1. Arizona Department of Corrections
Maximum Custody
Management
Charles L. Ryan, Director
ASCA Symposium for Correctional Administrators
September 26, 2015

2. Litigation History and Outcome
In Parsons v. Ryan, ADC was challenged by external sources on issues related to inmate health services, including medical, mental health, and dental care, and conditions of confinement.
The two-year class action litigation process reached a milestone in February 2015, when ADC entered into a Stipulation Agreement with the ACLU and Prison Law Office (PLO).
The terms of the Stipulation Agreement will be monitored for compliance over a four-year period through a combination of site visits by the plaintiffs and ongoing ADC monitoring of 121 measures.

3. Re-Examining Maximum Custody
Housing 2,834 maximum custody inmates as of September 17, or 6.6% of the total inmate population of 42,734
Placed there for administrative/disciplinary segregation, condemned row, security threat group, and new lifers
Needed to ensure that we had the appropriate inmates in maximum custody
Determined a need to have different levels of restrictions within maximum custody and a process to track their progress

4. ASPC-Lewis Rast Unit

5. Max Custody Placement Types
Most Restrictive –Inmates who pose the highest security risk and require more control, such as enhanced management, STG, condemned row, and intake (restraints are always used)
Intermediate Restriction –Inmates who have shown a willingness to program and comply with rules, such as Protective Custody, sex offenders, general population (both male and female), SMIs, and Behavioral Management Unit (restraints are used when necessary)
Least Restrictive – Inmates who have consistently shown pro-social behaviors, such as high functioning mental health, general population, and close custody overrides (no restraints are used)

6. The Placement Process
Maximum Custody Placement Instrument - Web Application that assists in placing inmates at the appropriate unit according to internal risk
Risk assessment is based on the following:
Disciplinary Violence level – a basic risk level from their classification review
Escape Risk
Release Group – 1-5 years, 5-10 years, 10 to life
Violation Score – A score based on severity of disciplinary in the last three years, with multiple disciplinary violations being rated cumulatively

7. The Placement Process (cont.)
Once the thorough review is complete, the committee meets daily to review the collected information
The committee consists of:
Administrator (DW or ADW)
Programming COIV
Correctional Officer
Mental Health Clinician
A determination is made by the committee on where to best place the inmate based on security risk and programming needs

8. Max Custody Program Elements
Team approach involving line staff, security management, case management, and mental health clinicians
Treatment team meetings weekly and discusses step progression
Cognitive-behavioral program materials are used for in-cell and out-of-cell programming
Other available incentives – work based programming, group meals, loaner TV and radios, increase in store purchases, additional phone calls, increase in library privileges, and group religious services

9. Out of Cell Time (Minimum) per Parsons v. Ryan Stipulation Agreement
Maximum Custody (per week)
Step 1 – 7.5 hours
Step 2 – 8.5 hours
Step 3 – 9.5 hours
SMI Population – 21 hours (per week), which includes:
10 hours of unstructured out of cell activities
2 hours of mental health groups

10. Step Program Complex/Unit Step 1 Sept. 2015 Step 2 Sept. 2015
Eyman, Browning
431 39
319
Eyman, SMU I
341
141
348
Florence, Central Unit Max GP 85 74
108
Central Unit, Close GP 44 84
278
Central Unit, Close MH 13 26 63
Central Unit, SMI 24 8 23
Central Unit, RSHP 22 17
Lewis, Rast Unit
167
101
199
Perryville, Lumley Unit 49 27 28
Phoenix, Alhambra 12 11 7
Total
1,188
537
1,390
Total Inmates in the Step Program: 3,118 as of September 17, 2015

11. Max Custody Recreation
Step I – Central Unit
Step II – SMU-1
Step III – Central Unit

12. Work Incentive Pay Program
Complex/Unit
Number Inmates Assigned
Eyman, Browning 87
Eyman, SMU I
126
Florence, Central Unit Max GP 24
Central Unit, Close GP
247
Central Unit, Close MH 56
Central Unit, SMI 11
Central Unit, RSHP
N/A
Lewis, Rast Unit 60
Perryville, Lumley Unit 30
Phoenix, Alhambra 8
Total
649
As of September 17, 2015; includes: porters, painters, landscape workers, maintenance, teacher aides, kitchen workers

13. Max Custody Housing Unit Porters
SMU I Step I & II
Browning Step I & II

14. Max Custody Kitchen Workers
Step II & III ,Central Unit
Step II & III, SMU I

15. Out of Cell Programs – Steps II & III
Complex/Unit
Group - # Assigned
Education # Assigned
Group – SMI # Assigned
Eyman, Browning
293 6 49
Eyman, SMU I
325 7 72
Florence, Central Unit Max GP
175 1
N/A
Central Unit, Close GP 12 44
Central Unit, Close MH 10 82
Central Unit, MH / SMI 32
Central Unit, RSHP
Lewis, Rast Unit
300 76
Perryville, Lumley Unit 47 56
Phoenix, Alhambra 29 18
Total
1,225 80
425
Step I inmates start program participation in cell
Total: 1,730 inmates, as of September 17, 2015; inmates may participate in more than one out of cell program (example: group and education)
Out of Cell Groups include: Responsible Thinking, Social Values, Substance Abuse, Feelings, Core Skills, Self-Control, Socialization, and Re-Entry

16. Program Restraint Progression
Step II – Restraint Chairs
Step II – Restraint Tables
Step III – Open Tables

17. Mental Health Programs
May 2012, initiated a behavioral health (axis II) program in cell block 1 and a mental health (axis I) program in Kasson, Wing 1
Inmates again screened from Browning, SMU 1, and Central Unit based on select criteria
Reviewed peer journal research regarding elements of successful mental health programming and implemented it
Staff selected to work in areas was based on their interest, patience, experience, and communication skills

18. Max Custody Mental Health
Before – Mental Health Group Therapy
After – Step III Mental Health Class

19. Browning Unit – Max Custody Mental Health Recreation Area
Step I
Step II
Step III

20. Restrictive Status Housing Program
Inmates are placed into the program if they commit one of the Forbidden Three acts of violence:
Assault on staff which results in injury
Assault on another inmate with a weapon which results in injury
Multiple inmates assaulting another inmate that results in injury
Strict, rigid, regimented environment that emphasizes safety and security and pro-social behavior
Inmates participate in programming designed to restructure their values and thinking process
Groups include: Substance Abuse Treatment, Social Values, Self-Control, Foundations of Character, Thinking for a Change, and Personality Restructuring

21. Restrictive Status Housing Program (cont’d)
120 day minimum three step program with incentives
Step I – 30 days Step II – 60 days Step III – 30 days
Began March 2014 with 30 inmates, all in Step I
As of September 17, 2015, a total of 65 inmates assigned
Step I – Step II – 21 Step III – 24
To date, 208 inmates have been assigned to RSHP
133 have graduated
6 have re-committed a violent act (one of which involved a weapon)
10 were removed for either refusal to participate or committee determined they did not meet criteria to be assigned