Synopsis of National Institute of Corrections Technical Assistance Report No. 97-P1097
Review and Evaluation of The Intensive Management Unit (IMU)
Oregon State Penitentiary, Oregon Department of Corrections
| Submitted To: |
Mr. David S. Cook, Director, Oregon Department of Corrections |
|
Ms. Kim C. Rendelson, Technical Assistance Manager |
|
Prisons Division, National Institute of Corrections |
|
|
| Submitted By: |
James Aiken & Larry Kincheloe, Technical Assistance Providers |
| Date: |
July 27, 1997 |
|
|
|
|
Introduction and Scope
The undersigned were requested by staff of the Oregon Department of Corrections to provide technical assistance relative to the Intensive Management Unit IMU of the Oregon State Penitentiary (OSP), Salem, Oregon. Department administrators requested an evaluation of the overall operation of this unit with emphasis on perceived problems and current issues. Based upon discussions between the department and the undersigned team, the goal of the project was determined to be the following:
By the conclusion of November, 1997, the Oregon State Penitentiary will review the management and operations of the Intensive Management Unit to ensure full compliance with all applicable statutes, policies and procedures, to enhance the safety of staff and inmates and increase the efficiency of the program.
During early conversations and meetings between department administrators and the undersigned, a work plan and objectives were developed to meet the project goal. Ms. Joan Palmateer, Security Chief, Institution Security and Operations, Institutions Division was assigned as coordinator for the project on behalf of the Director of Corrections.
The project objectives included:
Review Department and Institution Policy relating to the management and operations of the Intensive Management Unit at Oregon State Penitentiary.
Review relevant manuals, work guides, training documents and other related documents for consistency with policy.
Observe IMU operations to ensure consistency with policy and procedures.
Identify polices relating to IMU staff selection, assignments, training, overtime, supervision and discipline and compare to current practice.
Audit the inmate classification procedures with the IMU for consistency with policy and procedures.
Audit the conditions of confinement for consistency with policy, practice and judicial oversight criteria.
Conduct a risk assessment of the unit using established correctional indicators.
Observe and document safety equipment and technology issues relative to the safe and secure operations of the unit.
The project work plan consisted of four (4) major phases:
Preparation
On-site Activities
Findings and Recommendations
Implementation Review
Phase I Preparation
During the preparation period discussions were held with department administrators regarding the intent, current operations and areas of special concern. Resources were provided which enabled the undersigned team to review both control and guiding documentation. The team constructed an initial plan of action and schedule to guide on-site activities.
A literature resource review included written policies, procedures, manuals, work guides, audit records, training standards, content and accomplishments, pertinent memoranda and current post orders.
Phase II - On-Site Activities
On July 9,1997, this team met with Ms. Joan Palmateer, Security Chief, to review the Scope of Work, work plan and schedules. The group identified priorities and enlarged the scope based upon preparation research by all concerned. During the meeting, the following information was presented by Ms. Palmateer and appropriate arrangements concluded:
Director Cook´s authorization for full access to the IMU unit, policies, records and operations.
The Director´s assurance of the interest and full cooperation of his staff to ensure maximum productivity was achieved within the project on-site time frames
The Institution´s welcome and desire to assist with and benefit from the project.
The establishment of work space within the institution for meetings, interview and general project use.
A full tour of the IMU at our earliest convenience.
Upon completion of the preliminary meeting this team met with Director Cook and his staff. All present agreed on the importance of the IMU to the safe operation of the institution and the department, their desire to manage the unit in the most efficient and effective manner possible, and the commitment to the safety of all concerned.
A further meeting was held with Superintendent S. F. Thompson of the Oregon State Penitentiary. He shared his commitment to the project and provided us with an overview of the unit in a historical perspective as well as his philosophy of operations.
Within the on-site time frame the project team accomplished the following:
Conducted in depth discussions with OSP Administrators and managers regarding the goals and operation of the IMU, and the purpose of the on-site technical assistance.
Conducted in depth discussions and policy review with the Security Management Staff pertaining the daily operation of the IMU, impact on and by the other institution operations and issues of special concern.
Conducted in depth discussions and records review with Program and Treatment Staff assigned to the IMU.
Conducted on-site evaluations of policy, procedures and operations on an around-the-clock-basis in the following areas:
~ 1st Shift Operations - programs, security, transportation, shift change, food service, medical, visiting, maintenance and management practices;
~ 2nd Shift Operations - security, shift change, food service, medical procedures and management practices;
~ 3rd Shift Operations - security, shift change, food service, medical procedures and management practices;
~ Conducted interviews and discussions with custody, program and medical at both line and supervisory levels;
~ Audited the management of tools and keys;
~ Observed available recreation program and facilities;
~ Observed use of safety equipment;
~ Conducted an assessment of risk factors and preventive measures; and
~ Observed and discussed the overall tone and climate of the unit.
The following is a partial list of staff interviewed during the On-Site portion of Phase II:
Mr. David Cook, Director
Mr. Benjamin deHaan Deputy Director
Mr. Al Chandler, Assistant Director, Institutions
Mrs. Les S. Dolecal, Inspector General
Ms. Joan Palmateer, Chief, Security and Operations
Mr. Jim Lockwood, Assistant Director, Public Relations
Ms. Perrin Damon, Communications Manager
Mr. Frank Thompson, Superintendent, Oregon State Penitentiary
Mr. Mitch Morrow, Assistant Superintendent, Security, OSP
Mr. John Grill, Assistant Superintendent, Programs, OSP
Mr. Victor Gangitano, Jr., Correctional Captain
Mr. Dave Heppner, Correctional Captain
Mr. Craig Mitchell, Psychological Associate
Ms. Carla Topou, Correctional Officer
Various Line staff et random - 1st Shift, IMU
Various Line Staff at random - 2nd Shift, IMU
Various Line Staff at random 3rd Shift, IMU
Phase III - Findings and Recommendations
The following are findings and recommendations noted during both Phase I and Phase II of the project. They are based upon the team´s research, observations and knowledge of current correctional management practices. They recognize that the IMU houses the most dangerous, aggressive, violent criminal population in the state of Oregon. This population presents a continuous risk of harm to the safety and well being of the community, correctional staff and other inmates.
Findings:
1. The Oregon State Penitentiary, Intensive Management Unit is fulfilling its mission. Existing policies and procedures are designed, implemented and monitored to comply with statues, court requirements and sound correctional practice.
The IMU is being operated in compliance with department policies and in a safe, humane and secure manner.
3. The "observed" behavior, practices and general demeanor of staff reflect respect for the mission of the unit, sound correctional practices and fair treatment of the inmate population.
4. The Oregon Department of Corrections does not condone, nor tolerate unprofessional practices of staff. Rather, the Agency appears to aggressively address incidents that indicate noncompliance with laws and court mandates, policies or sound correctional practice.
5. The Department is utilizing this management program and designated facilities in a judicious, conservative manner with due regard for the safety and well being of both staff and inmates. Of a total department population of 7,693 inmates, an average of only 2% require this level of programming. Additionally, the IMU currently has forty-nine (49) vacant bed spaces. Both the occupancy and vacancy numbers reflect balanced management practices.
The inmate population is properly managed and secured. Staff and inmate safety have priority in both written policy and daily practice.
7. The classification system, relative to this IMU, is being operated in agreement with policy. Inmate records indicate placement, programs and release according to established criteria. Treatment staff follow established schedules and provide required documentation. Their interaction with inmates appears both professional, concerned and competent.
8. There is a chain of command in place to supervise, train and discipline staff. Documentation is available and, for the most part, procedures are followed.
9. The group education program is of excellent design and the manner in which it is carried out is outstanding. Staff convey a professional sense of mission which is acknowledged by participating inmates.
10. The design and intent of other programs offered to these high security inmates is considered outstanding. If implemented, the program will be a model for other similar units.
The planned Use of Force policy is followed and the number of incidents of usage held to a minimum. Three (3) uses in the past two (2) years is an exceptionally low figure and reflects both staff´s ability to manage in a prevention mode and the inmates acknowledgment that staff are in control.
12. Use of the video tape in recording cell extractions is sound practice in corrections today. Review of these by the team indicate well planned and managed events.
13. The facility appears well maintained and clean and is a sign of cooperation between staff end inmates.
Recommendations:
1. The IMU is fulfilling its mission, yet is experiencing some difficulties relating to a past incident. Staff and management need to recognize and validate the process of damage control and subsequent healing. This process is aided by the judicious disclosure of as much information as possible, a means to discuss personnel feelings about the incident, and a series of steps to create a "new" normal environment. Mental health clinicians are generally knowledgeable about this process, but the institution should seek some form of advice or assistance from outside community health services.
In the meantime, supervisors and mangers can have a positive influence by acknowledging the existence of differing perspectives of the incident and its aftermath, and moving quickly on to highlight positive changes in policy/ practice that resulted ( if applicable), and other positive, team building issues/ events.
Administrators set the tone within an institution. A greater and more routine presence in the IMU to personally observe the operations and communicate with staff would benefit all concerned.
Staff working in specialized units develop a feeling of separation from the more normal environment of general population programming. Generally, their contact and support from mid and upper managers comes second or third hand and lacks that spontaneity enjoyed by the rest of the facility. Including this area in the normal "management by walking around" activities would give the opportunity to staff at all levels to listen and share factual
information, and will help ensure that the vision, mission and objectives are clearly understood and reinforced.
3. The importance of IMU management staff cannot be over emphasized. While current staff appear well versed in OSP operations, exposure to a broader perspective would be beneficial. Arranging for unit managers, both custody, and treatment, to visit other similar operations in other areas, or states, would enhance their abilities to plan and carry out both current and future policies.
4. Training is essential to both operations and morale. Specialized training for IMU staff should be pursued and expanded. Sources include the National Institute of Corrections, various professional groups, other states´ correctional systems and others involved in related fields. An important aspect of this, considering current budget constraints, is that there be a formalized in-service, IMU training program. All those attending outside, related training must be required to present the material and lessons learned to all unit staff. This will increase team development, knowledge and sense of progress.
5. Training subject should also address related fields, including mental health, case work issues, identifying and managing gangs? etc.. A well rounded program will benefit staff and inmates alike.
6. A unit of this importance should be audited on a regular basis with the results used for ever improving management practices. There are various models available as samples. Unit mangers, supervisors and staff can use any of these and/or create one specific to their needs. The self-audit process provides a history of the unit´s compliance with relevant controls, provides excellent training for staff at all levels, and aids in developing a team approach to unit management. The project team will provide some examples.
The use of overtime by staff should be examined. While staff may not feel it excessive at this time, there is some disparity among them. Records indicate senior staff filling an abundance of overtime positions while junior staff doing very little. Whether by seniority or other method, all will benefit by having and using a well designed, fair and equitable system.
8. The planned Use of Force, while used very little here, deserves ongoing, close attention. Great care should be used to ensure consistency of procedures is taught and practiced in every instance, from academy through actual use.
9. In reviewing unit incident reports, the team found a relatively low number of cell extraction situations. An example would be the need to retrieve food trays.
10. While IMU staff understand the policy prohibiting corporal punishment, it still comes up in some discussions. The policy should be reinforced on a regular basis up to and including legal constraints that are involved. An active, no tolerance of that practice must be the rule.
11. Staff assignment to the IMU unit should be a privilege and recognition of exceptional skills and ability. The selection process should be formalized and include a means of assessment or other ways in which to document prior experience, work record, communication skills and initiative.
The department has recognized the value and need for a balanced workforce in the IMU. This includes age, nationality, gender, and ethnicity. Care should be taken to ensure the equal distribution of assignment, training and development experiences.
The duration of staff assignments within the IMU should be formalized and applied equally. Most IMUs nationally set a two (2) year time limit. While managers appreciate staff who stay in one position and become experts, it is unfair to the development of their correctional career and general well being of the unit. By contrast, the equal application of the rotation policy, combined with full exposure to all possible jobs in the unit will enhance staff´s skills and unit moral.
13. Staff being rotated out of IMU in the normal rotation process should be integrated back into general population duties with care and respect. Initial placement into jobs that utilize their communication and observation skills, for example, will signify to them and other that they have done a good job for the institution and fellow staff.
Because this process has not been the norm, the transition must be accomplished over a period of time. Whether seniority or time in the unit system is used, it should be absolutely clear to all that this is the "normal" process and everyone will be included.
14. Attention should be directed to the vacation scheduling process. It appears there is some disparity between junior line staff working general population units versus those same seniority staff working IMU. Whether the institution decides to keep the present system or develop another, the process should be formalized, known to all and followed.
15. The unit, while clean, gives the appearance of being dark and closed in. Existing lighting of the cell housing areas should be evaluated to enhance the visibility of inmate population (safety) and the effects on staff and inmates of a brighter environment.
16. Coupled with increased lighting, consideration should be given to the color of the interior walls. Again, this would enhance the safety of everyone and brighten the atmosphere.
17. The open fronted cells pose a concern for the safety of staff and other inmates. Current correctional practice dictates some form of barrier to prevent the introduction of contraband into cells and protection for those on the outside. Understanding budget constraints, the used of lexon may be sufficient for the short term.
18. A comprehensive evaluation of the unit design should be conducted to ensure that the unit, as designed, has met, and will continue to meet the special needs of the inmates housed within. Any problems should be resolved at this time and communicated to the newly constructed Snake River IMU for review and consideration. Likewise, OSP staff should carefully review Snake River design for potentially beneficial retro-fitting.
Conclusion
The information and perceptions developed by the project team were communicated to Director Cook in a meeting at the conclusion of the on-site visit. Director Cook has requested an implementation review by this team within 120 days of the receipt of this report. The purpose will be to review, observe and evaluate the implementation of recommendations addressed in this project.
Based upon the activities conducted in Phase I, II and III of this project, we the undersigned, conclude that the policies and practices of the Intensive Management Unit (IMU) located at the Oregon State Penitentiary are conducted in a safe and secure fashion for the community, staff and inmates.
Incidents or events which may have occurred appear to be of an isolated nature and do not reflect the standards and expectations of the facility management. There is no indication that the reported events of undesired staff practices at the IMU could be attributed to the failure of the present administration, it´s monitoring, policies or supervision.
The Oregon Department of Corrections has demonstrated leadership in taking steps to ensure the management of this very dangerous criminal population is well within constraints of law, policy, court mandates and sound correctional practice.
/s/James E. Aiken /s/Larry R. Kincheloe
Date 8/8/97 Date 8/8/97
last revision 2-28-2000 peg cook
|
