Update on PREA since August 16, 2014 PREA Committee Meeting in Salt Lake City, UT

 February 11, 2014 the US Department of Justice sent the Governor’s letters informing the Governors that they had two options; to sign and return the PREA Standards Certification Form or the PREA Standards Assurance Form by the due date of May 15, 2014.

As of the May 15, 2014, deadline for states and territories to submit certifications or assurances the DOJ reported that; States that certified full compliance (2)  New Hampshire  New Jersey States and territories that submitted an assurance (46 states) *The governors of Missouri and the U.S. Virgin Islands have indicated on their respective PREA Assurance forms that their juvenile facilities are in full compliance with the National PREA Standards.

 States and the territory subject to a five percent reduction in certain department grant funding after declining provide an affirmation or certification of compliance (8)   Arizona   Florida**   Idaho   Indiana   Nebraska   Northern Marianas Islands**   Texas   Utah **States and territories that not have yet provided sufficient information from the governor to indicate whether or not they will affirm or certify compliance

 44 Departments responded to the Survey  28 PREA Audits had been completed as of August 16, 2014  93 Audits are scheduled to be completed as of September 30, 2014  Follow-up Survey went out 09/02/14 -  23 Departments responded  61 Audits completed – 48 more scheduled by December 31, 2014

 Need for ASCA PREA Committee to solicit samples of State’s successful RFP PREA Audit Models  BJA/DOJ Reported that 218 State DOC employees have been trained in the PREA Audit Process (152 have been certified)

 Cross Gender Announcement  ACA PREA Panel – Salt Lake City  Discussion similar to ASCA PREA conversation  *Stressed that PREA Audit process provides a 30 day window to work with Auditor to bring facility/policy into compliance before declared in Corrective Action period  PREA Prepared – Not PREA Perfect

 Director Harold Clark, Virginia Department of Corrections  Assurance State – share experiences with successful audit process  Director Brent Reinke, Idaho Department of Correction  Declined Affirmation State – Experience with Idaho PREA State Standards & PRC Coming to Idaho for Technical Assistance

 From the PREA Resource Center

 In adult prisons and jails, and in juvenile facilities with discrete housing units, “staff of the opposite gender” are required to “announce their presence when entering an inmate housing unit.” This is sometimes referred to as the “cover-up rule” and is intended to put inmates on notice when opposite-gender staff may be viewing them. The announcement is required any time an opposite-gender staff enters a housing unit; however, the Department has determined that the purpose of the Standard may be fully realized by requiring the announcement only when an opposite-gender staff enters a housing unit where there is not already another cross-gender staff present. Accordingly, the Department has determined that compliance with the Standard will be achieved when an announcement is made, as follows:

 When the status quo of the gender-supervision on a housing unit changes from exclusively same gender, to mixed- or cross-gender supervision, the opposite-gender staff is required to verbally announce their arrival on the unit. The announcement is required for both custody and non-custody staff, and may include, for example, a clinician or case worker who spends time on the unit, or senior staff making supervisory rounds.  Note, a distinct buzzer, bell, or other noisemaking device may be substituted for a verbal announcement, so long as: (1) the buzzer emits a distinctive sound that is noticeably different from other common noisemakers; (2) inmates are adequately educated on the meaning of the buzzer sound and understand its purpose; and (3) the buzzer is not also used for other events at the facility. If used, such buzzers should be used in the identical manner that verbal announcements as required by the above guidance (e.g., when opposite- gender staff enter a housing unit

 Operationally, three options are in current practice for searches of transgender or intersex inmates/residents/detainees: 1) searches conducted only by medical staff; 2) searches conducted by female staff only, especially given there is no prohibition on the pat- searches female staff can perform (except in juvenile facilities); and 3) asking inmates/residents/detainees to identify the gender of staff with whom they would feel most comfortable conducting the search.