SEGREGATION
Perils
&
Possibilities
How the Hampden County Sheriff’s Department
transformed it’s Segregation Unit
1
Boston Globe
December 10, 2007
“Rodriquez was a man-child with a hard-wired inability
to learn at the mercy of a system where punishment and
more punishment is often the only real response to
inmates with little or no ability to control their behavior.”
“He is someone who definitely should not have been put
in isolation because of his condition. There’s no question
about that. Putting mentally ill inmates in segregation
and then closing the solid door to their cell is like asking
them to commit suicide.”
“This was a deeply troubled young man presenting with a
very complex set of circumstances in a very noncomplex
system.”
Commentary on the suicide of DOC and former
Hampden County Inmate Nelson Rodriguez.
2
Segregation Committee
In January of 2008, Sheriff Michael J. Ashe, Jr.
charged his Staff to form a committee to examine
the assignment of inmates to the correctional
center’s segregation unit. The Sheriff was
particularly concerned with the overuse of
segregation to manage inmates and the deleterious
effects that isolation and “over incarceration” had,
essentially turning out some inmate’s more
debilitated than when they went in, spreading
negativity and disruption throughout the larger
institution. The committee found that although
segregation was a proper response to the placement
of dangerous inmates, there were too many
occasions when segregation was being used not as
a last resort to deal with rule violators, but as a far
too common one.
3
Historical Perspective
York Street Jail (closed in 1992)
Safety risks were managed within general population
with only 2 cells designed for segregation
Growing focus on programming throughout the
institution to drive behavior change and to replace the
pure incapacitation model with a “carrot and sticks”
approach.
Re-Entry infrastructure established (Minimum
Security, Work Release, Day Reporting Center and
Aftercare).
Active, heightened supervision approach (Unit
Management/Direct Supervision) supplants
containment model.
4
Segregation Transformation
“Jail Within the Jail”
Hampden County Sheriff’s Department and
Correctional Center (Opened in 1992)
 Segregation capacity increases to 64 cells
 Avg. segregation count, to include both disciplinary
detentions and protective custody, climbs to 80 due
to the rise of gang culture, growing enemy threats,
increasingly violent behavior and an influx of the deinstitutionalized mentally ill
 Longer detention spans in segregation
 Incapacitation is primary focus
 Safety/Security preempt programming
 Contradicts Re-Entry model
 Throwback to “penitentiary/ warehouse” type system
5
The Problem
Segregation as Dumping Ground
 Provides a sort of instantaneous, “out sight out
of mind” banishment option for Staff to rid
themselves of difficult and frustrating inmates.
Segregation as Sanctuary
 Inmates who use segregation to escape the
stress of general housing and are willing to
give up freedom for structure, routine and
external control.
Segregation as Default
 Inmates who use segregation for self
protection.
6
The Problem (continued)
Segregation as Reinforcer of Victim Complex
 Using only punishment deepens the defense
mechanisms used by addicts and criminals to
blame others for the negative consequences of
their behavior.
Segregation as Slide
 Segregation’s isolating environment may actually
worsen the mental health of some inmates despite
the best forensic outreach. With worsening mental
health comes worsening behavioral problems in
segregation, throughout the institution and
eventually in the community. Deteriorated mental
health of segregation inmates results in
deteriorated safety, security and order throughout
the institution when they leave segregation.
7
The Results






Dangerous overcrowding
Constant crisis
Grievance glut
Pathology proliferation
Declining sanitary conditions
Undermines innovative discipline by
general housing & satellite unit Staff
 Stressful environment
 Revolving door
 Contradicts positive, productive
philosophy of Department
8
Segregation’s Purpose
•To ensure institution wide safety, security &
order by removing disorderly, dangerous
and self- threatening inmates from
population.
•To establish a deterrence to rule violating
behavior.
•To provide a safe environment for unstable
or vulnerable inmates.
•To furnish opportunities for inmates to
correct their behavior (what we weren’t
doing).
9
Philosophy & Practice
We seek to parallel and mirror the larger
institution’s philosophy and practice by:
diverting lower security unit and general
population inmates away from segregation
much the same as people are diverted away
from jail to the community, and by
re-entering inmates from segregation to
the general population pods and satellite
facilities much the same as we re-enter
inmates from our departmental custody to
the larger community.
10
Goals
 Reduce population through intermediate




sanctions in living units, early graduation from
segregation for good behavior and retention in
step down units after segregation.
Redesign segregation to compliment
incapacitation and punishment with a regimen
of accountability and opportunity to correct
inmate behavior.
Intervene to confront pathology, motivate selfawareness and spur transformation in
behavior.
Safely and gradually accord higher levels of
self-control and responsibility
Improve physical condition and climate to
facilitate behavioral change.
11
Corrective Action Plan
Concerted
Intervention
Identifying
unacceptable
behavior
Contract for
change
Written plan
Setting the Stage
Plan Elements
 Diversion –Progressive/proportional discipline in unit,
maximum detention period in general population increased to
15 days (intermediate sanction); early out provision for positive
behavior in segregation and other corrective action units (i.e.,
Davis 5 and B6)
 Corrective Action Plan Formulation - Coordination between
sending Unit Staff and Segregation Staff
 Documentation – Memorialized in TRAX
 Implementation – Orientation of inmate to plan expectations,
rewards and consequences
 Compliance Monitoring – Daily measurement of progress and
weekly Treatment Meeting
 Classification – Classification eligibility for segregation
completers is determined at the Primary Captain Meeting.
Classification eligibility for Special Management inmates who
complete segregation determined by the Weekly Central
Classification Mtg.
 Step Down – Corrective Action Plan continues in step down
unit
13
Treatment
Meeting
“Finding the best approach ”
Line, Supervisory and
Administrative Staff of the
Segregation Unit and Program
Staff meet weekly to review
every segregation inmate to:
• Assess psycho-social needs
•Determine mental health
stability
•Ascertain ability to participate
in group settings
•Identify safety issues (i.e.,
assaultive, enemies, etc.)
•Assign programming
•Provide guidance for
individualized behavior
management
Primary Capt. Meeting
The Primary Captains of each
housing tower meet weekly to
review every segregation inmate
for:
•Compliance with rules
•Stability (mental health)
•Type of program participation
•Awareness of wrongdoing, &
•Commitment to change
to determine the appropriateness of
moving inmates back to general
population.
Connecting the
dots by
connecting the
players
“Moving the freight”
Corrective Action Plan Flow
Disciplinary
Incident
Location
Lower
Security
General
Population
Corrective
Action
Plan
Classification
Review
Accountability
Pod
Accountability
Pod Review
Segregation
Unit
(serious
incidents)
Central
Classification
Board Review
of SMAD/SRG
Segregation
Unit
*********
Pre-Approved
Corrective
Action Plans for
dangerous
violations
****************
SMAD/SRG
move requests
Segregation
Unit Review
Central
Classification
Board Review
of SMAD/SRG
Step Down Reclassification
General
Population or
Lower
Security Readmission
Plan
Accountability
Pod
General
Population
or Lower
Security
Accountability
Pod
(sentenced)
or
Responsibility
Pod
(pretrial)
General
Population
Segregation Orientation
Rules
Expectations
Consequences
Rewards
Direction
Encouragement
First Things First
Making the Grade







Tracking
Monitoring
Evaluating
Communicating
Managing
Reinforcing
Motivating
..\EXCEL\abc.xls
Attitude Behavior Change Discipline
 All inmates sent to segregation start at a
median or C grade level.
 Behavior is monitored and reported by all
three shifts and dictates whether an inmate
moves up or down on the grade level system.
 The grade level system is posted on the Pod
Workstation to make the system user friendly
for Officers.
 At the end of the shift the Officer evaluates the
behavior of each inmate by using a “P” for
positive behavior and “N“ to indicate negative
behavior. If a negative mark is given, a drop
down selection is provided to describe the
inmate’s below average behavior.
19
 The information is used by Unit & Treatment
Staff to address and redirect the inmate’s
behavior.
 Behavior such as cleanliness of cell and
compliance with both Staff directives and daily
duties is addressed by Counseling and Security
Staff.
 Performance is reviewed with the inmate to
reinforce good behavior and to deter negative
behavior.
20
 Inmates who earn an above average
grade level (B) for each week participate
in a graduated system of privileges that
provide an incentive for good behavior.
 The lowest grade level of a D is an
indication that the inmate’s behavior is
below average and needs improvement.
 Progress is discussed at the weekly
Treatment Meeting and Primary Captain
Meeting and will determine a plan to
transition the inmate back into general
population.
21
Supervision
The Re-entry coach is always asking the
question of those not on the practice field:
“Why isn’t this person moving
forward and what new strategies
can we employ to get them headed
safely in the right direction”?
22
Coaching
Observing
Intervening
Correcting
Supporting
Modeling
Teaching
“Firm, Fair and Decent”
Program Mission
To help inmates develop the self-discipline
and stability required to function and be
positive in general population
24
Program Goal
To encourage greater mental and physical
activity in segregation to prepare inmates
for programs in general population.
25
Eligibility for Segregation
Programs
 Inmates who are fully detoxified and
mentally stable.
 Inmates who are willing and able to
attend.
 Inmates without safety or security
issues and who demonstrate good
behavior.
 Inmates referred by the Treatment
Committee based on need and security
risk assessment.
26
Wellness Program
 Orientation Packet: Information on expectations,
privileges and consequences.
 Portable Equipment: Medicine ball for in-cell con-
ditioning & walkman. Eligible after 1 week with B
avg.
 Exercise Activity Area: 1 cell each in both
segregation units with furniture removed;
outfitted with aerobic fitness equipment and wall
mounted instruction posters.Eligible after 1 week
with B avg.
27
Exercise
to exorcise
 Reinforces good
behavior
 Dissipates anger
 Relieves anxiety
 Stabilizes mental
health
 Improves
physical health
and mental
clarity
 Aids learning
 Builds self discipline
Wellness Program (continued)
 Inmates who successfully complete Command
Inspection on Fridays and have maintained a B
average for the week are escorted to the
Multipurpose Building.
 Use of vents for additional external auditory
stimulation.
29
T for
Testing
Conditioning
Acclimatizing
Challenging
Practicing
Leading
An Opening
To Purpose
Rewarding
Meaningful
Re-orienting
Shifting
Transforming
Mental Health


Open enrollment program
Facilitated by Forensic Clinician and
Counselor
 Interactive with less use of videos & more
direct inmate participation
 Continuation of treatment after completion of
segregation
Topics
Introduction
Family Issues
Basic Disorders
Coping Skills
Treatment Process
Group Support
Progression of Disorders &
Treatment
32
Substance Abuse Education
A Chance for Change


Open enrollment.
Facilitated by SAU Staff
Topics
Uppers, Downers
and All Arounders
The High Cost of Low
Living
Roots of Addiction
What Else Is Going On?
From
Experimentation to
Compulsion
Doesn’t Everyone?
A Matter of Balance
Driving the Inner-State,
Making Personal Changes
34
Education
 Eligibility: Inmates without a high school
diploma.
 Facilitated by Education Staff
Services
 Assessment of academic levels and learning
needs/goals
 Twice monthly education outreach
 Individual education plans
 Provision of materials and instruction
 Homework
 Education reintegration opportunities
35
Employment & Vocational

Twice monthly outreach

Facilitated by Vocational Education Staff

Participants will develop skills based on Five
Principles of Self-Sufficiency, to include:
1.
Urgency - time to become self-sufficient is
now
2.
Ownership – self sufficiency thru planning
3.
Learning By Doing – emphasis on action
4.
Lifelong Learning – ability & willingness to
learn
5.
Motivation – building confidence
36
Earning self control
Individualized
Interactive
Confronts:
criminal thinking
& denial
Educates around
mental, emotional & addictive
disorders
by Learning impulse control
Central
Classification
Determining release from segregation
of Special Management inmates (i.e.,
high profile, chronic disciplinary, gang
leadership, dangerous incidents)
 Reviewing
 Checking
 Balancing
 Assessing
threat/danger
 Intelligence
sharing
 Risk management planning
 Consensus
decision
making
Segregation is
Still……
Segregation
Restricted to cell 22-
23 hours per day
Deterrent effect still
strong
Reducing population
reduces danger
No longer a “dumping
ground”
“Seg” time is now
demanding, challenging
and accountable
In line with institutional
philosophy
Benefits to Staff
By lessening pathology in the
segregation unit, less
pathology will spread from that
unit throughout the institution.
Dangerous incidents will in
fact be reduced on the
segregation unit and
throughout the institution. The
climate of segregation and the
entire institution will be safer.
40
Preliminary Results
 Count in segregation drops considerably
 Major disciplinary incidents down in general
population
 Briefer, more productive stays in segregation
 Sanitary conditions and climate improved,
contributing to safety, security and order
 Better retention of inmates in general housing
and satellite units after they complete
segregation
41
Segregation Count
90
80
70
 Count in C1/C2
drops 77% from an
historic average of
80 to a low of 19 on
3/6/09.
80
60
50
40
30
C1 C2 Pop.doc
20
10
18
0
Historic
Average
6-Mar-09
From 11/1/08
to 1/20/09
160
140
120
100
149
Recidivism:
7.4%
Ave Stay:
9.6 days
80
60
40
20
0
at
ec
id
iv
R
In
/O
ut
of
Se
g
ed
11
Multiplier
Effect
Jan-June 08
300
250
•Fights
•Gang Activity
•Threats Staff
•Disturbances
•Interfering
July-Dec 08
Violations in Main Institution
234
200
150
129
173 163
141
-45%
-42%
-46%
-6%
-22%
249
193
82
100
28
50
15
0
Fighting
Gang Acts
Threats Staff
Create Dist
Intefering
Conclusion
The results clearly speak for themselves and the
indisputable success of the new approach.
Using segregation as a prudent housing option
rather than a dumping ground has given more
power to control inmate behavior to the Staff in
the general housing units, leading to better
compliance and respect. Cutting the population
has improved the climate and reduced the
dangers of overcrowding in segregation. Finally,
intervention programs in segregation directly
confront pathology while behavioral modification
techniques enhance rules compliance, a carrot
and stick approach that reinforces safety and
leads to greater self-control among inmates.
45