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

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.

Re-Examining Maximum Custody Housing 2,834 maximum custody inmates as of September 17, 2015 - 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

ASPC-Lewis Rast Unit

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)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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 – 20 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