Safety message - the Department is committed to your safety and the safety of staff. You have the right to serve your sentence with dignity and free from sexual assault, sexual harassment, and retaliation. The Department has zero tolerance regarding sexual assault within its facilities. This means we DO NOT tolerate any level of sexual harassment, misconduct, or assault in this facility. Not in this agency, not in my facility. EVERY effort will be made to prevent sexual assault and misconduct from occurring. EVERY allegation will be investigated, EVERY perpetrator punished, and EVERY victim offered services.
Results from an assessment of the Colorado Department of Corrections implementation of its PREA (Prison Rape Elimination Act) program are presented. This report includes these sections: executive summary; introduction; PREA incidents; PREA prevention—offender victim and predator profile, staff predator profile, diagnostic assessment of aggressive behavior and vulnerability, offender orientation and education, and staff training; PREA response; and discussion and recommendations. Of those cases investigated, 65% resulted in an unsubstantiated or unfounded outcome; 50% were offenses of inmates against staff.
This document states the policy on inmate possession of pornography in the state of Wyoming.
This document includes policies on inmate possession of pornography in the state of Oregon
This document outlines the disciplinary segregation procedure for the Oregon Department of Corrections. Definitions and Procedures are included.
The Correctional Institution Inspection Committee (CIIC) staff met with Department of Youth Services (DYS) Central Office staff on March 17, 2005, prior to the April 2005 effective date of the new CIIC responsibilities regarding juvenile correctional institutions.
Monthly data on specific areas were requested that would enable CIIC to monitor and evaluate operations, conditions, programs, and the grievance procedure. However, due to the reported lack of system-wide standardization in data gathering and reporting, CIIC staff received data limited to youth population, mental health caseload, and grievance summaries. Additional data were provided on a one-time basis in response to a request for Incident Summary Data that each facility provides to the American Correctional Association at the time of an audit. The data pertained to differing time periods from institution to institution. Further, urine drug test data was provided on one occasion.
CIIC staff were subsequently advised that on August 8, 2005, a DYS committee was formed to look at the data process relevant to establishing a uniform system-wide database on the number of incidents in DYS facilities. In the communication from the DYS director on the subject, it was reported that there were too many points of entry, too much room for interpretation, and no standards for quality assurance.
On May 16, 2006, in follow-up to the prior CIIC meeting on May 10, 2006, further inquiry was made on the status of the prior request for additional DYS data. Data were requested on use of force including information on injuries, youth on youth assaults, youth on staff assaults, seclusion rooms, and program participation. The information was requested for 2006 to date on these subjects, with monthly reports thereafter.
In response to the request, CIIC staff were advised that until a new computerized data management system could be put into place, the Superintendents were manually reporting data on a monthly basis on assaults, injuries, and seclusion. However, the data were reported to be reliable. Such data for January through March 2006 was subsequently provided on May 24, 2006, with assurance that it would be submitted on a monthly basis in the future. It was further relayed that DYS staff were in the process of putting the data in a useable, readable format.
This document describes the Department's policy that “any offenders in partial or total confinement alleging sexual abuse or assault will be referred to a medical provider. The purpose of the referral is to evaluate injury, collect forensic evidence, and to provide treatment. The offender will be provided medical and mental health treatment services that are clinically indicated based upon the evaluation”. Directives are included.
The purpose of this document is “to define the purpose, scope, authority, responsibility, selection, and training of Internal Affairs personnel”. Definitions and procedures are included.
This document describes the Department of Corrections policy meant to “establish standardized procedures to request approve and govern the actions, reporting procedures and authority of Tennessee Department of Correction (TDOC) Internal Affairs (IA) functions”. Definitions and procedures are included.
This document contains the Colorado Department of Correction’s staff code of conduct which states that “It is the policy of the Department of Corrections (DOC) that staff are to have honesty, integrity, and respect for the worth and individuality of human beings as well as a strong commitment to professional and ethical correctional service. Staff must constantly strive to live up to the highest possible standards of their profession and to incorporate and adhere to the January 15, 1999 Executive Order, ‘Executive Department Code of Ethics,’ as its ethical performance standard”. Definitions, procedure and relating previous documents are included.
Anti-fraternization policies of the Idaho Department of Corrections. This document states that “it is the policy of the Board of Correction that employees, volunteers, contractors and agents shall maintain only a professional relationship with offenders and ex-offenders, family members of offenders and ex-offenders, inmate visitors, and anyone residing in the last known or same household as the offender or ex-offender”. Includes definitions as well as explanations of procedure, applicability, prohibited activities, notifications of relationship to an offender, investigation and consequences for violations.
Changes since 1996 in state laws and agency policies and procedures regarding sexual misconduct are reported. Sexual misconduct is defined as “sexual behavior, contact, or relationships between correctional staff and inmates/offenders” (p. 1). Sections cover: an introduction; legislative actions; litigation; agency strategies for addressing staff sexual misconduct such as policies, training, investigation processes, and apprising inmates of sexual misconduct issues; incidence and outcomes of sexual misconduct; respondents’ views on the problem; and concluding remarks. Overall, there has been considerable activity to address this problem.
Governs the transfer of Oregon Department of Corrections' youth to Oregon Youth Authority