Please note that Standards referenced throughout this FAQ often apply to multiple sets of PREA Standards. Along with different standard numbers, the different sets of standards use different terminology to refer to the population they house including “inmate,” “detainee,” and “resident.” When referencing a standard that applies equally to all facilities covered under PREA, the language in the question and answer will, unless specified, refer to the Adult Prisons & Jails standard numbers and use the term “inmate” to refer generally to the populations in those facilities. The FAQ search functionality uses the standard numbering from the Adult Prisons and Jails, regardless of the specific setting. When a standard is selected, the search will identify all FAQs related to that standard across all standard settings.
The “Expand All” link will reveal all FAQ search results. To print the results, use the "Print Selection" button, which expands all of them automatically in the printed document. If you want to see all unfiltered results, use the "Reset" button to remove previous selections.
Search DOJ FAQ
How do agencies determine if an agency staff member or staff member of a community-based organization is qualified?
115.21(h) provides that “a qualified agency staff member or a qualified community-based staff member shall be an individual who has been screened for appropriateness to serve in this role and has received education concerning sexual assault and forensic examination issues in general.” Appropriateness should be based on factors such as temperament, background, interest level, listening skills, empathy, cultural competence, and schedule availability and not merely the person’s position such as psychology or counseling staff. In addition, it should be voluntary to take on this role.
Standard 115.21(d) provides that agencies must attempt to provide victim advocates. If they are unable to do so, they can provide a qualified staff member from a community-based organization or a qualified agency staff member. How can agencies identify an appropriate community-based organization?
The regulations do not define “community-based organization.” The intent of the standard is for agencies to partner with a non-profit or tribal organization that serves sexual assault victims even if it is not the sole focus of the organization or a nonprofit organization that has a related purpose. Examples are other victim service agencies, culturally specific organizations, LGBTQ organizations, and other multi-service organizations. Factors in determining the appropriateness of an organization include who the organization serves, what services they offer, any experience they have with sexual assault victims, and any training the staff has received on sexual assault.
When a Sexual Assault Forensic Examiner (SAFE) or Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner (SANE) cannot be made available to perform a Sexual Assault Forensic Examination, Standard 115.21 requires that the examination be performed by “other qualified medical practitioners.” What are the criteria for determining whether someone is a “qualified medical practitioner” who can perform the examination in this circumstance?
Standard 115.5 defines a “medical practitioner” as “a health professional who, by virtue of education, credentials, and experience, is permitted by law to evaluate and care for patients within the scope of his or her professional practice.” The definition goes on to provide that a “qualified medical practitioner” refers to such a professional who has also successfully completed specialized training for treating sexual abuse victims.
The Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) has published “National Training Standards for Sexual Assault Medical Forensic Examiners” available on the OVW website (www.justice.gov/ovw) at Training Sexual Assault Forensic Edition (justice.gov). Appendix C provides minimum training recommendations for all providers delivering care to the patient who has been sexually assaulted and/or abused, when there is not a SANE or SAFE available. Qualified medical practitioners should have at least successfully completed this training or its equivalent, although DOJ recommends that they complete more in-depth training. The International Association of Forensic Nurses (IAFN) with OVW support has produced a training, “No SANE in Sight” that incorporates these minimum requirements. This training is available at No SANE In Sight - IAFN (forensicnurses.org) free of charge and takes about 2 hours to complete. State sexual assault coalitions (Local Resources | OVW | Department of Justice) may have information on additional training available in the state, including trainings that provide more in-depth information and information specific to state protocols.
For juvenile facilities, the medical training should also include an understanding of child physical and mental/emotional development.
What is the difference between the post-incident victim advocacy required in PREA Standard 115.21, and the outside confidential support services required in PREA Standard 115.53?
PREA Standard 115.21(e) requires agencies to provide a victim advocate to, when requested by the victim, “accompany and support the victim through the forensic medical examination process and investigatory interviews and shall provide emotional support, crisis intervention, information, and referrals.” If a rape crisis center is not available to provide this service, the agency must provide a qualified staff member of a community-based organization, or a qualified agency staff member. The purpose of the standard is to provide victims with in-person advocacy and support during the forensic medical exam and investigatory interview. This is comparable with services that are generally available to victims in the community when they seek forensic exams or report sexual assaults.
PREA Standard 115.53, by contrast, focuses on longer-term or ongoing counseling and support for victims, which could be provided by phone or mail, or offered in person. This standard is also intended to provide victims with a way to reach out to a provider to request support. Specifically, this standard requires the facility to:
- Provide victims with mailing addresses and phone numbers (including toll-free hotlines where available) for victim advocacy or rape crisis organizations, and enable communication between inmates and victim service providers in “as confidential a manner as possible;”
- Inform inmates of the extent to which their communications with victim service providers will be monitored, and the extent to which reports of sexual abuse will be forwarded to authorities, in accordance with mandatory reporting laws; and
- Attempt to enter into agreements with victim service providers to provide inmates with confidential sexual abuse support services.
One example of how facilities and agencies have met these requirements is by signing an agreement with a local rape crisis center to respond to hotline calls and provide advocates on-site at certain dates/times. On-site advocates can meet with individual victims and facilitate support groups. The focus of this on-site work is helping victims to recover from the longer-term trauma and emotional impact related to being a victim of sexual abuse.
While the victim advocacy requirements of PREA Standard 115.21 are generally triggered after an inmate makes a report of sexual abuse within a facility, agencies are required to provide all inmates with access to outside confidential support services under PREA Standard 115.53, whether or not they make allegations of sexual abuse.
In regard to standards 115.21, 115.22, 115.34, and 115.71, what is required of agencies being audited, auditors, and external entities that conduct investigations of sexual abuse and harassment, and how will these obligations be audited?
There has been confusion in the field and among the auditor community about the requirements of standards 115.21, 115.22, 115.34, and 115.71 as they pertain to investigators who are external to the agency being audited. The following guidance is offered to auditors and agencies subject to a PREA audit in order to clarify what obligations auditors and audited agencies have vis-à-vis those provisions that obligate external investigative agencies to comply.
The information in this FAQ is consistent with and expands upon the FAQ that focuses on whether an auditor can find an entity being audited to be compliant with the PREA Standards if an entity external to the confining agency, which conducts criminal investigations of sexual abuse in the facility being audited, is not compliant with the external investigative entity’s obligations under the standards. To review this FAQ, please click here.
Responsibilities of Audited Agencies and Auditors under Standard 115.21
Under standard 115.21, the agency (a private, federal, state, county, or other local entity) being audited must demonstrate to the auditor that it has attempted to gain compliance from an external entity that conducts criminal investigations of sexual abuse with requirements (a) through (e) of that standard—that is, the agency being audited must have requested that the external entity responsible for investigations comply with all those provisions described in (a) through (e) of standard 115.21.
Auditors may find that the private, federal, state, county, or other local entity being audited has attempted to confirm that an external investigator is complying with (a) through (e) of the standard, and was unable to get such confirmation. In that case, the agency being audited can be found compliant with the standard, if they have documented these efforts.
Responsibilities of Audited Agencies and Auditors under Standard 115.22
The requirements of standard 115.22 work in a way that is consistent with standard 115.21. If an external entity conducts criminal investigations of sexual abuse for the agency (a private, federal, state, county, or other local entity) being audited, the agency must have a policy in place that makes explicit both the responsibilities of the agency in a criminal investigation and the corresponding responsibilities of the external investigating entity. The agency being audited also must publish that policy on its website or make it available through other means if the agency has no website of its own. There is no exception here—the policy must be in place, as it is an agency policy, not the policy of the external investigator, and the agency can describe the respective roles and responsibilities in its own policy, regardless of whether the external investigating entity has a corresponding policy of its own.
Auditors must confirm that a policy is in place that makes explicit both the responsibilities of the agency in a criminal investigation and the corresponding responsibilities of the external investigating entity, and that the agency has published that policy on its website or has made it available through other means if the agency has no website of its own.
Responsibilities of Audited Agencies and Auditors under Standard 115.34
Standard 115.34 describes the specialized training that the agency being audited must provide to its investigators in order to be PREA compliant. This standard further requires that, “any State entity or Department of Justice component that investigates sexual abuse in confinement settings must provide such training to its agents and investigators who conduct such investigations.”
The obligation of the agency being audited is to provide the required specialized training to its own investigators if they conduct sexual abuse investigations, whether administrative or criminal. External State and Department of Justice investigative entities that conduct investigations of sexual abuse in confinement bear a separate obligation to train their agents and investigators per the standard, and that obligation does not lie with the agency being audited. Auditors should not assess compliance with these training requirements by external entities.
Responsibilities of Audited Agencies and Auditors under Standard 115.71
Standard 115.71(a)-(j) sets out the requirements for both administrative and criminal investigations of sexual abuse and sexual harassment, and describes when, how, and by what standards those investigations should be conducted. standard 115.71(a)-(j) also reiterates the requirement that investigators who conduct those investigations must have received specialized training described in standard 115.34.
Standard 115.71(k) requires that any external State entity or Department of Justice component that conducts these investigations in a confinement setting do so according to the requirements laid out in this standard.
Standard 115.71(l) requires that the facility being audited cooperate with any outside investigative agency conducting sexual abuse investigations in the facility and must remain informed about the progress of the investigation.
The obligations under standard 115.71 of the agency being audited are to ensure that:
Its own investigators comply with this standard;
It cooperates with external investigators; and
It remain informed about any investigation being conducted by external investigators.
It is the responsibility of auditors to assess whether these obligations are being met by the agency being audited.
The obligation placed on external State entities and Department of Justice component investigators conducting sexual abuse investigations in a confinement facility to comply with the requirements laid out in this standard rests with the State entity or Department of Justice component. Auditors should not assess compliance with these obligations by external entities.
Summary of Implications for Auditors
Consistent with the requirements stated above of standards 115.21,115.22, 115.34, and 115.71, and as articulated in the FAQ that can be accessed by clicking here, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has determined that auditors should not:
Assess whether external entities that conduct criminal investigations of sexual abuse and sexual harassment for the agency being audited are in compliance with the PREA Standards. The sole focus of the audit is to determine whether the agency (a private, federal, state, county, or other local entity) being audited is in compliance with the standards.
Include in interim or final audit reports information about compliance with the standards on the part of external entities that conduct criminal investigations of sexual abuse and sexual harassment. The sole focus of these reports is to document whether the agency (a private, federal, state, county, or other local entity) is in compliance with the standards.
Affirmative Obligations of External Entities that Conduct Investigations to Comply with the PREA Standards
Standards 115.21, 115.22, 115.34, and 115.71 do impose affirmative obligations to comply on both external State entities and Department of Justice (DOJ) components that conduct sexual abuse investigations in confinement. Nothing in this guidance changes that obligation. However, confirming compliance with these standards by external entities during a corrections facility/agency audit is beyond the scope of that audit. DOJ is working to develop tools to assist these external entities, state and territorial governors who are responsible for certifying full compliance with the PREA Standards, and others to assess whether these external entities are in compliance with their affirmative obligations under the standards.
Can an auditor find a federal Bureau of Prisons, state, county, or other local or private facility compliant with the PREA standards if an entity external to the confining agency, which conducts criminal investigations of sexual abuse in the facility being audited, is not compliant with the external investigative entity’s obligations under standards 115.21, 115.22, 115.34, and 115.71?
Yes, provided that the confining agency and facility being audited has met its own specific obligations under these standards. For example, standard 115.21(f) requires the confining agency to request that the relevant external investigating entity follow the PREA standards regarding a uniform evidence protocol and forensic medical evaluations.
The four PREA standards referenced above explicitly apply to DOJ and state entities that are responsible for investigating allegations of sexual abuse in adult prisons, jails, lockups, community corrections facilities, and juvenile facilities. See, standards 115.21(g)(2), 115.22(e), 115.34(d), and 115.71(k)&(l).