in their entirety, the building blocks become the foundation to aid in making a structurally sound decision and also in developing the organization’s leadership.

Case in point: As veterans from all branches of the military return home from abroad, some have found themselves on the wrong side of the law. Burdened with the invisible scars earned from sustained combat, these men and women must now navigate the judicial system. A system (through no fault of its own) that is not designed to address the issues of our country’s veterans.

Recognizing the population of veterans who were currently in custody in Orange County, Florida, an Armed Forces Dorm was implemented with the sole purpose of housing and assisting incarcerated veterans (Proudfit, 2014). Now in its fifth year, the program has exceeded expectations and serves as a templet for other correctional facilities looking to implement a veterans’ program. If critical thinking about the problems faced by returning veterans hadn’t resulted in this program, where would these veterans be when they left the jail?

As Albert Einstein said, “We can’t solve problems using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.” This modest quote illustrates the point that critical thinking combined with an objective and honest look at the issue at hand will often yield a better solution. As we look deeper into the eight steps of critical thinking, it’s important to understand how our life experiences influence our personal decisionmaking processes. It’s often been said that hindsight is always 20/20; however, as jail administrators we must constantly evaluate our decisions critically and objectively. The consequences of poor decisions are

too expensive for our staff and for the inmates under our care, custody, and control.  References Goodwin, M. (2013, March 12). Law professors see the damage of done by ‘no child left behind.’ ” The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from www.chronicle.com/blogs/ conversation/2013/03/12/lawprofessors-see-the-damage-done-byno-child-left-behind/ Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux.

McCampbell, S. W. (2015, July/August).

Core competencies and jail leadership. American Jails, 29(3), 45–49.

Parent, D.G. (2003). Correctional boot camps: Lessons from a decade of research.

Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Justice, National Institute of Justice.

Retrieved from www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/197018.pdf Proudfit, C. (2014, July 03). Behind the perimeter: A glimpse inside Orange

County Corrections veterans’ dorm.

Retrieved www.orange countyfl. net/Newsroom/NS-Corrections VeteransDorm 07-03-2014.aspx West, S. L, & O’Neal, K. K. (2004).

Project D.A.R.E. outcome effectiveness. American Journal of Public Health, 94(6), 1027–1029. Retrieved from www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/ articles/PMC1448384/

Susan W. McCampbell, CJM, is President of the Center for Innovative Public Policy, Inc., a Florida-based company specializing in public policy consulting since 1999. She is also President of McCampbell and Associates, Inc. For more information, contact Ms. McCampbell at susanmccampbell @cipp.org.

Malik Muhammad, MSCJ, CJM, CCT, a Hostage Team Commander and Captain in the Security Operations Division at Orange County Corrections Department in Orlando, Florida. He can be contacted at Malik.Muhammad@ocfl.net.

AMERICANJails

MAY | JUNE 2017

| 51

C ongratulations

to the

OF THE

24th Graduating Class

National

Jail Leadership Command Academy

F

SCHOLARSHIPS ARE AVAILABLE!

ounded in 2009, NJLCA prepares and develops leadership skills for the successful transition of senior leadership positions within jails. The only program of its kind in the Nation, the academy covers a wide range of topics from budgeting and finance to strategically using statistics. Other topics include communications, ethics, collaboration, discipline, and managing change. The academy faculty includes subject matter experts

representing field practitioners and criminal justice academicians. In addition, the graduates earn 80 hours of training credit toward their Certified Jail Manager (CJM) requirements.

AJA sponsors three academies annually at the George J. Beto Criminal Justice Center at Sam Houston State University in Huntsville, Texas. Class size is limited to 36 participants. The tuition fee includes all lodging, meals, training materials, instruction, and ground transportation between Houston airport and the campus.

For more information about the NJLCA initiative, visit www.nationaljailacademy.org.

Scholarships may be available through the Andrew Nunnally/Bob Patterson Scholarship Fund. Contact AJA for details.

52

|

MAY | JUNE 2017

AMERICANJails

GRADUATES OF CLASS 24 Pictured is the 24th Graduating Class of the National Jail Leadership Command Academy, faculty, and staff. The session was held in February 5–10, 2017.

Justin L. Allen Lieutenant Colville Tribal Corrections Facility Nespelem, Washington

Sandora B. Cathcart Correctional Program Specialist National Institute of Corrections Washington, District of Columbia

Tyler Z. Attaway Sergeant Graham County Sheriff’s Office Safford, Arizona

Thomas Allen Conrad, CJO Lieutenant Davidson County Sheriff’s Office Nashville, Tennessee

Kevin J. Balawejder Lieutenant Lubbock County Sheriff’s Office Lubbock, Texas

Leidy Y. Cruz Sergeant Lee County Sheriff’s Office Fort Myers, Florida

Cordney V. Battle, CJM Lieutenant Orange County Corrections Orlando, Florida

Kimberly de la Cruz Lieutenant San Joaquin County Sheriff’s Office French Camp, California

Daniel W. Beck Sergeant/Gang Unit & Classification Supervisor Passaic County Sheriff’s Office Paterson, New Jersey Brian D. Bivens Assistant Chief of CorrectionsFacility Commander Knox County Sheriff’s Office Knoxville, Tennessee Robert M. Blake Lieutenant New Hanover County Sheriff’s Office Castle Hayne, North Carolina Scott A. Booher Captain Western Virginia Regional Jail Salem, Virginia Katina B. Bouza Inmate Services Bureau Manager Collier County Sheriff’s Office Naples, Florida

Steven C. Durbin Lieutenant Sheriff Al Cannon Detention Center North Charleston, South Carolina Randy A. Dykema Lieutenant Kent County Sheriff Department Grand Rapids, Michigan Allen C. Hammond Chief of Corrections Colville Tribal Corrections Facility Nespelem, Washington Joni M. Kennedy Sergeant Graham County Sheriff’s Office Safford, Arizona Myrna Kinney Confinement Squad Commander Fairfax County Sheriff’s Office Fairfax, Virginia

Jeffrey Knight Administrative Lieutenant Middlesex County Department of Corrections New Brunswick, New Jersey Shawn T. Lammer Lieutenant Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Office Santa Barbara, California Tracey N. Mathewes Sergeant Sheriff Al Cannon Detention Center North Charleston, South Carolina Michael Maxwell Sergeant Kent County Sheriff’s Department Grand Rapids, Michigan Brenda L. Maynard Lieutenant Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Office Santa Barbara, California Omar W. McClain Lieutenant Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office Phoenix, Arizona Mark A. McCorkle Commander Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department Los Angeles, California

Thomas McCormick Sergeant McLean County Sheriff’s Department Bloomington, Illinois

Jaime L. Popik First Lieutenant Fairfax County Sheriff’s Office Fairfax, Virginia

Audey D. Moree Chief of Security Farmville Detention Center Farmville, Virginia

Leon Valquier Lieutenant Douglas County Omaha, Nebraska

Kevin O’Farrell Lieutenant Travis County Sheriff’s Office Austin, Texas

Michelle Velasquez Jail Administrator Calhoun County Sheriff’s Office Port Lavaca, Texas

Patrick J. O’Reilly Jr. Sergeant Belknap County Department of Corrections Laconia, New Hampshire

Kit Wright, LVN, CCHP Sergeant Brazos County Sheriff’s Office Bryan, Texas

Mandy Kay Rennie Sergeant Sunny Miller Franklin County Sheriff’s Office Lieutenant Garland County Detention Center Columbus, Ohio Hot Springs, Arkansas Andrew Sandor Sergeant James Mitchell Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Sergeant Department Brazos County Sheriff’s Office Los Angeles, California Bryan, Texas

Brett W. Pezzella Sergeant Lee County Sheriff’s Office Fort Myers, Florida

For more information visit nationaljailacademy.org.

AMERICANJails

MAY | JUNE 2017

| 53

Congratulations to AJA’s Newest CJOs! Congratulations to AJA’s newest Certified Jail Officers! These individuals have excelled in proficiency and competency by demonstrating a high standard of achievement and commitment.

How Invested Are You?

HOUSTON COUNTY JAIL, ALABAMA

Invest in your agency staff or you could be losing your most valuable resource.

Let us help.

GARLAND COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE, ARKANSAS

Certification of your facility and jail officers can:

Robert Hoglund, CJO

RIVERSIDE REGIONAL JAIL AUTHORITY, VIRGINIA

Patrick O’Shea, CJO

Brandon Edmonds, CJO

❱ I ncrease employee confidence and competency. ❱ Decrease turnover. ❱ P rovide job satisfaction. ❱ R educe liability and strengthen your agency’s reputation.

James Watson, CJO

Michael Carter, CJO BROOMFIELD POLICE DEPARTMENT, COLORADO

COLLIER COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE, FLORIDA Erida Haxhiu Caudill, CJO LUNA COUNTY DETENTION CENTER, NEW MEXICO Lionel Lozano, CJO Andrew Gilmore, CJO

DAVIDSON COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE, TENNESSEE Thomas Conrad, CJO

Charlene Jones, CJO Jackie Cole, CJO James Picardat, CJO Richard Neeson, CJO Tammie Roberts, CJO Audrey Wilson, CJO Kyle Printz, CJO Xavia Jackson, CJO

NEW HANOVER COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE, NORTH CAROLINA

Kawan Peterson, CJO

Michael Capoot, CJO

Melissa Lewis, CJO

LaTanya Mells, CJO Ray Brown, CJO

Let’s Get You Started!

To start the process for achieving your certification, visit aja.org or contact Kendra Thompson at 301–790–3930, ext. 301 or send her an e-mail at kendrat@aja.org.

S a c r a m e n t o, C a l i f o r n i a | A p r i l 2 2 – 2 5 , 2 0 1 8

ION T A N MI

S

O N OR F L AJA 2018-19 Board of Directors L A C Election time is coming and the Nominating Committee of the American Jail Association is selecting candidates for the following positions: ■ Third Vice President The person elected as Third Vice President serves progressively through the Executive Committee chairs to become your President in the year 2022. Please give serious thought to this nomination and submit your name or that of a colleague to the Nominating Committee. The incumbent is required to attend five meetings per year. Eligibility for elected office is contingent upon service of at least two years as a member of the Board of Directors.

■ Treasurer This person sits as a member of the Executive Committee and is the Chief Financial Officer for the Association. The Treasurer is expected to monitor and oversee the financial operations and records of the Hagerstown, Maryland office on behalf of the Board of Directors, Executive Committee, and Membership. This is a twoyear term. Eligibility for elected office is contingent upon service of at least one year as a member of the Board of Directors.

■ Board of Directors The Board of Directors is the governing body of the Association.

It sets the policy of the Association, establishes the annual business plan and budget of the Association, and verifies that your Association is fulfilling its mission. Board members and elected officers will be installed at the 2018 conference in Sacramento, California, and will attend their first board meeting. Normally, there is one additional board meeting during the year at a separate location. Elected Board members serve for a three-year term.

General Guidelines 1. Persons seeking nominations must be individual professional members in good standing as specified in the Bylaws at the time of nomination. For the purpose of seeking election to the AJA Board, Agency, Corporate, Affiliate, and Student memberships do not meet the above individual membership requirement.

2. Only written nominations and justifications are considered by the Committee, and nominees must be endorsed by a minimum of two members in good standing.

3. Individuals nominated for one office can be considered for another office.

4. The Committee gives consideration to affirmative action, geography, and agency size so that nominees reflect the diversity of the Association’s membership.

5. Nominees, if elected, are required to attend the following Conference events and functions in Sacramento: • Business meeting & luncheon.

• Board meeting.

• New board member orientation.

• Banquet awards.

They are also expected to attend the Fall board meeting.

6. Elections are conducted in accordance with the provisions of Article VIII of the Bylaws.

We need good people from every part of the Nation to continue the tradition of dedication and commitment set by current and previous officers and Board members. Become involved by submitting a nomination now. The nominations must be postmarked no later than October 30, 2017. Nominations received after that date will not be considered.

Send nominations to: Steve Custer, Director of Communications American Jail Association ■ 1135 Professional Court ■ Hagerstown, Maryland 21740–5853 Fax: 301–790–2941 ■ E-mail: stevec@aja.org

RECOGNIZING THE BEST OF THE BEST

CORRECTIONAL ADMINISTRATOR OF THE YEAR Candidates must be individual AJA members in good standing for three consecutive years prior to nomination.

(Agency memberships do not qualify.) They also must be government employees and have the endorsement of their sheriff or city/county manager. Factors that enter into the selection process include: ■ Ability to successfully cope with contemporary day-to-day jail problems, such as crowded conditions, personnel shortages, litigation, etc.

■ Promotion of programs that enhance the jobs of jail personnel.

■ Implementation of inmate programs that promote the efficient operation of the jail.

■ Promotion of ongoing staff training programs.

■ Promotion of a professional image of the facility and the personnel who staff it.

■ Practitioner of sound, managerial principles.

CORRECTIONAL SUPERVISOR OF THE YEAR In most jails, administrators rely heavily on mid-level managers. In fact, these mid-managers often serve as the link between administrators and line staff. They coach, they lead, they guide. Without these managers, the job of an administrator would be extremely difficult. Candidates for this award must be government employees and have the endorsement of their sheriff or administrator.

CORRECTIONAL TRAINING OFFICER OF THE YEAR This award affords jail administrators the chance to recognize that sworn employee who continually strives to elevate the level of professionalism in their facility through training.

Whether coordinating an academy or conducting in-service training, this individual provides organizations with competent, educated personnel. To be eligible, the training officer must be a government employee who works in a jail as well as a certified trainer as defined by a State regulatory or individual agency. The nomination must carry the endorsement of the sheriff or system administrator of the agency in which the officer is employed.

CORRECTIONAL OFFICER OF THE YEAR This award provides the opportunity to recognize those uniformed employees who hold our jail facilities together.

Consider submitting the name of an outstanding officer who is doing an outstanding job. To be eligible for the award the officer must be a government employee who works in the jail. In addition, the officer’s nomination form must carry the endorsement of the administrator of the system in which the officer is currently employed.

CIVILIAN EMPLOYEE OF THE YEAR Those who have extensive experience managing jails recognize that uniformed personnel cannot accomplish everything that must be done for the proper operation of a jail facility. None could function well without the outstanding support that comes from the nonuniformed employee. How about that civilian who does the bulk of the bookings, or handles the mailroom, or does yeoman duty getting reports typed and paperwork filed? To be nominated the only basic requirement is that the individual be a nonsworn employee currently working in a government agency.

VOLUNTEER OF THE YEAR Few jails survive without the help of volunteers—those citizens in the community committed to making positive contributions to their local jail. This is an opportunity to recognize that unsung hero who may be working in religious programs, providing crisis counseling roles, or assisting in the commissary. He or she may be that senior citizen volunteer doing an exemplary job of handling telephone calls, thereby taking off some of the load of full-time staff. The only criterion for nomination is that the service provided by the individual must be to the government agency from which the volunteer is being nominated.

FRANCIS R. “DICK” FORD DISTINGUISHED SERVICE AWARD Named in honor of the American Jail Association’s first Executive Director, this award recognizes a lifetime of professional excellence in the field of local corrections and detention. Any individual, active or retired, who has demonstrated exceptional leadership and a sincere commitment to the professional advancement of jails and their operations is eligible to be nominated for the award. Nominees are not required to be members of AJA, and the award is not perpetual—i.e., it may or may not be accorded annually. Credible nominations must include examples of accomplishments that demonstrate the individual’s extraordinary leadership, vision, and devotion to the profession. Also for inclusion are “special impact” focuses such as inter-association cooperation, research/scholarship, training, and professional visibility. Additional key elements to be considered are impact of actions, resonance, devotion, and ownership.

Submit Your Nomination NOW! Please fill out the nomination form on the following page or at www.aja.org.

All nominations must be time stamped no later than November 30, 2017.

AJA Officers and Board Members are not eligible for consideration.

2018 Award Nominations

T

he American Jail Association is committed to the professional growth of our Nation’s jails. Ways this goal can best be accomplished include promoting meaningful training programs, exchanging technical information, developing and implementing jail standards, encouraging sound management practices, and adopting practices that improve the efficiency of corrections.

There are dedicated people in every organization who work long and hard to accomplish these goals to ensure their organizations continue to grow professionally. Out of all these professionals, however, there are some whose performance is exceptional.

The Awards Committee of the American Jail Association is asking you to identify these exceptional practitioners so they can be recognized publicly at AJA’s 37th Annual Conference & Jail Expo in Sacramento, California, April 22–25, 2018.

2018 Award Nominations

All award recipients receive conference registration, airfare, hotel accommodations, and two tickets to the conference banquet.

(Please check only one category.) _______ Correctional Administrator of the Year (Requires an individual membership

for three consecutive years. Contact AJA

for nominee’s member eligibility.) _______ Correctional Supervisor of the Year

_______ _______ _______ _______ _______

Correctional Training Officer of the Year Correctional Officer of the Year Civilian Employee of the Year Volunteer of the Year Francis R. “Dick” Ford Distinguished Service Award

Please type or print clearly.

Nominee’s Name: ______________________________________ AJA Member No.: ______________________________

(For Correctional Administrator Only)

Rank and/or Title: __________________________________________________________________________________ Agency: _________________________________________________________________________________________ Street Address:____________________________________________________________________________________ City/State/ZIP: ____________________________________________________________________________________ Business Telephone:____________________________________ Fax: _________________________________________ E-mail:__________________________________________________________________________________________ Person Submitting the Nomination Nominator’s Name:_________________________________________________________________________________ Title: ___________________________________________________________________________________________ Agency: _________________________________________________________________________________________ Street Address:____________________________________________________________________________________ City/State/ZIP: ____________________________________________________________________________________ Business Telephone:____________________________________ Fax: _________________________________________ E-mail:__________________________________________________________________________________________ Required Endorsement by Agency Head (i.e., Sheriff, County Manager, Director, etc.)

Name of Agency Head:_______________________________________________________________________________ Title: ___________________________________________________________________________________________ Agency: _________________________________________________________________________________________ Street Address:____________________________________________________________________________________ City/State/ZIP: ____________________________________________________________________________________ Business Telephone:____________________________________ Fax: _________________________________________ E-mail:__________________________________________________________________________________________ Instructions: Complete this form. Attach written justification for the nomination. Use as many pages as necessary, but give the Awards Committee ample justification to support your nomination. Nominations are strengthened by a thorough discussion of the nominee’s accomplishments and the inclusion of endorsements from a variety of persons—both inside and outside the nominee’s agency. Send the completed nomination package and five copies to: Michele Florian American Jail Association • 1135 Professional Court • Hagerstown, MD 21740–5853 michelef@aja.org • 301–857–2233 Nominations Must Be Postmarked On or Before November 30, 2017.

AJA NEEDS YOUR ASSISTANCE

Do You Have a Workshop Topic of Interest to Jails?

Help Us Plan Your 2018 Conference 37th Annual Conference & Jail Expo

T

Sacramento, California | April 22–25, 2018

he Conference Planning Committee for AJA’s 37th Annual Conference & Jail Expo, to be held in Sacramento, California, April 22–25, 2018, is seeking your assistance to ensure our professional development workshops are on target and meet the needs of our attendees. We welcome suggestions for workshop topics, as well as any ideas or suggestions to improve the conference experience as a whole.

If you would like to present a professional development workshop or know someone who would, the 2018 Planning Committee wants to know.

You can submit your presentation topic by going to the AJA website at www.aja.org.

Hover over the “Conference” tab at the top of the page, then from the drop-down menu click on “Call for Presentations.”

Deadline for submissions is June 15, 2017.

From Elias Diggins, CJM, CCE Chair, 2018 Conference Planning Committee Sacramento, California

VACANCY JAIL MANAGER CERTIFICATION COMMISSION The AJA Board of Directors and the Jail Manager Certification Commission (JMCC) are seeking to fill a vacancy on the Commission. Service on the JMCC is a five-year term commencing April 22, 2018, at AJA’s 37th Annual Conference & Jail Expo in Sacramento, California.

The JMCC is the governing body that administers the Certified Jail Manager (CJM) and Certified Jail Officer (CJO) programs, sets policy, and ensures that the programs reflect the changing needs of the profession. A member of the JMCC is an ambassador for the advancement of corrections professionals.

To be considered, the applicant must be: › A Certified Jail Manager. › Currently employed full-time as a jail manager as defined in the CJM Handbook for Candidates. › An AJA individual member in good standing.

Responsibilities include: › Attending scheduled JMCC meetings. › Attending an Examination Item Review Session during the first year. › Reviewing CJM candidate EBFs. › Attending a test review session each year. › Actively participating in the promotional aspects of the CJM and CJO programs, which may include attending State, regional, and national conferences as needed. › Other responsibilities as the necessity arises.

Applicants should send a letter of expressed interest that includes: › Professional and educational background. › Current impressions of the CJM and CJO programs. › Vision for future growth of the programs.

Applications must be received at AJA headquarters no later than February 12, 2018. Applications received after the deadline will not be considered. Become involved by submitting your letter now.

Mail to: Kendra Thompson Certification Coordinator American Jail Association 1135 Professional Court Hagerstown, Maryland 21740 Applications are reviewed by the JMCC. Up to four candidates will be submitted to the AJA Board of Directors for final selection.

Consideration shall be given to affirmative action, geography, and agency size so that the JMCC reflects the diversity of the field.

Questions should be directed to Kendra Thompson at 301–857–2323 or kendrat@aja.org.

Parting Reflections Rev. Carmen Warner-Robbins As my AJA Chaplaincy draws to a close, I am reflecting on my journey, thanking God for every moment and each individual I have encountered. I’m not the same person that I was seven years ago when I met former Executive Director Gwyn SmithDownes, who opened this chapter of my life. I am wiser, richer, and a better person by knowing you and becoming part of the AJA family. My journey has blessed me and, as with all blessings, my responsibility is to pay it forward. During my past seven years with AJA, I received the following precious moments: • Awe at how my AJA family has broadened my ability to love across the country, sharing exciting news with AJA staff, reaching out and supporting those in need, and celebrating with the announcement of each new award, accomplishment, and achievement.

• Blessed with the reality that prayer is just a flicker away. God has touched my heart through scripture and message, while preparing the monthly prayer vigil sent electronically across the country, knitting us together in a tapestry of God’s blessings.

• Humbled to be a part of the American Jail magazine award-winning team as I “have the last word” in each issue of the magazine.

• Honored to be a member of the Board of Directors who care so deeply for the corrections profession.

• Touched that my chaplaincy has afforded me an enriching opportunity to begin my calling to support, to encourage, and to pray with correctional staff across the country. As God has placed this passion upon my heart, I have come to appreciate the role and function of correctional officers and all they do to make a difference in the lives of those under their care.

Carmen Warner-Robbins

• Grateful that I could serve as (one person told me) “the Mother Teresa of corrections.” This is truly a humbling thought, as the joy and the sacred blessing that I receive from seeing the transformation on the faces of those with whom I am praying is beyond words.

Paying it forward; this is what we are called to do. So I encourage you to: 1. Remember that you don’t stop serving others when you grow old, but you grow old when you stop serving others.

2. Believe not only in what each person can accomplish, but also in the value of her or his ability to become confident in her or his future.

3. Envision more; love where others judge; and pray when others doubt.

4. Bring hope to the hopeless, joy to the lonely and love to the abandoned. For because without this, people do not live, they merely exist in isolation.

5. Encourage others, knowing that the reward is not in the destination, but it is the growth and joy obtained on the journey step by step, that really matters.

6. Remember to look with love into the eyes of the hurting, the lonely and the lost, reaching deep into their

AMERICANJails

MAY | JUNE 2017

| 61

souls and providing healing that will last a lifetime.

7. Be open and honest with your feelings, shared in trust, as feelings penetrate the soul.

8. Recognize that you are always in my heart.

And so it is, as I move forward, my hope for you is to praise more and worry less; listen more and speak less; give more and take less.

For it is in praising that we find peace; and it is in listening that we hear the voice of God. In the concluding words of St. Francis “it is in giving that we receive; and it is in pardoning that we are pardoned.”

In closing, the following scripture and prayer are shared with you in love and gratitude. From Hebrews 10:23–25: “Let us hold onto the confession of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful. And let us be concerned about one another in order to promote love and good works, not staying away from our meetings as some habitually do, but encouraging each other and all the more as you see the day drawing near.”

Precious Lord, we do see these times as difficult, challenging and disquieting. May we come together in unity, in agreement to care for one

another and to love one another, as you dear Lord, have loved us. In your Holy Name we pray, Amen and Amen.

REV. CARMEN WARNER-ROBBINS, MSN, RN, M.DIV, FAAN

AJA Chaplain 2010–2017

Have you visited the National PREA Resource Center’s website at www.prearesourcecenter.org lately? It’s all at your fingertips or a phone call away. Keep up-to-date on all the latest news, available assistance, and resources.

Don’t reinvent the wheel—start at www.prearesourcecenter.org. Here is just some of the information available: TRAINING AND TECHNICAL AUDIT LIBRARY ASSISTANCE ● Audit Instruments ● Resources ● PREA Essentials (Start here) ● Audit Process ● Policy and Practices ● Curricula ● Auditor Qualifications and ● Legal ● Upcoming Webinars Application ● Research ● Archived Webinars ● Certified Auditors ● News Coverage ● PREA in Action ● Auditor Trainings AJA is presently under a grant to provide technical assistance at no cost to you. For more information, visit www.prearesourcecenter.org. Don’t forget to sign-up for the latest news, available training, and updates!

62

|

MAY | JUNE 2017

AMERICANJails

in the federal courts

Staff Working Conditions FMLA Light Duty Injury Workers’ Compensation Gillman v. Okaloosa County Florida, 58 F.Supp.3d 1305 (N.D. Fla. 2014). A former county employee, who had worked as a correctional officer and had injured her hand and taken leave, brought an action against the county, alleging interference and retaliation under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). The employee had sustained an on-the-job injury when her right hand became lodged in a hydraulic door. She was transported to a hospital where she was treated for a crush injury to her right thumb.

As a result of her injury, she was unable to perform many of the basic functions of her job, including tasks that required hand and finger manipulation.

The county moved for summary judgment and the district court granted the motion. The court held that: (1) the county had no obligation under FMLA to place the employee in a light-duty position so that she could take FMLA leave intermittently, where the employee was not medically capable of performing her regular job duties; (2) the county’s proffered reason for terminating the employee was not a pretext for FMLA retaliation; (3) the county’s proffered reasons for refusing to place the employee

in a light-duty position were not a pretext for FMLA retaliation; and (4) there was no causal connection between the employee’s termination and her workers’ compensation claim.

The court noted that the county had no policy allowing for light duty, and that no designated light duty job existed for the employee’s position, and that no light duty job was available when the employee requested it.

(Okaloosa County Jail, Florida) Union Working Conditions U.S. Dept. of Justice Federal Bureau of Prisons Federal Correctional Complex Coleman, Fla. v. Federal Labor Relations Authority 737 F.3d 779 (D.C.Cir. 2013). The Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) petitioned for review, and the BOP and the Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) cross-applied for enforcement of FLRA’s order stating that the BOP was required to bargain with a labor union over proposals relating to the BOP’s use of metal detectors at a high security prison. The court held that the decision to use the Federal prison’s compound metal detectors to screen only those inmates suspected of carrying contraband did not render moot the FLRA decision stating that the BOP was required to bargain with the employee union over proposals relating to safety issues arising out of the prison’s use of metal detectors, absent a showing that

there was no reasonable expectation that the union’s safety concerns would not recur. The court found that the FLRA’s determination that the BOP was required, under the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Act (FSLMRA), to bargain with the labor union over a proposal that prison management have inmates turn in all watches that did not clear the compound metal detector, treat such watches as contraband, and assure that watches sold in the prison store would not set off the metal detectors, in order to avoid bottlenecks of inmates at the entrance to the compound/detector area, was eminently reasonable and supported by the record. According to the court, the proposal was sufficiently tailored to target employees likely to be harmed by the installation of outdoor metal detectors, was intended to reduce nuisance alarms triggered by prohibited watches, thereby moving inmates through the compound-detector bottlenecks more quickly, and would not excessively interfere with the BOP’s management rights. The court found that the FLRA determination that the labor union’s proposal requiring construction of a block and mortar officer’s station near one of the prison’s two metal detectors was non-negotiable as a whole under FSLMRA. (Federal Bureau of Prisons Federal Correctional Complex Coleman, Florida)

AMERICANJails

MAY | JUNE 2017

| 63

in the federal courts

Failure to Protect Staffing Levels Working Conditions Fields v. Abbott, 652 F.3d 886 (8th Cir. 2011). A female jailer brought a § 1983 action against a county, sheriff, county commissioners, and several other defendants, alleging violations of her substantive due process rights. The district court denied the sheriff’s and commissioners’ motion for summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity and the defendants appealed. The appeals court reversed and remanded, finding that the defendants’ failure to act was not deliberate indifference as to the safety of the jailer.

According to the court, the sheriff’s and county commissioners’ awareness of potentially dangerous conditions in the jail, including that the jail was understaffed and that the drunk tank had an interiormounted door handle, and failure to take action regarding those conditions, which resulted in the jailer being attacked and taken hostage by two inmates, was not deliberate indifference as to the safety of the jailer, as would violate the jailer’s 14th Amendment substantive due process rights on a State-created danger theory. The court found that the defendants’ failure to act was at most gross negligence, rather than deliberate indifference, and the jailer was aware of the conditions as she had been injured previously due to the handle and staffing issue, such that she could take these issues into account in

64

|

MAY | JUNE 2017

AMERICANJails

interacting with inmates. (Miller County Jail, Missouri) Staffing Levels Working Conditions Fraternal Order of Police v. Williams, 263 F.Supp.2d 45 (D.D.C. 2003). The union that represented correctional employees sued the District of Columbia to force a change in staffing patterns at a jail. The district court dismissed the action, finding that the District’s alleged failure to provide correctional officers with a safe working environment did not violate their substantive due process rights under the Fifth Amendment. The union was concerned about overcrowding and a reduction in the jail work force. (Central Detention Facility, District of Columbia) Protection from Harm Nicholas v. Wallenstein, 266 F.3d 1083 (9th Cir. 2001). County jail employees who had participated in the restraint and removal of an inmate who was suffering from a cocaine overdose brought a State court action under § 1983 based on the public identification of them as the persons who had participated in the cell extraction. The district court granted summary judgment for the defendants and the appeals court affirmed.

The appeals court held that the employees did not show that the facility commander had acted with deliberate indifference to known or obvious dangers when he disclosed their identities to an angry group of the inmate’s family and

friends while the inmate was near death. The employees had struggled with the inmate and handcuffed him and used pepper spray to control him. When they put him on a restraint board he stopped breathing and had no pulse. He was revived and taken to a hospital where he later died. (King County Jail, Washington) Protection from Harm White v. Lemacks, 183 F.3d 1253 (11th Cir. 1999). A nurse and the administrator for another nurse’s estate brought a § 1983 action alleging substantive due process violations against a sheriff, deputy sheriff, and county, based on an incident in which the nurses were attacked and beaten by a county jail inmate while they worked in the jail infirmary. The district court dismissed the case and the appeals court affirmed.

According to the appeals court, the fact that a government employee would risk losing her job if she did not submit to unsafe job conditions does not convert a voluntary employment relationship into a custodial relationship, and therefore does not entitle to employee to substantive due process protection from workplace hazards, including harm caused by third parties. The nurses worked for Prison Health Services, Inc., which was under contract to provide medical services to the county jail. As a condition of their job, and while performing their nursing duties at the jail, they were required to be in close contact with inmates, and their

Y R A S S I M M O C ES U L A V S N O I T U L O S

PARTNERING WITH JAILS AND PRISONS ACROSS THE NATION

F

M Y L L U SM

M O C

A N A

L L A

S I M

D E G

M O C

Y R SA

Y N PA

N A M

M E AG

T N E

Providing Full Service Automated, End-To-End Integrated Commissary Solutions

UnionSupplyGroup.com

in the federal courts

freedom of movement and ability to flee or otherwise protect themselves were limited. The nurses were attacked and brutally beaten by an inmate who also subdued a deputy who had been assigned to protect the nurses. (Clayton County Jail, Georgia) Protection from Harm Kohl v. Smythe, 25 F.Supp.2d 1124 (D. Hawaii 1998). A former State prison employee alleged 1st and 14th Amendment violations in a § 1983 suit. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants, finding that the employee’s complaint did not state a claim that he had a constitutionally protected liberty interest in a continuing position. The court held that prison officials were not liable for any violation of the 14th Amendment by failing to provide the employee with a personal security guard.

The employee, a recreation specialist, alleged that he was terminated in retaliation for his repeated complaints regarding the lack of his safety at the prison, which the court found did not substantially involve matters of public concern. The court also held that failure to comply with the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) does not, in and of itself, create a private cause of action.

(Halawa Corr. Facility. Hawaii)

66

|

MAY | JUNE 2017

AMERICANJails

Protection from Harm Working Conditions Liebson v. New Mexico Corrections Dept., 73 F.3d 274 (10th Cir. 1996). A librarian who was assaulted by a prison inmate while she was working at a prison brought a civil rights action against prison officials.

The librarian alleged that the officials, who had changed the hours during which a guard was in the library, failed to protect her. The district court denied the officials’ motion for summary judgment and they appealed. The appeals court reversed the case and remanded it, ruling that prison officials were not liable under either the special relationship theory or the danger creation theory.

The court found that even if the librarian alleged an actual due process claim, those rights were not so clearly established that reasonable officials would have understood that their conduct violated those rights at the time of the assault. The court also ruled that there was no special relationship between prison officials and the librarian which would trigger an affirmative duty on the part of the officials to protect the librarian from assault by inmates; the librarian’s presence in the prison library, both before and after the guard was removed, was completely voluntary and she was free to come and go each day of her employment. (New Mexico State Penitentiary)

Assignment L.W. v. Grubbs, 974 F.2d 119 (9th Cir. 1992). A registered nurse at a medium security custodial institution for young male offenders brought a Section 1983 action against her supervisors arising out of a situation in which she was raped and terrorized by an inmate. The U.S. District Court dismissed the action, and the nurse appealed.

The appeals court, reversing and remanding, found that the nurse could maintain a Section 1983 claim against her supervisors on the basis that they created a dangerous situation.

The supervisors assigned the nurse to work with the inmate despite knowing of his history of violence against women, that he was likely to assault a female if left alone with her, and that the nurse would be alone with the inmate. (Oregon) Working Conditions Staffing Levels Smith v. Dodrill, 718 F.Supp.

1293 (N.D. W.Va. 1989). Prison officers injured during a prison takeover riot brought a civil rights action against the Commissioner of the West Virginia Department of Corrections. The Commissioner moved for dismissal of action.

The district court granted the motion and found that the guards, who alleged that the Commissioner failed to provide adequate facilities and personnel to properly provide for their security, safety and care, failed to establish deprivation of a Federal right, and therefore failed to state a cause

of action under the Federal civil rights statute against the Commissioner for injuries sustained during the riot. While the due process clause forbids the State itself from depriving individuals of life, liberty, and property without due process of law, its language cannot fairly be read to impose affirmative obligation on the State to ensure that those interests do not come to harm through other means.

The officers were not in custody nor compelled to be officers, but instead enlisted for service. A West Virginia statute imposing a duty upon employers to maintain places of employment in reasonably safe conditions did not create a contractual property interest for the employee which would allow the employee to bring a Federal civil rights action against the employer for violation of that duty. (West Virginia State Penitentiary, Moundsville) Working Conditions De Jesus Benavides v. Santos, 883 F.2d 385 (5th Cir. 1989). Jail detention officers who were injured during the course of an attempted escape by jail inmates filed a Federal civil rights action against the jail officials. The officers were unarmed and on duty when they were attacked. They claimed that the sheriff was aware of a persistent pattern of contraband smuggling in the jail, that the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) had specifically warned the sheriff that

a jailbreak was “imminent,” and that the sheriff acted “callously and in utter disregard” for institutional security in failing to respond to these problems.

They also complained that the commissioners and the judge had failed to provide sufficient funds to the jail to ensure its safe operation. The U.S. District Court dismissed the suit, and the plaintiffs appealed. The appeals court found that the local jail detention officers who were injured by jail inmates that were attempting to escape did not have a Section 1983 action against the government officials in charge of the jail for reckless or grossly negligent failure to prevent, adequately guard against, or protect those injured from an attempted escape and accompanying inmate violence, stating, “The issue presented is whether those who, in the course of their duties as local jail detention officers, are injured by jail inmates attempting to escape, have a section 1983 claim against the government officials in charge of the jail where the injury would not have occurred but for those

officials’ callous indifference or grossly negligent failure to prevent, or to adequately guard against, or to protect those injured from, the attempted escape and accompanying inmate violence.” According to the court, the claim fell squarely within traditional State tort law and did not give a rise to a constitutional claim. (Webb County Jail, Texas)

Rod Miller and Donald J. Walter are editors of two legal publications. The Detention and Corrections Caselaw Quarterly presents summaries recent jail and prison decisions and is published with assistance from the American Jail Association. Each year the Quarterlies add more than 300 new cases to the parent publication, the Detention and Corrections Caselaw Catalog. The Catalog, which summarizes over 9,000 court decisions, is currently in its 25th year. For more information about these publications, go to www.correction.org or e-mail rod@correction.org.

AMERICANJails

MAY | JUNE 2017

| 67

Liability Issues of Tactical Terms continued from page

39

Second, to avoid the risk of successful litigation rela­tive to tactical team operations, administrators must carefully consider the theories of liability previously dis­cussed.

Supervisors must know their employees and assign only those officers to tactical operations who have demonstrated the proper abilities and motivation. This requires high standards and supervisors’ not abdicating their responsibility to enforce such standards. A majority of the cases identified in this article revealed that liabil­ity generally revolved around the failure of the supervi­sor to direct employees properly. A tactical response team is not an operations where a supervisor can turn a deaf ear or a blind eye to employee actions.

Finally, administrators must establish and maintain minimum performance standards for all officers assigned to the tactical unit.

Careful review of all candidates’ history and qualifications prior to assigning the officers, as well as careful periodic reevaluations, is highly recommended. Standards should include the cri­teria for personnel selection, training and frequency of advanced training required, properly equipping the team, and approving the appropriate procedures and tactics to use in varying situations. State and local professional standards should be consulted when deter­mining agency criteria and policy development of the team in order promote acceptable levels of opera­tional effectiveness.

Maintenance of a special response team requires administrators to be proactive in assessing the functions of the team and preparing them to successfully respond to critical incidents, while at the same time decreasing the risk of potential

68

|

MAY | JUNE 2017

litigation. Development of policies and procedures and enforcement of them relative to the team’s operation are critical responsibilities of the cor­rectional administrator and are highly useful in defend­ing against claims of supervisory liability.

Continued success in responding to emergency situations originates with the correctional administrator who makes contin­ued strides to ensure officer safety is enhanced and that team members are adequately prepared to perform nec­essary team functions. Adopting a management strategy of assessing the liability issues discussed in this article, as they apply to the needs of varying agencies, will place the correctional entity in a defensible position when claims of supervisory indifference are alleged.  References Adams, R., McTeran, T. M., & Remsburg, C. (1989). Street survival: Tactics for armed encounters. Northbrook, IL: Caliber Press.

Barrineau, H.E., III (1994). Civil liability in criminal justice (2nd edition). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson Publishing Company.

Borum, R. & Stock H. (1992). An essential tool to properly train staff and protect against litigation. Corrections Today, 54(4), 26–30.

Bryan, D. (1995, July). Emergency response teams: A prison’s first line of defense. Corrections Compendium, 20.

Callahan, M. (1989, March). Municipal liability for inadequate training and supervision. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin.

Collins, W. C. (1982). Legal responsibilities and authority of correctional officers. Alexandria, VA: American Correctional Association. del Carmen, R. (1991). Civil liabilities in American policing: A text for law enforcement personnel. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Drapkin, M. & Klugiwicz, G. T. (1994, January/February). Use of force training in jails (Part I). American Jails, 7(6), 9–12.

AMERICANJails

Fyfe, J. (1995). Training to reduce police civilian violence. In W. A. Geller & H. Toch (EDs.), And justice for all: Understanding and controlling police abuse of force (pp. 163–176).

Washington, DC: Police Executive Research Forum.

Gessinger, S. (1986, May 4). Prison assault teams: First line of defense against riots. Los Angeles Times.

Gray, G. C. (1994, October). Prison uprisings: Prison life examines America’s most notorious riots. Prison Life, 31.

Jacobs, J. (1983). SWAT tactics. Boulder, CO: Paladin Press.

Kappeler, V. E. (1993). Critical issues in police civil liability. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press, Inc. Kolman, J. (1982). A guide to the development of special weapons and tactic teams. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas Publishers.

Lucas, R. M. (1992, March/April).

Tactical control: Goon squad or its antithesis? American Jails, 6(1), 52–54.

Miller, R. C. & Walter, D. J. (1995).

Detention and corrections caselaw catalog. Topsham, ME: CRS, Inc. Robbins, I. P. (1985). Prisoners and the law. New York: Clark Boardman Company, Ltd. Scrivner, E. M. (1994, April). The role of police psychology in controlling excessive force. National Institute of Justice: Research Report. Washington, DC. Silver, I. (1990). Police civil liability. New York: Matthew Bender & Company, Inc. Useem, B., Graham Camp, C., Camp G., & Dugan, R. (1995, October).

Resolution of prison riots. National Institute of Justice: Research in Brief.

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.

Webb, D. & Alicie S. (1994, January/ February). Tactical response teams.

American Jails, 7(6), 15–19.

At the time of original publication Darrell L. Ross, Ph.D., was an Assistant Professor in Criminal Justice Studies at East Carolina University.

2016–2017 Jail Manager Certification Commission (JMCC) President’s Commentary continued from page

4

If it is not evident, I fancy myself a “de-criminalist.”

That is, I do not feel an assignment to a jail is necessarily the proper punishment for all crimes. In addition, I subscribe to the belief that even those remanded to a jail’s care deserve to be treated with dignity and respect.

We must realize as correctional officers, that although we manage some bad people in jails, there are far more individuals who are simply in bad situations that resulted in their incarceration. This small, but very distinct difference, can change how we view our role in the criminal justice system—and it could also set the stage for successful reform of those jails that appear to perpetuate recidivism, in contrast to the institutions where life changes can be achieved.

During my presidency, you can expect AJA to reach out to advocacy groups and other agencies to ensure that we, as an association, are developing our policies and practices with the most pertinent and real-time information related to humane confinement. Soliciting the input from those representing an opposing viewpoint, can only result in more robust conversation, and ultimately better solutions to the issues that we face in this, our NOBLE profession.

Be safe and God bless.

JOHN W. JOHNSON, SR., MBA, CJM, CPM

President American Jail Association

Commission Chair Shane Dotson, CJM Jail Administrator Joplin Police Department Joplin, Missouri sdotson@joplinmo.org Commission Vice Chair Tiffany Mass, CJM Jail Administrator Pottawattamie County Sheriff’s Office Council Bluffs, Iowa tmass@pottcosheriff.com

Lisa Peck, CJM Sergeant Mesa County Sheriff’s Department Grand Junction, Colorado lisa.peck@mesacounty.us Michael Harris, CJM Superintendent-in-Chief Suffolk County Sheriff’s Department Boston, Massachusetts mharris@scsdma.org

2016–2017 Correctional Trainer Certification Commission (CTCC) Co-Chairs Randy Perdue, CCT President Tactical Security & Leadership Training and Consulting, LLC Lookout, West Virginia randyperdue1@yahoo.com

Co-Vice Chairs Spencer Hill, CCT Law and Public Safety Instructor Mid-Ohio Valley Technical Institute St. Marys, West Virginia taser296@@yahoo.com

Commissioners Stacie Mitchell, CJM, CCT Corrections Lieutenant Salt River DOC Scottsdale, Arizona stacie.mitchell@srpmic-nsn.gov

Commissioners Anthony Yeber, CJM Correctional Lieutenant Miami-Dade Corrections and Rehabilitation Department Miami, Florida mmyeber@miamidade.gov

AMERICANJails

Lenny O’Keefe, CJM, CJO, CCT Training Coordinator Merrimack County Dept. of Corrections Boscawen, New Hampshire cclinebacker@comcast.net

Erin O’Hearn, CCT Director of Training Academy Massachusetts Department of Youth Services North Grafton, Massachusetts erin.o’hearn@state.ma.us

Desiree Harrington, CCT Sheriff’s Training Specialist II San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department San Bernardino, California dharrington@sbcsd.org

MAY | JUNE 2017

| 69

G N I N I A TR The American Jail Association can provide your staff with cost-effective, custom-designed training and technical assistance in the comfort and convenience of your own facility!

Our instructors are qualified to provide assistance with almost any issue your staff may be facing. If you require training in a specific subject area, we can send our team of expert instructors to train your staff in your facility. When you have more than just a few people to train, the cost savings could be significant. Here are some of the topics we cover: Management › Personnel Management › Labor Relations › Vendor Contracts and RFPs › Housing Unit Management Legal/Safety/Security › PREA › Use of Force › Laws, Standards, Codes › Inmate Classifications › Suicide/Suicide Prevention

Communications › Interpersonal Communication Skills › Communication for Supervisors › Community Relations › Communication Barriers Environment/Equipment/ Technology › Restraints › ID, Tracking, Documentation › Architecture and Design

Professional Issues › Ethics › Education and Training › Voluntary Standards Special Populations › Mental Illness › Elderly › LGBTI Support Services › Health and Hygiene Services › Food and Commissary › Transportation

For more information on how your staff can receive custom training that won’t break the bank, contact: Connie Lacy, Professional Development Director, American Jail Association, 1135 Professional Court, Hagerstown, MD 21740, Phone: 301–790–3930, ext. 300, e-mail: conniel@aja.org.

70

|

MAY | JUNE 2017

AMERICANJails

NEW IN

2017

What’s coming from AJA in 2017?

Here is a preview! › Objective Jail Classification—Best Practices and Implementation › Objective Jail Classification—Beyond the Basics › Direct Supervision: Remember Who’s Boss in the Pod › The ABCs of Direct Supervision Theory and Implementation › Interpersonal Communication Skills › It’s Lonely Up Here—Skills for Newly Promoted Supervisors › Generations in the Workplace: How to Get the Most Out of Your Blended Staff › Legal Updates for Jail Practitioners: Protecting Your Organization and Staff › Use of Force › Mental Health First Aid › Religious Programming in Jails › A Jail Practitioner’s Guide to Housing the Mentally Ill… What’s in Your Toolbox? › Jail Leadership in the 21st Century › Small Jail Summit › PREA Investigation › How to Operate the Best Jail in America Visit www.aja.org for updates and the most current calendar.

For more information, contact Patty Vermillion at pattyv@aja.org or Connie Lacy at conniel@aja.org.

AMERICANJails

MAY | JUNE 2017

| 71

board profile

Jeffery L. Newton, CJM, Colonel/Superintendent, Riverside Regional Jail Authority, North Prince Georgia, Virginia

Hello, my name is Jeff Newton and I have the distinct privilege to serve as the Superintendent of the Riverside Regional Jail Authority in North Prince George, Virginia. RRJA is a 1,500-bed direct supervision jail that serves seven diverse member jurisdictions.

• I decided to enter the field of corrections and make it my career because… my first career was in the U.S. Army.

I took an undergraduate degree in corrections from Virginia Commonwealth University and had the opportunity to work twice in my military career in military confinement facilities (8th Army Confinement Facility, Korea and the U.S. Disciplinary Barracks in Leavenworth, Kansas). Both of these assignments convinced me that my second career should be in corrections. I chose local corrections as opposed to State corrections to be more connected to the community, engaged in local issues, and hopefully be an agent of change in how local corrections is perceived by the general public and the news media.

• The most unusual job I’ve ever had was… fork lift operator. Yes, it was this job that convinced me that a college degree might be a good idea after all!

• I felt it was important to be a member of AJA and serve on the Board and Commission because… I am passionate about local corrections.

Citizens from our local communities pass through our jails and the general public does not clearly understand 72

|

MAY | JUNE 2017

AMERICANJails

the mission of the local jail.

I have had the pleasure to serve on the Jail Manager Certification Commission, the Board of Directors, and now the Executive Board as Treasurer. With each position I have looked for opportunities to change the public perception of local jails. That is one reason I am so passionate about the AJA Certification Programs, the National Jail Leadership Command Academy, the Jail Executive Development Program and the many regional training initiatives AJA engages in to foster a more professional workforce.

• The hardest thing I’ve ever done is… deploy as a member of the Armed Forces in defense of this great Nation.

The sacrifices made by veterans and their families of every generation should not be underestimated, forgotten, or taken lightly.

• The three people, living or deceased, I’d invite to dinner are… the author John Ronald Reuel Tolkien, General of the Army George Catlett Marshall, Jr. (the only man to serve as Army Chief of Staff, Secretary of Defense, and Secretary of State), and Ted Williams (The Splendid Splinter, the last baseball player to hit over .400).

• My favorite way to relax is… reading.

• My favorite meal is… I am a simple man: meatloaf, roasted potatoes, peas, and a slice of my wife’s pumpkin or apple pie (don’t forget a glass of smooth cabernet).

• One item from my personal “bucket list” is to… travel more.

• You’d be surprised to learn that… I have a great sense of humor.

• I am most proud of… my family.

• My motto is… It is what it is; sometimes despite our best efforts the outcome just is what it is.

• If there is one piece of advice I’d like to give to anyone considering corrections as a career, it would be… Do not underestimate your ability to change another person’s life with your actions. Choose to work for an organization committed to providing citizens with an opportunity to make different life decisions in the future. Demand excellence from your organization, your superiors, your peers, and your subordinates. Be a living example of professionalism. Sometimes the only thing you can control is your actions in any given situation. Be that example of professionalism. 

officers and board of directors

President John W. Johnson, Sr., MBA, CJM, CPM Division Chief Program Services Division Support Services Miami-Dade Corrections and Rehabilitation Department Miami, Florida John.Johnson@miamidade.gov President-Elect Ronaldo D. Myers, MA, CJM, CCT Superintendent Hampton Roads Regional Jail Portsmouth, Virginia myersr@hr.rj.virginia.gov 1st Vice President Elias Diggins, CJM, CCE Division Chief Denver Sheriff Department Denver, Colorado Elias.Diggins@denvergov.org 2nd Vice President Marsha P. Travis, CJM, CCM Director of Standards and Accountability Davidson County Sheriff’s Office Nashville, Tennessee mtravis@dcso.nashville.org 3rd Vice President Amanda Lambert, CJM Major/Director of Support Services Prince William-Manassas Regional Adult Detention Center Manassas, Virginia alambert@pwcgov.org

17 18

Secretary Darren Sieger, MS Classification Manager Broward Sheriff’s Office Ft. Lauderdale, Florida darren_sieger@sheriff.org

2–Year Term Eddie K. Lance, CJM Captain/Jail Administrator Transylvania County Sheriff’s Office Brevard, North Carolina elance@tcsonc.org

Sergeant-At-Arms Robert Leslie Hood, CJM Lieutenant Shelby County Sheriff’s Office Vincent, Alabama lhood@shelbyso.com

Treasurer Jeffery L. Newton, CJM Colonel/Superintendent Riverside Regional Jail Authority North Prince George, Virginia jnewton@rrjva.org

Angelique P. Lochrie, BA, CJM Captain/Assistant Jail & Court Services Administrator Sumter County Sheriff’s Office Bushnell, Florida alochrie@sumterso.org

Immediate Past President Wayne Dicky, CJM, CCE Jail Administrator Brazos County Office of Sheriff Bryan, Texas wdicky@brazoscountytx.gov

Parliamentarian Darwin Long Lieutenant/Facility Administrator Oglala Sioux Tribe Department of Corrections Pine Ridge, South Dakota dlong@ostdps.org

Louis A. Quinones, Jr., MSSL, CJM, CCE, CPM Deputy Chief Orange County Corrections Department Orlando, Florida louis.quinonesjr@ocfl.net

1–Year Term Oscar Aviles, CJM, CCE, CCHP, CPM Assistant County Administrator County of Hudson Jersey City, New Jersey oaviles@hcnj.us

Michael Tolerico, BA, CJM, CPM Warden Passaic County Sheriff’s Office Corrections Services Division Paterson, New Jersey mtolerico@pcsheriff.org

Cavin Harley, CJM Captain Sheriff Al Cannon Detention Center North Charleston, South Carolina charley@charlestoncounty.org Jamey Kessinger, CJM Jail Superintendent McLean County Detention Facility Bloomington, Illinois jamie.kessinger@mcleancountyil.gov Kimberly Moule, CJM Retired Captain San Joaquin County Sheriff’s Office French Camp, California moulekimberly@yahoo.com

3–Year Term Sam L. Davis, MA, CJM Major/Jail Administrator Ingham County Sheriff’s Office Mason, Michigan so_sdavis@ingham.org

Chaplain James K. Martin Chaplain Miami Dade Corrections and Rehabilitation Department Miramar, Florida JM5693@miamidade.gov Executive Director Robert J. Kasabian, MBA American Jail Association Hagerstown, Maryland robertk@aja.org Legal Counsel Terrence O. Lynch, Esq. Broward Sheriff’s Office 2601 W. Broward Boulevard Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

Mark Foxall, PhD, CJM Director Douglas County Department of Corrections Omaha, Nebraska mark.foxall@douglascounty-ne.gov Penny Perry Chief of Corrections Franklin County Sheriff’s Office-Corrections Columbus, Ohio plperry@franklincountyohio.gov Robert Schlegel, CJM, CCT, CIT Captain Broward Sheriff’s Office Pompano Beach, Florida robert_schlegel@sheriff.org

AMERICANJails

MAY | JUNE 2017

| 73

notes from the field

WRAP Restraint Device: A User’s Perspective In 2015, our agency was preparing to move into a new jail.

We were going from a jail built as a linear-remote supervision facility to direct supervision, and increasing from 200 beds to 608 beds. We were also bringing back over 125 inmates whom we had been housing out; these were our more aggressive or otherwise non-compliant inmates. It soon became apparent that we needed to prepare ourselves for actually dealing with our “problem” inmates rather than just sending them to be housed in other facilities. We were also in the process of making the much needed repairs to our restraint chairs. It was during this time that our jail administrator contacted me with the name and phone number of Safe Restraints, LLC, asking me to get in touch with them about a product that he had just seen. It was the WRAP restraint device.

I called Safe Restraints and in a short time they shipped me a unit for us to test and evaluate. I selected a handful of deputies and supervisors, then we sat through the “Train the Trainer” course on how to use and teach the use of the WRAP. We began putting it through the paces during in-service training for our tactical team before using for live incidents. Safe Restraints gave me the names of several people at other agencies to contact for their perspective on the device and how it has helped them. We also received sample policies for the device so we didn’t have to reinvent the wheel if we chose to purchase it.

74

|

MAY | JUNE 2017

AMERICANJails

As we continued to practice with the device, we realized how easy it was to use. The WRAP is designed with simplicity in mind. It is very efficient and can be applied very quickly with just a little bit of practice.

In no time, our staff could go from the subject being handcuffed and ready to be put in the WRAP, to having it applied and the inmate ready to be moved in about 45 seconds. As the divisional training coordinator and team leader for the tactical team, it was easy to see how this would benefit our agency immediately.

After more practice with the device, I contacted Safe Restraints for the most important information—pricing. Once I had all of the information and drafted a policy, I submitted a memo with my findings, including the policy draft and a request to purchase four units.

We wanted one for the detention area of the courthouse (for which the jail is responsible), as well as two that we could have stored here in the jail. Then, we would have one that was fully dedicated to training so we would not be putting jail staff in units that had been used on inmates. In the meantime, we were still using restraint chairs as our primary restraint device for combative or self-harming inmates.

During this time frame, we had an inmate who became very disruptive during court and was ultimately put in a restraint chair. Now another problem was posed. How do we get the inmate and the restraint chair

back to the jail from the courthouse? This situation opened us up to liability for anything that could occur while trying to transport the inmate in the chair. We decided to try the WRAP. Now we rarely use the restraint chairs. The WRAP is so much easier to use and provides many more benefits.

First, the WRAP is more versatile. While most of the restraint chairs on the market have wheels for mobility, they are not portable. The WRAP can be picked up and slung over a shoulder, leaving both hands free for hands-on encounters and immediately available for deployment when the subject is handcuffed. It is easily maneuvered into whatever environment you are working in. Once the subject is ready for the WRAP application, the device can be brought to them rather than taking them to the device. This is particularly helpful if the subject is a larger individual or is some distance away from where you may need to leave a restraint chair due to small hallways, doors, or other obstructions. We also found that it is very easy to utilize the handles that are provided on the sides of the WRAP to lift even large subjects in order to move them—even if only short distances—and then use a stretcher to move them farther if needed.

Secondly, the WRAP is much faster to apply. Again, we have to rely on whatever tactics are needed to get the subject in a

prone position and handcuffed behind the back. But if they are still combative, you can’t put them in a restraint chair any easier than you can handcuff them.

So now after the handcuffs are on, the actual application of the WRAP is 45 to 60 seconds, even with limited practice. But even without the entire device having been applied, the fight is over as soon as the leg restraint portion is applied. The padded rods that are embedded in the harness keep the inmate from continuing to kick or struggle to get free and run. After, having been put in this device many times during training, I can honestly say that there is no pain involved.

You simply know that you aren’t going anywhere!

Initially, I wasn’t convinced that this system would control larger inmates or really small ones due to its one size. But then I put my 10-year-old son in the WRAP as a test (at the time he weighed about 75–80 pounds and stood at 5-feet tall). On the flip side, we put it on a male who weighed at least 350 pounds and was over 6-feet tall: it fit and kept him restrained. The truth is, as long as the device is applied correctly, it works well regardless of the size of the subject! We have come to rely on the WRAP during incidents with inmates who are combative or who are engaging in behavior that may cause harm to themselves. It has also become a standard tool for cell extractions. It can even be

modified, once initial control is gained, to allow the inmate to walk around for blood flow purposes, to go to the bathroom, or for transports.

We are now trying to implement the use of the device for the rest of our agency. We believe there is a potential benefit for other divisions, such as Uniform Patrol who also deals with combative arrestees.

Rather than hobble straps or incurring damage to the windows, cages or doors of their patrol car, the subject could be put in the WRAP and then placed in the backseat with the seatbelt buckled for a safe and secure transport to the jail.

And because of how effective the WRAP is at controlling the subject, they are usually much more compliant and ready to get through the process upon arriving at the jail.

Our Transport Unit can benefit because the WRAP can be used for long distance transports, particularly for inmates with a disciplinary history. With the hobble strap removed and the lower portion of the leg harness loosened, the subject can walk themselves to and from vehicles but easily be taken back down to a prone position with the unit reapplied completely, thereby quickly and safely regaining complete control again.

Do you have a story to share? An experience that can help others?

For every success, for every failure, for every lesson learned, there is a story to be told.

Innovative approaches and solutions that address operations, staff training and retention, inmate programming, healthcare, and other equally important issues are being developed in jail facilities across the Nation.

In fact, your own facility may have put into place a successful policy, procedure, or program that could be replicated by other correctional agencies.

Well here’s your chance to tell your story.

Now is the time to consider penning an article in American Jails magazine to tell your story… how you went from having a problem to how you found a solution. Your experiences and expertise can greatly assist individual agencies in particular and the field of local corrections in general.

For more information about article submissions or guest editorials, contact Steve Custer at 301–790–3930, ext. 400, or stevec@aja.org.

AMERICANJails

MAY | JUNE 2017

| 75

notes from the field

Cleaning is simple—all that is needed is soap and water. You can brush with a soft bristled brush and then let it air dry completely. If needed, a small amount of bleach or Simple Green Pro5 can be used without causing damage to the device.

Avoid cleaning the WRAP with harsh soaps or chemicals. Also, there is a professional cleaning service available through the Safe Restraints website and a third-party provider. If your unit is heavily soiled, getting it professionally cleaned may be a better solution. However, for general cleaning, you can

do that on-site yourself , which is sufficient in most cases. The wear and tear on your device is minimum and I have spoken to agencies that have had WRAP devices for more than 10 years with no issues. This obviously effects your budget down the road when you don’t need to worry about buying replacement parts or replacing your entire unit(s).

If you are looking for an alternative to restraint chairs or just looking to have another form of restraint device as an additional tool, I strongly suggest the WRAP by Safe Restraints. We have been using

ours for two years now. From high intensity training, to putting it through the paces to see if we even wanted to purchase the WRAP, to real world use within our facility, we are thrilled with the ease, effectiveness, versatility, and safety of the device.

ing the rationale behind many of our practices and the associated societal costs and benefits of those initiatives. This is not a criticism, but rather a truism derived from the understanding that the criminal justice system is a human network of influential decision-makers, thus continuous dynamic changes and adjustments are to be expected.

It was a series of decisions made by well-intending persons over a series of decades that has led us to where we are today. And it will take courage and hard work by many criminal justice

practitioners to lead us into a new era, keeping the principle of “justice” at the forefront.

SGT. KENNY HUGHES, CCT

Jail Division/Security Unit; SRM Team Leader Forsyth County Sheriff’s Office Cumming, Georgia LKHughes@forsythco.com

Guest Editorial continued from page

5

of the public criminal justice process. We have a responsibility to perpetually and carefully evaluate what we are doing or not doing and then make improvements in our respective operations.

Additionally, we have an obligation to engage other criminal justice system stakeholders when the scale of justice appears to be getting tipped out of balance by their actions or pursuits.

As system leaders we should be talking about and examin-

76

|

MAY | JUNE 2017

AMERICANJails

EDWARD SWEENEY, CJM, CCHP

Retired Director of Corrections Lehigh County Jail Sweeney Corrections Consulting Allentown, Pennsylvania sweeneycorrections@gmail.com

chaplain’s corner

Converting Conflict to Cohesion and Collaboration Editor’s Note: For the Chaplain’s Corner in this issue of American Jails, we are pleased to welcome Chaplain Raymond M. Perez, who served as AJA’s chaplain from 2008–2011.

Often the challenge in any organization is resolving conflict with grace and integrity.

Conflict is normal in any setting, but it often goes unresolved; and many times, it is not communicated. When this occurs with conflict, it becomes a hidden cancer that can destroy the unity and cohesiveness of the organization and divert it from its defined mission. There is a positive process to take conflict and convert it from a toxic and destructive force into a positive and building influence, which can then cause the organization or agency to be empowered.

What does this process look like?

Conflict always begins when someone’s ego is offended.

Scripture from the JudeoChristian bible provides very specific counsel on this and addresses the underlying cause of conflict: “Pride leads to conflict; those who take advice are wise.” Proverbs 13:10 (NLT) When someone has an overwhelming need to be right, this often is at the expense of relationships or maintaining team cohesion. This creates conflict. This pride leads to conflict.

Disagreement is not negative, and it is important to improving quality and professionalism in any organization.

When a leader or a team member can set aside his or her own ego, this allows the organization to harvest the wisdom from the “team,” and opposing perspectives become a net gain rather than a net loss. Improvement is often lost because of an unyielding attitude of conflict. When someone operates out of pride, they will not allow others to contribute insights that can bring real solutions.

Creating a Positive Influence The first step in converting conflict into a positive influence is encouraging a culture of humility, which values the opinions of others as highly as one’s own opinion. This kind of culture is sometimes difficult to cultivate in the “power and

control” environment of corrections, but it can be nurtured by leaders who encourage peers and subordinates to freely give their input. Wise leaders know that input from many sources is invaluable to an organization.

This kind of leadership is based on a servant-leadership model that is in direct contrast to a command-and-control style of leadership. The servant-leadership model is based on valuing others as individuals and not merely as resources in accomplishing a mission. The attitude that undergirds this leadership style is an attitude of humility.

The command-and-control model is based on intimidation and coercion and this approach makes the agency atmosphere hostile, toxic, and unsafe for both staff and inmates. To build

“Death and life are in the power of the tongue, And those who love it and indulge it will eat its fruit and bear the consequences of their words.”

— Proverbs 18:21 (AMP)

AMERICANJails

MAY | JUNE 2017

| 77

chaplain’s corner

AJA Af

f i l i at e

Me

m b e r s

Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences Alabama Jail Association American Correctional Association American Correctional Chaplains Association Bill Glass Behind the Walls Colorado Jail Association Correction Captains’ Assoc., Inc. Detention Equipment Contractors Association Freedom Forever Ministries Georgia Jail Association Good News Jail & Prison Ministry GreenPrisons.org Imperial County Sheriff’s Association Interstate Commission for Adult Offender Supervision Kentucky Jailers Association Law Enforcement Officers Regional Training Commission Michigan Sheriff’s Coordinating & Training Council Middle Atlantic States Correctional Association National Commission on Correctional Health Care National Correctional Industries Association National Organization of Hispanics in Criminal Justice New Jersey County Jail Wardens Association North Carolina Jail Administrators Association Pikes Peak Community College San Joaquin County Correctional Officers Association Servant’s Oasis South Carolina Jail Administrators’ Association Texas Jail Association Virginia Association of Regional Jails Wisconsin Jail Association 78

|

MAY | JUNE 2017

AMERICANJails

a culture of humility, it often takes years of modeling this kind of behavior to build a culture of respect and openness.

The second step in converting conflict from a negative influence to a positive force is setting boundaries for behavior.

Behavior must be respectful and dignified. Hostile bodily posturing shuts down dialog and prevents healthy interchanges.

Folded arms, standing up or over someone, scowling, glaring or frowning are all behaviors that negatively influence conflict resolution.

This type of body posture also reveals hostility, and when it is engaged in by a leader, it will undermine the ability to build an atmosphere of respect, honor, and humility. It is important to communicate acceptance and cohesion with both body posture and with facial expressions. Here are two scriptures from the Judeo-Christian bible that give counsel: “For the look on their faces bears witness against them; they proclaim their sin like Sodom; they do not hide it. Woe to them!

For they have brought evil on themselves.” Isaiah 3:9 (ESV) “Nebuchadnezzar was filled with rage, and his face twisted beyond recognition because of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego.

In response he commanded that the furnace be heated to seven times its normal heat.” Daniel 3:19 (CEB)

Communicating with Grace Our facial expressions can communicate openness, concern, dissatisfaction, disappointment, excitement, frustration, anger, and many other emotions. All facial expressions can either build or destroy an atmosphere of acceptance and cohesion, and can either increase or decrease the possibility of resolving a conflict.

Finally, to build an atmosphere of respect and honor, for the resolution of conflict, the most important factor is to focus on verbal communication.

Words that are used can have a negative impact on a tense or difficult situation. In addition, words that are not communicated can also damage relationships. Praise and positive affirmation either given or not given can dishearten and even devastate. Words have power to both create and destroy relationships, personal worth, and even self-confidence.

This is what the JudeoChristian bible says about negative words and communication: “A gentle answer deflects anger, but harsh words make tempers flare. The tongue of the wise makes knowledge appealing, but the mouth of a fool belches out foolishness. The Lord is watching everywhere, keeping his eye on both the evil and the good. Gentle words are a tree of life; a deceitful tongue crushes the spirit.” Proverbs 15:1–4 (NLT)

There is much that is said in the Judeo-Christian bible about the power of words. Negative words emanate from a corrupt heart and can crush a person’s spirit and poison relationships.

The result of using negative language is it tends to amplify conflicts instead of minimizing them, and the result is division instead of inclusion. This kind of language frustrates communication, reflection, and reconciliation.

As much as words can destroy they can also create, build up, and encourage. Again, the Judeo-Christian scripture provides a clear message for this kind of language: “Let us think of ways to motivate one another to acts of love and good works.” Hebrews 10:24 (NLT) “Let no unwholesome word proceed from your mouth, but only such a word as is good for edification according to the need of the moment, so that it will give grace to those who hear.”

Ephesians 4:29 (NASB) Our communication, when it is gracious, gentle and encouraging, can contribute to an atmosphere of inclusion that allows the free interchange of ideas and criticism. Objective criticism that is gentle and gracious enables the recipient to receive the criticism without emotionally engaging in conflict.

Building a Positive Environment While conflict is not positive, a wise leader can follow this pattern of building an environment where conflict can be resolved in a healthy manner.

Here is the pattern: • Lead with and model humility.

• Establish and model healthy body language and facial expressions.

• Utilize language that provides positive reinforcement, minimizes conflict, and

encourages recipients and participants.

When leaders foster an environment where positive steps are taken to resolve conflict and leaders model this kind of process in their own behavior, conflict can move from a negative experience to a force for developing cohesion, transformation, and collaboration.  CHAPLAIN RAYMOND M. PEREZ

Chaplain Prince William Manassas Regional Adult Detention Center Manassas, Virginia

AMERICANJails

MAY | JUNE 2017

| 79

items ad index of interest

Jail Staffing Challenges Jail Staffing Challenges

Page Advertiser Number

Page Advertiser Number

Alkermes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 vivitrol.com

Union Supply. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 unionsupply.com

Aramark. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 aramarkcorrections.com

Wexford Health Sources, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 www.wexfordhealth.com

ARMORPUR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 armorpur.com

American Jail Association

CGL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 cglcompanies.com

2017 Professional Calendar. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71

equivant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 equivant.com/aja

AJAccess. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Falcon Correctional & Community Service. . . Cover III FalconImpact.com

Call for Articles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 Certifications. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

Homewav, LLC. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 homewav.com

Congrats to AJA’s New CJOs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

Keefe Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cover IV Keefegroup.com

Contract Trainings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70

MHS, Inc.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 mhs.com Millennium Access Control Technology, Inc.. . . . . . . 51 millenniumpacs.com NaphCare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cover II naphcare.com

Employment Opportunities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Jail Executive Development Program. . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Membership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 PREA Resource Center . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

OD Security North America. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 odsecurityna.com Questions About Islam? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 peacetv.tv Relias Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 reliaslearning.com/aja TriActive America. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 triactiveamerica.com

ATTENTION READERS! Companies that want your business advertise in American Jails. It’s part of their commitment to serving the needs of the American Jail Association.

If you do business with a company that is not advertising in our magazine, please let us know and we’ll give them a call.

The support of our advertisers is one reason we’re able to bring you the high level of editorial content you’ve enjoyed in American Jails for more than 30 years.

Please thank these advertisers by telling them you saw their advertisement in YOUR magazine—American Jails.

80

|

MAY | JUNE 2017

AMERICANJails

Falcon_AJA_1pg_Ad_Freedom_R4.pdf

1

3/24/17

1:49 PM

Because Freedom from Mental Illness Can’t Wait for Release Dates

C

M

Y

CM

MY

CY

CMY

K

Falcon Helps You Open Doors and Change Minds.

We earn your trust from day one.

Falcon brings a visionary new approach to behavioral health care in jails and prisons. We reimagine the treatment and reentry of detainees suffering from mental illness. We are committed to sustainable results that bolster families, communities and society as a whole.

NaphCare does things differently. Unlike other correctional healthcare providers, we make sure new patients receive a complete evaluation within 24 hours so we can provide better care, and start saving you money, from day one.

We believe trust still matters.

2090 Columbiana Rd. / Ste. 4000 Birmingham, AL 35216 800.834.2420 naphcare.com

Learn more at: falconimpact.com

If you’re ready for change, call a Falcon expert today to discuss what we can do for you. 312.803.5666

American Jails The Magazine of the American Jail Association

AMERICAN

THE MAGAZINE OF THE AMERICAN JAIL ASSOCIATION May | June 2017

A lot has changed in corrections, but one thing remains the same: our commitment to delivering innovative solutions and exceptional customer service. From all of us at Keefe Group, thank you for allowing us to be of service throughout the years.

NONPROFIT ORG.

PAID

U.S. POSTAGE

PERMIT NO. 30

HAGERSTOWN, MD

800.325.8998 • keefegroup.com

May | June 2017

Commissary | Package Programs | Inmate Phone | Kiosk Technology Inmate Banking | Inmate eMail | Deposit Services | MP4s & Tablets Debit Release Cards | Parole, Probation & Court-Ordered Payments Investigative Tools | Offender Management Software

KEEPING OPERATIONS CLEAN.