Task Force Report on Administrative Segregation

J. Conditions of Confinement

(a) Introduction

Section 37 of the CCRA indicates that inmates in administrative segregation shall be given the same rights, privileges and conditions of confinement as the general inmate population, except for those rights, privileges and conditions that can only be enjoyed in association with other inmates or cannot reasonably be given owing to limitations specific to the administrative segregation area or security requirements. It seems clear that the two limitations outlined in the CCRA were not intended to unreasonably restrict the rights and privileges of or punish segregated inmates. They were intended to address legitimate security concerns.

The Task Force advocates that CSC take a more assertive stand in providing the same rights, privileges and conditions of confinement to segregated inmates as those given to the general inmate population.

It should be noted that access to spiritual support (including Aboriginal spiritual practices), recreational activities and health care services are part of ensuring safe and humane conditions of confinement, and must therefore be provided regardless of the statutory limitations outlined in section 37 of the CCRA. The operational reality, however, has been that inmates, their advocates or program staff have had to demonstrate why they should be provided the same rights, privileges and programs. The legal reality is that CSC has to demonstrate why they should not be provided.

(b) Survey of Segregated Inmates

In order to assess this requirement, inmates were asked the following question: "Compared to when you were in the general population, how much access have you had to the following services, when needed, while in segregation?" A list of 32 items followed, each with the option to respond "Less", "More", "Same", "Does not Apply" and a space for narrative comments.

The inmate questionnaire was distributed to all segregated inmates in late November and early December, 1996 and results were tabulated based on the 397 valid responses received by January 9, 1997. Of this number, 393 were from male offenders, including 88 Aboriginal offenders, and 4 were from women offenders.

Note: the percentages that are displayed indicate the proportion of respondents who indicated that they had the same or more access to these services while in segregation, compared to when they were in the general inmate population.

Visits by Staff / Spiritual and Health Care Support

• Access to CMO (25%)
• Access to psychological and psychiatric counselling (50%)
• Spiritual support (33%)
• Health care (65%)

As part of the segregation review process, inmates are generally seen at least once per month by their CMO and institutional psychologist, and daily by a health care professional.

Access in excess of these regular contacts normally occurs through an inmate request, which in many institutions would mean less ready access than in the general inmate population. Spiritual support while in segregation was of concern to a large proportion of the respondents, and is an issue that needs further attention. As inmates do not have access to religious services while in segregation, and chaplains in many institutions do not visit the segregation area regularly, spiritual support to segregated inmates is limited.

Visits and Correspondence

• Telephone calls (42%)
• Mail (77%)
• Open visits (28%)
• Closed visits (62%)
• Private Family Visits (excluding SHU inmates) (46%)

Due to limitations in the physical structure, staffing and security issues in many segregation units, access to telephone calls is limited to a set number of calls per month per inmate (excluding legal calls). Many institutions do not permit open visits or Private Family Visits (PFVs) for most inmates in segregation. Over the course of the past few months, institutions have moved to evaluating PFVs on a case-by-case basis or reserving the open visits area for groups of segregated inmates.

Access to Programs, Education and Recreational Activities

• Cell studies / Correspondence Courses (32%)
• Recreation Activities / Equipment (9%)
• Hobbycraft (11%)
• Library Services (32%)
• Television (77%)
• Radio / Sound System (66%)

This was the area where the greatest concerns were raised by the respondents. For the most part, books, TV and radio are the only distractions available to inmates for the 23 hours each day that they are in their cells. The variety of books available, and access to TV and radio (particularly when the segregated inmates do not have one in their personal effects) were also of concern. Very few institutions permit hobbycraft in segregation. At the time of the first on-site visits, very little recreation equipment was available to inmates in their one hour of exercise. The second on-site visits indicated that efforts had been made to offer recreation equipment (basketball hoops, weights, baseball gloves, etc.) and consideration was being given to some "passive" hobbies such as painting and drawing.

With respect to programming, cell studies is the most common activity, but depends on the anticipated length of stay of the inmate in segregation and whether or not the inmate is expected to transfer out of the institution. Although a few institutions have initiated some programs in segregation (Alcoholics Anonymous, Breaking Barriers, etc.), it is an area that still needs improvement.

Services /Cell Effects

• Food (48%)
• Clothing (62%
• Cigarettes (65%)
• Laundry Services (40%)
• Toiletry Items (70%
• Showers (56%)
• Canteen (44%)
• Barber/Hairstylist (38%)
• Bedding/Linen (71%)

One of the most common concerns across the country was food - the temperature of the food, the amount provided and the hours it was served. Access to canteen and cigarettes is an issue primarily because inmates in segregation receive a lower rate of pay than when they are working in the general inmate population. Although they may have the same access to the canteen and most of the same items, their purchasing power may be reduced as a result of their segregation.

Showers are subject to operational routine, so inmates do not have the opportunity to determine when, how often and how long they may shower. Similarly, laundry services in segregation are often limited to certain days of the week, or are provided by a unit cleaner, which in many institutions differs from the ready access to laundry machines in the general inmate population.

Access to Aboriginal Culture

• Visits by Native Elder (31%)
• Native Liaison (25%)
• Native Brotherhood (19%)
• Access to Cultural Ceremonies (14%)
• Access to ceremonial objects (medicine bundles, sweet grass, ceremonial pipes, sacred waters, cedar, rattles, sage and eagle feathers) (from 31% to 44%)

The majority of respondents indicated that they were not permitted to have their ceremonial objects in segregation, and where there was access, that staff did not show respect for these items. In addition, most institutions do not provide Aboriginal inmates in administrative segregation with access to cultural ceremonies such as sweat lodges. There was also indication that Elders are not visiting the segregation area on a regular basis.

This is an area of concern. The response to the inmate questionnaire in this area confirmed that there is a need to increase the level of access to Aboriginal cultural items and spirituality while in segregation.

Other Support Systems

• Inmate Welfare Committee (36%)
• Peer Support (29%)
• Grievance System (55%)

In general, the respondents felt that there was little support available to them while in segregation. The audit confirmed that in some institutions, there is little involvement by the Inmate Committee in segregation cases.

The main concerns communicated through the inmate survey were those relating to the day-to-day routine of the segregation unit and contacts with various parties. While some access has been limited due to operational and security requirements (i.e., telephone calls, showers, laundry, visits, etc.) in accordance with Section 37 of the CCRA, other areas were identified where improvements could be made to provide similar access as in the general inmate population. Of primary concern is hobbycraft and recreation equipment, programs and educational services, Aboriginal culture and spiritual support. The results of this survey and observations made by the audit teams have led the Task Force to conclude that the role of the Segregation Review Board must encompass the ongoing review of conditions of confinement, so as to ensure that they are in compliance with the law and that they respond to individual needs as defined in the segregated inmate’s reintegration and/or Correctional Plan.

(c) Recreation and Programming

The purpose of delivering programs in administrative segregation is to offset the debilitating impact of segregation; to assist inmates in reintegrating into less restrictive environments, when and where possible; and to prepare offenders for reintegration into the community when release into the institutional population is not possible.

The Task Force recommends that as soon as possible after the five-day review, the inmate’s Correctional Plan be amended to include a reintegration strategy for placement in a less restrictive population. The programs offered in segregation must be directed to achieving this new goal. The original goals of the Correctional Plan, to facilitate the reintegration of inmates into the community, must be reinstated if the timely return of an inmate into a less restrictive population is impossible.

The evaluation of programming options must entail an individual assessment of the level of association possible and an assessment of security risks. Clearly, the ability to associate with other inmates because of security concerns may vary greatly among segregated inmates. Therefore, programming options for segregated inmates should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Attention should be given to ensuring that generic programs are respectful of Aboriginal requirements.

When an offender is denied access to a program identified in the Correction Plan, the onus must rest on the institution to demonstrate and justify why the program cannot be provided. Segregation Review Boards should review program access on a case-by-case basis.

The Task Force acknowledges the constraints imposed by segregation on the delivery of core programs. Nevertheless, it believes that opportunities can be created for segregated inmates to address issues associated with the reasons for being segregated (e.g. anger management). There is an abundance of options to support individual cell studies, including individual access to educational tapes and/or videos (e.g. study related to achieving ABE or GED certification), and other types of correspondence courses. Consideration should also be given to the use of volunteer inmates and/or teachers to provide tutoring, when and where possible.

Accommodating various forms of programming may mean reconsidering the physical layout of the segregation unit to provide access to common rooms and/or individual rooms where possible.

The Task Force suggests that, as part of the review of program delivery in segregation, attention be given to the issue of inmate pay. Current policy (CD 730 Inmate Pay) states that "inmates in administrative segregation, where no programming opportunities exist, shall be paid at level one". Consideration must be given to reviewing the relationship of pay and the delivery of non-core programs and the completion of the inmate’s reintegration play, to the pay structure that is currently defined for segregated inmates.

The Task Force acknowledges that CSC must make every reasonable effort to be responsive to segregated inmates’ needs and special status. For example, due to the evidence of a high prevalence of severe mental disorders among segregated inmates, programming which addresses their special needs should be offered.

Aboriginal inmates have distinct needs and are legally entitled to spiritual and cultural support. Therefore, CSC must ensure that segregated Aboriginal inmates have access to Spiritual Leaders and Elders, Native Liaison Workers, sacred and cultural items, and appropriate spiritual ceremonies (i.e. sweat lodges). In addition, CSC must take an active role in offering programming that is tailored to their respective needs.

With respect to recreational activities, the Task Force strongly encourages the provision of additional exercise time whenever possible subject to the limitations of the segregation area, security requirements, and resource availability. All institutions should ensure that the exercise yards are equipped with some form of recreational equipment (e.g. chin-up bars, basketball nets, balls, etc.). Segregated inmates must have access to cards, board games, television, music, art work, or other cell hobbies.

(d) Physical Plant

Cleanliness of the administrative segregation units must be an ongoing priority. The Task Force has observed significant progress in all regions to attain and sustain this goal. The compliance audit indicated that major changes had occurred in all institutions with respect to conditions of the physical plant. No institution was cited as having any major deficiency in this area.

The Task Force recommends that part of proposed regular and random audits includes the systematic review of all factors contributing to cleanliness, health, safety and security.

(e) Informing Segregated Inmates of Their Rights and Privileges

The Task Force has strongly suggested that each unit develop an Inmate Handbook that would be provided to each segregated inmate at placement. An example was developed and distributed by the Task Force to each administrative segregation unit across the country.

The handbook should clearly define what segregation is under the law; explain the rights, privileges, and conditions of confinement of segregated inmates; and define the steps that will be followed to review inmates’ cases. Finally, the handbook should describe the daily routine of the unit and the responsibilities of segregated inmates while segregated.

(f) Cell Effects

Segregated inmates are entitled to their personal effects. As soon as an inmate is placed in administrative segregation, CSC must ensure that adequate bedding, clothing, and toilet articles for personal health and cleanliness are provided. Segregated inmates should receive all of their cell effects shortly thereafter. In most cases, all personal effects that do not jeopardize security should be provided to segregated inmates after their five-day review.

(g) Roles and Responsibilities

(i) Visits by the Institutional Head and the Health Care Professional

In view of the potential negative consequences on both mental and physical health of administrative segregation, there should be an on-going assessment of the inmate’s physical and psychological well-being. The CCRA requires that a registered health care professional visit each inmate in administrative segregation on a daily basis. At least every thirty continuous days, a written psychological or psychiatric opinion on the inmate’s current mental heath must be completed.

The results of the compliance audit indicate that institutions must be vigilant in ensuring that segregated inmates are visited on a daily basis by the senior institutional authority. The CCRA requires that the institutional head visit the administrative segregation unit daily (including week-ends). This responsibility can be delegated to a senior staff member (not below Unit Manager) or to the officer-in-charge of the institution on weekends and holidays. Inmates must also be provided with the opportunity to meet with the institutional head, when requested (CCRA, S. 36(1)). This requirement ensures that there is a continuous assessment by a senior staff member that conditions of confinement are in compliance with the law and policy.

(ii) The Psychologists

The Task Force examined the role of the psychologist in the administrative segregation process. It believes that psychologists have a critical role to play in:

• monitoring segregated inmates’ mental health (especially in view of the high prevalence of severe mental disorders among segregated inmates and the potentially harmful effects associated with the segregation experience);
• identification and promotion of appropriate alternatives to administrative segregation (e.g. special needs, mental health units, etc.); and
• elaboration of interventions which may (a) facilitate segregated inmates’ return to less restrictive environments, and (b) negate the potentially harmful effects associated with the segregation experience.

The Task Force developed a questionnaire that allowed CSC psychologists to voice their opinions on five major areas with regard to their role in the administrative segregation process:

1. policy criteria for assessments in the current review process and the frequency of these assessments;
2. psychological factors that should be assessed; methods of assessment; and the need for national standards of practice;
3. role of the psychologist in the review process with respect to making recommendations to SRBs;
4. communicating findings and recording them on OMS; and
5. need for research on the impact of segregation on inmates’ ability to cope and reintegrate successfully.

Based on the findings of the survey, the Task Force makes the following five recommendations:

1. The Task Force recognizes that a diversity of opinions exists on a number of important issues. The Task Force recommends that mental health professionals be brought together to share their expertise and best practices on assessments, interventions, preventive measures, alternatives, and research with regard to segregated inmates.
2. The policy criterion requiring the psychologist to determine "the inmate’s capacity to remain in administrative segregation" must be reworded to clearly state that the psychological or psychiatric opinion required is limited to inmate’s current mental health and their current ability to cope with segregation.
3. The Task Force encourages psychologists to take an active role in intervening shortly after an inmate’s placement in segregation. The Task Force considers that early intervention by a psychologist can serve to establish a baseline for subsequent evaluations of mental health deterioration and to provide support to segregated inmates at times of crisis. The Task Force views this early intervention as a best practice.
4. Since there is a strong consensus among psychologists on the factors to be assessed during the 30-day assessment, the Task Force recommends that a national assessment form be developed and installed on OMS. As for the method of assessment, general guidelines should be developed to encourage consistency and best professional practices. Particular attention should be given to the development of assessment instruments and protocols which are tailored to Aboriginal and women offenders.
5. The Task Force considers that owing to the high prevalence of mental health disorders among segregated inmates, staff assigned to work in segregation units be sensitized and educated on mental health issues. The Task Force recommends, that in order to enhance mental health monitoring, the reference document include a section on the identification of factors and behaviours associated with mental health deterioration.

(iii) The Case Management Officer (CMO) and the Correctional Officer II (COII)

The Task Force has based many of its recommendations on the need to develop a reintegration plan for the segregated inmate, as early as possible after placement. It has observed that there is a requirement to ensure the modification and the implementation of the inmate’s Correctional Plan. The Task Force has observed two approaches to case management in segregation - retaining the segregated inmate’s existing CMO and COII or maintaining a separate case management function in administrative segregation. There have been advantages and disadvantages identified for both approaches. Two key requirements are identified:

• the need to maintain a clear relationship between an inmate’s correctional and reintegration plans; and
• the need to ensure that segregated inmates, particularly voluntary cases, continue to remain a high priority for CMOs and COIIs.

The Task Force recommends that the Case Management Manual be reviewed and revised in the context of the its observations and recommendations. Particular attention should be given to the development of training models on the management of segregated inmates in the context of the law.

(iv) Staff of the Administrative Segregation Unit

The Union of Solicitor General Employees in its response to the recommendations of the Arbour Commission noted to the Deputy Solicitor General in May, 1996 that "there must be sufficient staff with reasonable workloads and that staff must be given complete and continuing training, including refresher training".

The Task Force fully supports this observation. In order to assist staff in carryout their responsibilities while the Task Force continued its work, the following support packages were developed and distributed:

• an information package was given to staff that provided an overview of the administrative segregation process in the context of the Charter, the CCRA/CCRR and CSC policy;
• a second information package responded to the most frequently asked questions that were being raised by staff about the administrative segregation process;
• an Administrative Segregation Checklist was drafted that staff could use as a reference to ensure that they were carrying out their legal responsibilities at the key stages of the administrative segregation process; it also contained examples of best practices being used in institutions across the country;
• a model Inmate Handbook was created that could be used by staff to inform segregated inmates about their rights and privileges and the rules and procedures of the segregation unit; and
• initial changes were made to some OMS screens that enabled staff to accurately document information at the time of placement.

The Task Force observed that the use of a dedicated unit management team provided the best approach to ensuring compliance with the law. The Task Force recommends that a dedicated staff should be assigned to the administrative segregation unit. The rotation schedule should be modified to allow staff to be assigned for designated periods, sufficient to ensure that administrative segregation units are staffed in a consistent manner by personnel familiar with the law; the unit and its routine and the segregated inmates. The roster should also provide staff with an opportunity to maintain contact with other staff and familiarize themselves with the day-to-day operation of other posts in the institution.

The Task Force has made recommendations with respect to continuous education on the overall context of the law and its application to the daily activities of the administrative segregation unit.

An important aspect of this training is respect of the rights and privileges of Aboriginal inmates under the law. The Task Force is recommending that particular attention be given to refamiliarizing staff with the applicable law and with Aboriginal entitlements to Native artifacts and ceremonies associated with spirituality and the healing process.

The Task Force recommends that institution-based training modules be developed and supplemented by integrated reference material that is easily accessible and understood by staff.