Commissioner's Directive

• Policy Objectives
• Authorities
• Application
• Responsibilities
• Procedures
  • Centralized Intake Assessment Process
  • Decentralized Intake Assessment Process
  • Interregional Movements for Offender Intake Assessments and Interregional Penitentiary Placements
  • Inmates Convicted of Terrorism Offences
  • Inmates Subject to a Dangerous Offender Designation
  • Initial Inmate Security Level and Penitentiary Placement
    • Custody Rating Scale
    • Security Classification
    • Placement of Co-Convicted Inmates
    • Procedures Following the Capture of an Inmate
    • Inmate Security Level and Penitentiary Placement Decision

• Enquiries
• Annex A: Cross-References and Definitions
• Annex B: Custody Rating Scale
• Annex C: Offences Committed While Incarcerated
• Annex D: Modified CSC Offence Severity Scale
• Annex E: Assessment for Decision for a Security Classification and Penitentiary Placement - Report Outline
• Annex F: Interregional Movements for Offender Intake Assessments and Interregional Penitentiary Placements

Policy Objectives

1. To determine the inmate's security classification and penitentiary placement that will contribute to his/her timely preparation for safe reintegration.

2. To ensure public safety as well as inmate rights while meeting the inmate's security requirements and the objectives of the Correctional Plan.

Authorites

3. Corrections and Conditional Release Act (CCRA), sections 3.1, 4, 15.1, 26, 28, 29, 30 and 40

Corrections and Conditional Release Regulations (CCRR), sections 11, 12, 17 and 18

Application

4. This Commissioner's Directive applies to staff responsible for the inmate's security classification and penitentiary placement.

Responsibilities

5. The Assistant Commissioner, Correctional Operations and Programs, following consultation with the Deputy Commissioner for Women in cases of women inmates, and when supported by the Regional Deputy Commissioner, is the final decision maker for:

1. initial placement to other than maximum security, for an inmate serving a life sentence for first or second degree murder, or an inmate convicted of a terrorism offence punishable by life except when the male inmate is transferred directly to the Special Handling Unit (in such cases, the Senior Deputy Commissioner will make the classification decision); and
2. initial classification of a Dangerous Offender to minimum security.

6. The Regional Deputy Commissioner will establish a regional procedure for the readmission of an inmate subject to a temporary detention, revocation, or an inoperative release.

7. The Regional Deputy Commissioner:

1. will forward a recommendation to the Assistant Commissioner, Correctional Operations and Programs, for final decision:
   1. for the classification to medium security of an inmate serving a life sentence for first or second degree murder, or an inmate convicted of a terrorism offence punishable by life,
   2. for the classification of a Dangerous Offender to minimum security;
2. is the final decision maker if he/she disagrees with the Institutional Head's recommendation to classify a Dangerous Offender to minimum security or to make the initial placement to other than maximum security, for an inmate serving a life sentence for first or second degree murder, or an inmate convicted of a terrorism offence punishable by life;
3. of the receiving region, is the final decision maker for out-of-region movements from provincial/territorial custody.

8. The Institutional Head or District Director will:

1. authorize an inmate's security classification (this authority may be delegated to the Deputy Warden or Area Director except for an inmate who is subject to a Dangerous Offender designation, or in those cases where the security classification is related to a transfer decision and/or involves an inmate serving a life sentence for first or second degree murder, or an inmate convicted of a terrorism offence punishable by life);
2. forward the recommendation to the Regional Deputy Commissioner for final decision:
   1. for the classification to medium security of an inmate serving a life sentence for first or second degree murder, or an inmate convicted of a terrorism offence punishable by life, and
   2. for the classification of a Dangerous Offender to minimum security.

9. The decision maker must provide specific ratings for institutional adjustment, escape risk and public safety in every inmate security level final decision. If the decision maker does not concur with the recommended ratings in the Assessment for Decision, a rationale must be provided for the divergence from the recommendation.

10. The decision maker will provide the inmate with the rationale as well as the information considered in the decision, in writing within five working days. The inmate will be advised, at the same time, of the right to seek redress using the grievance process as per CD 081 – Offender Complaints and Grievances.

11. When the decision maker for the security classification is the Assistant Commissioner, Correctional Operations and Programs, or the Senior Deputy Commissioner, a grievance arising from the decision will be submitted directly to the third level.

12. The Institutional Head will:

1. implement a process to ensure the high profile offender flag is set for any inmate who meets the definition of a high profile offender;
2. implement a process to ensure procedures are followed when a high profile offender is being placed, as per CD 701- Information Sharing; and
3. ensure processes outlined in CD 784 - Information Sharing Between Victims and the Correctional Service of Canada are followed.

Procedures

Centralized Intake Assessment Process

13. The community Parole Officer will complete the Custody Rating Scale, as per Annex B, for women inmates in provincial/territorial custody.

14. The Parole Officer will:

1. complete the Custody Rating Scale;
2. complete the Assessment for Decision for the initial inmate security level and penitentiary placement as per Annex E; and
3. complete a new Assessment for Decision for the inmate security level and penitentiary placement for all revoked inmates, where temporary detention facilities exist.

Decentralized Intake Assessment Process

15. The community Parole Officer will complete the Custody Rating Scale and Assessment for Decision for inmate security level and penitentiary placement:

1. within five working days of sentencing; and
2. following suspension and/or revocation.

16. The warrant of committal will be used to effect the initial admission of the inmate from provincial/ territorial to federal custody.

17. Once in federal custody, the inmate will be moved to the placement institution via a penitentiary placement decision.

18. The institutional Parole Officer will:

1. complete a subsequent Custody Rating Scale upon receipt of additional information, if required; and
2. complete the Assessment for Decision for penitentiary placement as per Annex E, if required.

Interregional Movements for Offender Intake Assessments and Interregional Penitentiary Placements

19. An out-of-region movement or placement of an inmate may be required for population management reasons.

20. Refer to Annex F when it is determined that the most viable option is to either:

1. move an offender directly from provincial/territorial custody to an out-of-region facility for the purpose of completing the offender intake assessment; or
2. proceed with an interregional penitentiary placement.

Inmates Convicted of Terrorism Offences

21. For an inmate convicted of a terrorism offence included in Part II.1 of the Criminal Code, or an offence determined by the court to constitute a terrorism offence as defined in section 2 of the Criminal Code, an interim placement review will be completed within 15 days from the sentencing date while the inmate is in provincial/territorial custody. The review will consist of, at a minimum, the completion of the Custody Rating Scale.

22. In regions with a centralized intake assessment process, the Custody Rating Scale will be completed by the institutional Parole Officer; while in regions with a decentralized process, the community Parole Officer will complete the Scale.

23. When the Custody Rating Scale results in a maximum security rating for an inmate convicted of a terrorism offence, the Regional Deputy Commissioner of the region where the inmate was sentenced will subsequently outline in a Memo to File whether the inmate would meet the criteria for a transfer to the Special Handling Unit for assessment purposes. As applicable, the inmate may thereafter be directly transferred from provincial/territorial custody to the Special Handling Unit. The intake assessment and the assessment for admission to the Special Handling Unit will be completed in accordance with the timeframes prescribed in CD 708 - Special Handling Unit.

24. The Memo to File outlining the reasons for transfer to the Special Handling Unit for assessment purposes will be shared with the inmate within two working days following the transfer.

Inmates Subject to a Dangerous Offender Designation

25. When the classification of a Dangerous Offender to minimum security is being considered, the decision-making process is as follows:

1. the Assessment for Decision, the CSC Board Review/Decision Sheet (Inmate Security Level) containing the Institutional Head's recommendation, and the required psychological risk assessment will be forwarded to the Regional Deputy Commissioner for review;
2. following review of the documentation noted above, the Regional Deputy Commissioner will enter his/her recommendation in the CSC Board Review/Decision Sheet;
3. if the Regional Deputy Commissioner recommends against the proposed classification to minimum security, he/she will enter the final decision and reasons for denial in the CSC Board Review/Decision Sheet;
4. if the Regional Deputy Commissioner is in agreement with the proposed classification to minimum security, he/she will enter the decision in the CSC Board Review/Decision Sheet and the pertinent documentation regarding the proposed classification to minimum security will be forwarded to the Assistant Commissioner, Correctional Operations and Programs, for the final decision.

Initial Inmate Security Level and Penitentiary Placement

26. A penitentiary placement recommendation is included in the same Assessment for Decision covering the security classification decision. When recommending a penitentiary placement for an inmate, the recommended institution will be one that provides an environment that contains only the necessary restrictions, taking into account, but not limited to, the following factors:

1. the safety of the public, staff or other persons in the penitentiary and the inmate ;
2. the inmate's individual security classification;
3. the security classification of the institution (CD 706 - Classification of Institutions);
4. accessibility to the inmate's home community and family;
5. the cultural and linguistic environment best suited to the inmate;
6. the state of health and health care needs of the inmate;
7. the availability of appropriate programs and services to meet the inmate's needs; and
8. the inmate's willingness to participate in programs.

Custody Rating Scale

27. The Custody Rating Scale takes into consideration the following factors as required by section 17 of the CCRR:

1. the seriousness of the offence committed by the inmate;
2. any outstanding charges against the inmate;
3. the inmate's performance and behaviour while under sentence;
4. the inmate's social and criminal history, including a Dangerous Offender designation under the Criminal Code, and, where applicable, young offender history;
5. any physical or mental illness or disorder suffered by the inmate;
6. the inmate's potential for violent behaviour; and
7. the inmate's continued involvement in criminal activities.

28.28. The Parole Officer scores each factor based on the information obtained from the inmate during the intake assessment as well as from documents collected (e.g., FPS sheet, police report). A guide for the completion of the Scale is contained in Annex B.

29. The security level cut-off scores in the Custody Rating Scale are as follows and all scores are inclusive:

1. minimum security: 0 to 85 on the institutional adjustment dimension and 0 to 63on the security risk dimension;
2. medium security: between 86 and 94 on the institutional adjustment dimension and between 0 and 133 on the security risk dimension; OR between 0 and 85 on the institutional adjustment dimension and between 64 and 133 on the security risk dimension; and
3. maximum security: 95 or greater on the institutional adjustment dimension or 134 or greater on the security risk dimension.

30. The Parole Officer will make a recommendation on the security level based on the Custody Rating Scale and the assessment of institutional adjustment, escape risk, and public safety. This assessment and recommendation will be completed as per Annex E.

Security Classification

31. An inmate will be classified as:

1. maximum security where the inmate is assessed by the Service as:
   1. presenting a high probability of escape and a high risk to the safety of the public in the event of escape, or
   2. requiring a high degree of supervision and control within the penitentiary;
2. medium security where the inmate is assessed by the Service as:
   1. presenting a low to moderate probability of escape and a moderate risk to the safety of the public in the event of escape, or
   2. requiring a moderate degree of supervision and control within the penitentiary;
3. minimum security where the inmate is assessed by the Service as:
   1. presenting a low probability of escape and a low risk to the safety of the public in the event of escape, and
   2. requiring a low degree of supervision and control within the penitentiary.

32. The assessment will be completed as per Annex E.

Placement of Co-Convicted Inmates

33. Co-convicted inmates under current sentence for an offence resulting in death or serious harm and whose association or influence on each other may be detrimental to the rehabilitation and safe reintegration of one or more inmates, or to the safety and security of the institution will:

1. not be accommodated in the same cell; and
2. whenever possible, will not be accommodated on the same range, unit, or in the same institution.

Procedures Following the Capture of an Inmate

34. Following the capture of an inmate who has escaped or who was unlawfully at large, he/she will be detained at an institution, at the appropriate security level, in the region of the arrest.

35. The region in which the inmate is recaptured is responsible for determining the appropriate placement and security level. Readmission procedures may differ by region.

Inmate Security Level and Penitentiary Placement Decision

36. The reasons for the security level and proposed penitentiary placement will be provided in writing to the inmate two working days prior to the final decision and transfer to the assigned penitentiary.

37. The Institutional Head will consider any responses provided by the inmate in the final penitentiary placement decision.

38. The inmate may appeal the penitentiary placement decision using the offender grievance process as per CD 081 - Offender Complaints and Grievances.

Enquiries

Strategic Policy Division
National Headquarters
Email: Gen-NHQPolicy-Politi@CSC-SCC.GC.CA

Commissioner,

Original signed by
Don Head

Annex A: Cross-References and Definitions

Cross-References

• CD 081 – Offender Complaints and Grievances
• CD 550 – Inmate Accommodation
• CD 703 – Sentence Management
• CD 705-5 – Supplementary Intake Assessments
• CD 706 – Classification of Institutions
• CD 708 – Special Handling Unit
• CD 710-2 – Transfer of Inmates
• CD 710-6 – Review of Inmate Security Classification
• Criminal Code

Definitions

Co-convicted offenders:

offenders who were parties in the commission of an offence resulting in death or serious harm (section 99 of the CCRA), even though they may have been charged with different offences and received different sentences or may have been prosecuted at different times.

Custody Rating Scale:

a research-based tool used to assist in assessing the most appropriate level of security for the penitentiary placement of an inmate.

Dangerous Offender:

an offender who is subject to a designation by the court under section 753 of the Criminal Code.

High profile offender:

an offender whose offence dynamics elicited or have a potential to elicit a community reaction in the form of significant public and/or media interest.

Inmate security level:

a rating (minimum, medium or maximum) based on the assessment of the inmate's institutional adjustment, escape risk and risk to public safety.

Inoperative:

discontinuation of conditional release and return to custody when receipt of an additional sentence or an increase in the sentence length on appeal results in a conditional release eligibility date in the future.

Temporary detention:

period of incarceration arising out of the execution of a warrant of apprehension and suspension of conditional release.

Annex B: Custody Rating Scale

Introduction

For all Items in the Custody Rating Scale, no incidents or convictions will be counted if they occurred when the inmate was under the age of 16.

Part I – Institutional Adjustment Rating

1. History Of Involvement In Institutional Incidents

Definitions

Incidents:

any actions or behaviours listed in Annex C that occurred prior to final penitentiary placement for the current sentence.

Last five years of incarceration (pertaining to item b):

any accumulated period or periods of federal or provincial/territorial incarceration (including remand) in the inmate's history that total five years or more, not just the five years immediately preceding the current admission to federal custody.

Serious physical injury:

any injury as determined by Health Services personnel as having the potential to endanger life, or which results in permanent physical impairment, significant disfigurement or protracted loss of normal functioning. It includes, but is not limited to major bone fractures, the severing of limbs or extremities, and wounds involving damage to internal organs.

Instructions

Incidents involving convictions in institutional court or outside court, and incidents contained in institutional security reports should be counted. For incidents in the provincial jurisdiction, find the offence in Annex C that most closely corresponds. Incidents occurring while the inmate was in a youth facility (but not under the age of 16) should be included.

Where there is clear and substantial evidence to support that the inmate was a victim of an assault or fight and not the aggressor, no score should be given.

With the exception of item 1a) as shown below, the remaining items are mutually exclusive, that is once you have chosen the response option appropriate to the incident, the same incident is not applied to any other Item under Institutional History.

Notes

• a) refers to any period of incarceration
• If a score is entered under b), c) or d), then a score of "2" must be entered under a) any prior involvement.

Note

• Score only one of the above options and choose the option that yields the highest score.

Notes

• c) refers to any period of incarceration.
• This includes serious incidents that occurred in the last five years of incarceration but that do not meet the criteria specified in 1 b).
• Also includes serious incidents in remand or intake on a prior admission.

Note

• Serious incidents while in remand, awaiting transfer to federal custody or in intake status on previously completed sentences are not scored here.

Sources of Information

• FPS record
• Discipline and Dissociation file
• Security incident base (Security Information Reports)
• Provincial records/files
• Inmate interview

2. Escape History

Definitions

Escape:

includes only escapes from federal/provincial/territorial correctional institutions, from police/peace officer custody or while on escorted temporary absence (ETA). It does not include leaving an open custody youth facility, a community residential facility (CRF), a community correctional centre (CCC)) or where an inmate has been unlawfully at large from an unescorted temporary absence (UTA) or probation.

Last five years of incarceration (pertaining to item d):

includes any accumulated period or periods of federal or provincial/territorial incarceration (including remand) in the inmate's history that total five years or more, not just the five years immediately preceding the current admission to federal custody.

Instructions

Where charges were laid against the inmate, it is not necessary that a court conviction be registered to count the incident of escape. When reviewing cases where the inmate was charged with "escape lawful custody" or "unlawfully at large", count only those situations where the act leading to the charge was an escape from a federal/provincial/territorial institution, from police/peace officer custody or while on an escorted temporary absence from a federal or provincial/territorial institution.

Provincial or territorial designation of security levels maximum, medium and minimum is equal to the federal levels, except in the case of provincial/territorial jails and detention/remand centres which are considered to be maximum security for the purposes of scoring the CRS.

Escapes from provincial/territorial closed/secure custody youth facilities should be counted under category b.

Only the single highest score for any one item from 2a) to 2d) is entered on the Scale even though any number of them may be applicable to the inmate.

Sources of Information

• FPS record
• Discipline and Dissociation file
• Security incident base (Security Information Reports)
• Provincial records/files
• Inmate interview
• Police reports

3. Street Stability

Street stability refers to the evaluation of an inmate's level of functioning in the community as it relates to socially and legally acceptable norms. In order that street stability can be assessed consistently and objectively, four specific key life style areas must be evaluated separately and a composite rating reflecting these areas determined.

Street stability is assessed against the inmate population and not relative to non-criminal individuals. In addition, it should be assessed relative to the community in which the inmate was residing at the time the offence was committed. For example, if unemployment was relatively high in a particular community, the inmate should be assessed against the employment opportunities in that community.

Where applicable and if completed as part of the current assessment, the domain ratings from the Dynamic Factor Identification and Analysis (revised), Associates and Community Functioning domains can be used to support the Above Average (Factor Seen as an Asset or No Immediate Need), Average (Low or Moderate Need) and Below Average (High Need) rating.

1. Employment/Education

   CRS Guidelines

   Above average – The inmate has been steadily employed or attending an educational program for more than six months prior to the present incarceration.

   Average – The inmate has been employed or attending an educational program sporadically in the last six months prior to this incarceration and there have been significant periods of unemployment during this period.

   Below average – The inmate has been usually unemployed and was not employed when the current offence(s) was committed. If the inmate verbalizes that the employment/educational situation contributed to the present offence(s), the rating should be "below average".

2. Marital/Family Adjustment

   CRS Guidelines

   Above average – A stable marriage (including common-law) exists. The inmate is presently supported by an intact nuclear family (includes parents, siblings, spouse and children).

   Average – The inmate has a marital partner, however, periods of instability have occurred, and/or the nuclear family is somewhat unstable.

   Below average – No significant family relationships are identified as having existed during the six month period prior to the commission of the present offence(s) and/or immediate family members do not provide pro-social supportive roles.

3. Interpersonal Relationships

   CRS Guidelines

   Above average– The inmate associates with essentially non-criminal persons in the community.

   Average – Associations with unstable or criminally oriented persons, along with a mixture of stable individuals has been identified.

   Below average – The inmate's social circle is made up almost entirely of persons with criminal backgrounds or unstable lifestyles. The inmate may have a co-accused in the present offence(s) with whom social ties in the community are identified.

4. Living Arrangements

   CRS Guidelines

   Above average – Lengthy period of time (more than one year) at a single residence unless legitimate reasons for relocation are identified.

   Average – Changes of residence once or twice per year have occurred with no strong rationale identified.

   Below average – Changes of residence have occurred two or more times during the six month period prior to the current offence(s).

   After having examined each lifestyle area, place the individual in the category that best describes the life circumstances prior to incarceration. An overall assessment should be made of the areas considered together.

Sources of Information

• Police report(s)
• Presentence report
• Community Assessments
• Suspension report
• Inmate interview

4. Alcohol/Drug Use

Applicable results from the Dynamic Factor Identification Analysis (revised) (Substance Abuse) or other substance abuse assessment instruments can be used to support the No Identifiable Problem (No Immediate Need for Improvement), Abuse Affecting One or More Life Areas (Low/Moderate Need) and Serious Abuse Affecting Several Life Areas (High Need) ratings.

Sources of Information

• Police report(s)
• Presentence report
• Community Assessments
• Suspension report
• Inmate interview

5. Age (at Time Of Sentencing)

Select the score for the inmate's age at time of sentencing for the current offence(s). When there is more than one current offence, take the earliest sentencing date.

Readmission

For inmates returning on suspension with/without new convictions, use the executed suspension warrant date to calculate the inmate's age.

For inmates returning on revocation without new offences, use the PBC revocation decision date as the date of sentencing to calculate the inmate's age.

For inmates returning on revocation with new offences, use the date of sentencing on the new offences to calculate the inmate's age.

Part II – Security Risk Rating

1. Number Of Prior Convictions

Definition

Prior convictions:

convictions other than the ones for which the inmate is presently serving a sentence.

Instructions

Convictions are counted separately only if they were awarded a consecutive sentence. All convictions that are dealt with by the imposition of concurrent sentences, even if they are different (e.g. false pretences and fraud), or occurred on different dates, are counted as a single conviction for the purpose of completing the Scale. Unless the conviction is stated as being consecutive, it is assumed to be concurrent. Convictions under the Juvenile Delinquents Act, Young Offenders Act or Youth Criminal Justice Act should be counted. No incidents or convictions will be counted if they occurred when the inmate was under the age of 16.

Sources of Information

• Canadian Police Information Centre
• FPS record

2. Most Severe Outstanding Charge

All outstanding charges at the time of admission on the inmate's current sentence are to be identified. Using Annex D, determine which outstanding charge is the most severe, and enter only the score for that offence.

For suspension or revocation admissions, check for any outstanding charges and score accordingly. If parole has been revoked following the commission of an offence and the charges have not yet been dealt with by the courts, count the offence under this item. In situations where the police have informed CSC they are planning to charge an inmate but have not yet done so, do not count the charge below. However, this may be an issue to take into account in the rationale for decision-making on placement.

Sources of Information

• Sentence Management screen
• Canadian Police Information Centre
• FPS record

3. Severity Of Current Offence

Using Annex D, determine which of the inmate's current offences is the most severe. Choose the single highest score that applies to the inmate.

Note: A revocation of parole or statutory release for a technical violation or conviction for a breach of a long-term supervision order (LTSO) counts as a current offence in the "minor or moderate" category.

Sources of Information

• Sentence Management screen
• Warrant(s) of Committal
• Admission Form

4. Sentence Length

This is the total aggregate sentence as calculated at admission to CSC. Life or indeterminate sentences are included in "over 24 years".

Sources of Information

• Sentence Management screen
• Warrant(s) of Committal
• Admission Form

5. Street Stability

This Item is to be rated following the same definitions and instructions provided previously for Institutional Adjustment Score – Street Stability (Item 3). The difference is in the Scores assigned for each category and the special category "other". "Other" is to be selected for inmates convicted of a criminal organization or a terrorism offence included in Part II.1 of the Criminal Code, or an offense determined by the court to constitute a terrorism offence as defined in section 2 of the Criminal Code.

6. Prior Parole And/or Statutory Releases (Mandatory Supervision)

Definition

Parole release:

provincial/territorial or federal day or full parole.
Only federal statutory releases/mandatory supervisions are counted.
Releases at warrant expiry date are not counted.

Instructions

A calculation of the number of releases the inmate has obtained throughout his/her criminal history is required. Whether or not the release was revoked is not relevant for the completion of this Item.

Count only one release following a formal admission of any type. If an inmate was released on a day parole (the first release following a current admission), then received either a day parole "continued" or a full parole decision, count only the one release on the first day parole.

If an inmate was released from federal custody on statutory release, then revoked (formally re-admitted) and then released on day parole, count one statutory release and one parole release.

7. Age At Time Of First Federal Admission

If the current sentence is not the first federal sentence for this inmate, enter his/her age at the time of admission for the first federal sentence on the record. If the current sentence is the inmate's first federal sentence, use the age at the time of admission for the current sentence.

Choose the score that applies to the inmate's age category.

Final Scores And Security Level Rating

OMS calculates the Scores for institutional adjustment and security risk separately and then provides the security level rating (classification).

Annex C: Offences Committed While Incarcerated

Notes

1. When the offence is a conspiracy to commit another offence, use the offence that is the object of the conspiracy to score seriousness.

2. This list of offences is not exhaustive. Users should exercise judgment to find the offence on this list that is the closest approximation to the offence(s) committed by the inmate.

Serious Offences

Moderate Offences

**(CCRA) Corrections and Conditional Release Act

Annex D: Modified CSC Offence Severity Scale

Notes

1. Dangerous drugs: heroin and other opiates/cocaine/PCP/LSD and other similar substances.

2. Assault offences: classify according to seriousness of the harm inflicted by the assault.

3. Any sexual offence involving a child victim is considered major.

4. If a parole violation is the result of a new offence, classify according to the new offence.

5. Conspiracy, attempt to commit and accessory before and after the fact are classified as the actual offence.

6. This list of offences is not exhaustive. Users should exercise judgement to find the offence on this list that is the closest approximation to the offence(s) committed by the inmate.

7. As a general principle, do not ignore information that is not on the official record. For example, where the FPS indicates assault, but other reliable sources allow us to determine that the inmate actually committed a sexual assault, treat the offence as a sexual assault and score accordingly.

Annex E: Assessment for Decision for a Security Classification and Penitentiary Placement – Report Outline

Introductory Statement/Case Status

Provide a brief statement of the purpose of the report, length of sentence, current offence(s), outstanding charges or appeals and immigration/deportation/extradition status.

Security Classification Actuarial Results

Identify when the Custody Rating Scale, Security Reclassification Scale, or Security Reclassification Scale for Women was completed, the Scores (institutional adjustment rating and security risk rating) and overall level of security indicated by the scale.

Institutional Adjustment

Consider the following to assess institutional adjustment rating and update any relevant information since the completion of the most recent inmate security level review:

• length of the inmate's sentence and its impact on the inmate's institutional adjustment
• violent institutional incidents – use of weapons, role in the incidents, harm caused (including during provincial incarceration and previous federal sentences)
• review the inmate's disciplinary information during intake, federal and provincial/territorial custody (identify if there have been any previous minor or serious disciplinary offences, the nature and gravity of the offences, if there is a pattern)
• periods of segregation (disciplinary, voluntary and involuntary)
• include comments on the inmate's behaviour from unit staff
• review the Preventive Security file, record date of review and consultation with the Security Intelligence Officer
• indicate whether the inmate has any affiliations with criminal organizations/gangs, or continues to be involved in criminal activities while in custody
• identify the existence of incompatibles or co-convicted inmates and the impact on institutional adjustment
• identify whether any administrative intervention has been required in this case, such as transfers to higher security, segregation or transfers for protection reasons, behavioural contracts, etc.
• comment on inmate's level of motivation/engagement to participate in his/her Correctional Plan
• identify whether the inmate displays special needs or socio-cultural factors indicating a requirement for special intervention on an ongoing basis (Aboriginal inmate, woman inmate, etc.)
• identify whether the inmate has a history of mental health issues, suicidal ideation, self-injury
• current emotional stability, and whether this will impact on the inmate's institutional adjustment.

Institutional Adjustment Rating

Based on the individual adjustment factors and any other relevant considerations, assign a rating of either low, moderate or high.

Low – The inmate has demonstrated:

1. a pattern of satisfactory institutional adjustment; no special management intervention is required;
2. the ability and motivation to interact effectively and responsibly with others, individually and in groups, with little or no supervision;
3. motivation towards self-improvement by actively participating in a Correctional Plan designed to meet his/her dynamic factors, particularly those relating to facilitating his/her reintegration into the community.

Moderate – The inmate has demonstrated:

1. some difficulties causing moderate institutional adjustment problems and requiring some management intervention;
2. the potential to interact effectively with others, individually and in moderately structured groups, but needs regular and often direct supervision;
3. an interest and active participation in a Correctional Plan designed to meet his/her dynamic factors, particularly those which would lead to a transfer to a less structured environment and ultimately, to his/her reintegration into the community.

High – The inmate has demonstrated:

1. frequent or major difficulties causing serious institutional adjustment problems and requiring significant/constant management intervention;
2. a requirement for a highly structured environment in which individual or group interaction is subject to constant and direct supervision;
3. an uncooperative attitude toward institutional programs and staff and presents a potentially serious management problem within an institution.

Escape Risk

Consider the following to assess the escape risk rating and update any relevant information since the completion of the most recent inmate security level review:

• identify if the inmate is a Canadian citizen
• identify history/convictions for escape, attempt escape, being unlawfully at large, breaches of trust (consider seriousness and recency)
• use of violence or threatened violence in any escapes or attempted escapes
• comment on whether there was a period of bail and whether the conditions of the bail were respected
• identify if there are any outstanding charges or appeals, including those related to immigration/deportation issues that may impact the inmate's risk of escape
• identify if length of sentence may have an impact on this area, and time to be served before eligibility for unescorted temporary absence
• comment on any previous periods on parole or statutory release, whether the inmate has participated in any successful ETAs, UTAs or work releases
• other concerns – unusual circumstances having the potential to increase the escape risk (i.e. current emotional instability, custody battle, problems with significant other, gambling/drug debts, etc.)

Escape Risk Rating

Based on the preceding escape risk factors and any other relevant considerations, assign a rating of either low, moderate or high.

Low – The inmate:

1. has no recent serious escape and there are no current indicators of escape potential;
2. has no significant history of breaches of trust.

Moderate – The inmate:

1. has a recent history of escape and/or attempted escapes OR there are current indicator(s) of escape potential;
2. is unlikely to make active efforts to escape but may do so if the opportunity presents itself;
3. presents a definite potential to escape from an institution that has no enclosure.

High – The inmate:

1. has demonstrated a pattern of escapes and/or attempted escapes OR there are current indicator(s) of significant potential to escape OR could threaten the security of the institution in order to facilitate his/her escape.

Public Safety Risk

Provide an analysis of the inmate's public safety risk and update any relevant information since the completion of the most recent inmate security level review:

• history of any known violence, include violent community incidents (consider the seriousness and recency)
• Dangerous Offender designation under the Criminal Code
• the inmate's social, criminal and, where applicable and available, young inmate history
• nature and gravity of current and number of previous offences (whether weapons were involved and whether serious harm occurred to the victim)
• evidence of spousal abuse
• level of dynamic factors or areas of need identified in the Correctional Plan
• Correctional Plan motivation/engagement and progress accomplished
• past releases performance and past ETA, UTA or work release performance
• psychological concerns based on the results of psychological or psychiatric assessments, or other information including the existence of mental health concerns/disorders
• emotional stability/instability, self injury history, suicide history
• detention referral or whether the inmate is being considered as a potential candidate for detention
• alcohol and drug use and the drug and alcohol rating
• affiliations with criminal organizations/gangs
• affiliation with a terrorist organization or radicalized group
• whether the inmate meets the criteria of being a high profile inmate (will only have an impact if in light of the other factors, there is a clear connection between it and public safety)
• identify if the inmate is being supported for release and when
• notoriety likely to invoke a negative reaction from the public, victim(s) or police and/or to receive significant media coverage (sensational crime, major sexual or drug offence, terrorism, affiliation with organized crime, etc.). In order for notoriety to be a relevant factor, it must be demonstrated that it will have an impact on an inmate's reintegration potential by increasing the risk to re-offend, or the likelihood that he/she could pose a threat to the safety of any person or the security of a penitentiary
• public safety risk in the event the inmate would escape.

Public Safety Rating

Based on the public safety factors and any other relevant considerations, assign a rating of either low, moderate or high.

Low – The inmate's:

1. criminal history does not involve violence;
2. criminal history involves violence/sexually-related offence(s), but the inmate has demonstrated significant progress in addressing the dynamic factors which contributed to the criminal behaviour and there are no signs of the high risk situations/offence precursors identified as part of the offence cycle (where it is known);
3. criminal history involves violence but the circumstances of the offence are such that the likelihood of reoffending violently is assessed as improbable.

Moderate – The inmate's:

1. criminal history involves violence, but the inmate has demonstrated some progress in addressing those dynamic factors which contributed to the violent behaviour;
2. criminal history involves violence, but the inmate has demonstrated a willingness to address the dynamic factors which contributed to the violent behaviour;
3. there are current indicator(s) of moderate risk/concern.

High – The inmate's:

1. criminal history involves violence and the inmate has not demonstrated any progress in addressing those dynamic factors which contributed to the violent behaviour or a willingness to attempt to address such factors;
2. criminal history involves violence and the inmate has not demonstrated a willingness to address the dynamic factors which contributed to the violent behaviour;
3. there are current indicators of high risk/concern.

Overall Assessment

Provide a short summary of the factors and consider any pertinent results/recommendations from the psychological and/or psychiatric assessments and/or health care, if available, in the plan for managing the inmate at the proposed security level.

Consider Aboriginal Social History and information provided in the Elder Review.

Consider victims concerns.

Indicate the existence of co-convicted and/or incompatible inmates.

Comment on discussions during case conferences, when it occurred and who was present. Identify the Case Management Team's recommendations and how the recommendation meets the needs of the inmate while ensuring the safety of the public.

Comment on consultation with receiving institution, when an interregional penitentiary placement is being considered.

Dissenting Opinion

Detail any dissenting opinions.

Recommendation

Final recommandation.

Annex F: Interregional Movements for Offender Intake Assessments and Interregional Penitentiary Placements

1. The purpose is to provide procedures to:

• move offenders directly from provincial custody to an out-of-region facility for the completion of the Offender Intake Assessment;
• move offenders from provincial custody to an out-of-region facility when they are returning to federal custody as a result of a suspension; and
• effect an interregional penitentiary placement.

2. The receiving facility may be a federal facility, or a provincial facility with which CSC has an Exchange of Services Agreement. The facility may also be a Healing Lodge (section 81) in the case of an interregional penitentiary placement.

Criteria For Interregional Movements And Interregional Penitentiary Placements

3. When it is determined that the most viable option is to either move an offender directly from provincial custody to an out-of-region facility, or proceed with an interregional penitentiary placement, the sending Regional Deputy Commissioner or delegate will assess the offender's risk and needs, and demonstrate that all other options have been considered prior to making the recommendation to proceed with the movement or placement.

4. The sending Regional Deputy Commissioner or delegate will confirm that:

• consideration has been given to principle 4g) of the CCRA:
  • (g) that correctional policies, programs and practices respect gender, ethnic, cultural and linguistic differences and be responsive to the special needs of women and aboriginal peoples, persons with mental health needs and other groups of offenders with special requirements;
• all of the elements for selection of penitentiary as outlined in section 28 of the CCRA have been considered:
  1. the degree and kind of custody and control necessary for
     
     1. the safety of the public,
        
     2. the safety of that person and other persons in the penitentiary, and
        
     3. the security of the penitentiary;
  2. accessibility to
     
     1. the person's home community and family,
        
     2. a compatible cultural environment,
        
     3. a compatible linguistic environment, and
  3. the availability of appropriate programs and services and the person's willingness to participate in those programs;
• there are no current voluntary transfer applications in the sending region that can be processed; and
• there are no approved voluntary transfers to the proposed receiving region waiting to be actioned.

Procedures For Movement Directly From A Provincial Facility To Another Region For The Offender Intake Assessment Or Following A Suspension

5. Once an offender has been sentenced and is in provincial custody, the community Parole Officer will meet with him/her, and gather the required information to prepare a Preliminary Assessment Report.

6. When it is determined that an interregional movement is the best option to manage the offender, the District Director will advise the Assistant Deputy Commissioner, Institutional Operations, who will in turn inform the Regional Deputy Commissioner.

7. As per section 12 of the (CCRA), the offender shall not be received in federal custody until the expiration of 15 days after the day on which he/she was sentenced, unless the offender agrees to be transferred to a penitentiary before the expiration of those 15 days.

8. If the offender is held in provincial custody pending the interregional movement, he/she becomes subject to the Exchange of Services Agreement.

9. The sending Regional Headquarters will ensure that the Regional Advisor, Sentence Management, confirms the admission requirements to federal custody or to provincial custody where CSC has an existing Exchange of Services Agreement, as outlined in CD 703 - Sentence Management.

10. The sending Regional Deputy Commissioner or delegate will discuss with the receiving Regional Deputy Commissioner or delegate the reasons that prevent the offender from remaining within the region, the criteria and considerations given to the pertinent policies to make the recommendation, and the possibility of an interregional movement via the Warrant of Committal. A transfer warrant is not required.

11. Once it has been determined that an interregional movement can be facilitated, the receiving Regional Deputy Commissioner or delegate will inform his/her regional counterpart in the sending region of the final destination.

12. The sending Regional Headquarters will document the rationale and the recommendation for the offender's movement in a Memo to File, which will include, but not limited to:

• the reason why the Offender Intake Assessment cannot be completed within the sending region;
• the offender's risk and needs, keeping in mind subsection 4(g) and section 28 of the ((CCRA);
• the consideration given to the offender's state of health and health care needs, as identified in the Preliminary Assessment Report;
• the identification of any immediate needs in terms of security and suicide;
• a statement that presents the specific considerations given to all other options and a statement indicating that there are no other alternatives;
• the communication made with the regional counterpart, including his/her willingness to accept the movement of the offender in that region.

13. As the sending Regional Deputy Commissioner or delegate has the recommending authority, he/she will sign the Memo to File.

14. The receiving Regional Headquarters will document the final decision in a Memo to File, which will include, but not limited to:

• the management of the offender's risk and needs;
• the acceptance of the offender in the region; and
• the offender's destination.

15. The decision maker for these movements is either the Regional Deputy Commissioner; Assistant Deputy Commissioner, Institutional Operations; or Director, Interventions, of the receiving region.

16. As the receiving region is the final decision maker, one of the above-named will sign the Memo to File.

17. The Regional Transfer Coordinator is responsible for the coordination of the transfer between regions.

18. The Offender Intake Assessment will be completed by the receiving facility, unless otherwise specified in an Exchange of Services Agreement.

19. Prior to the movement, the sending Regional Headquarters will communicate with the receiving Regional Headquarters when there is new information regarding risk and needs that would impact on the viability of the offender's movement. The Regional Headquarters are responsible for identifying a person to perform this task, and will ensure that the information is documented in a Casework Record.

Procedures For Transfer Directly From A Federal Facility To Another Region For A Penitentiary Placement

20. The Parole Officer will complete an Assessment for Decision for an initial penitentiary placement as per this Commissioner's Directive, which will include an added section to document the receiving region's comments. While the receiving region is being consulted, the Assessment for Decision will remain unlocked to allow the inclusion of these comments.

21. The sending institution will advise the Regional Transfer Coordinator, who will then consult with his/her regional counterpart to explore the regional willingness to accept the inmate and to identify the best suited institution.

22. The Regional Transfer Coordinator will then forward the consultation comments to the sending institution, which will include the final destination.

23. The sending institution will document the consultation comments in the Assessment for Decision, finalize the recommendation, lock the document in the Offender Management System, and share the information with the inmate.

24. The inmate may submit a rebuttal should he/she disagree with the proposed placement. The rebuttal process must be followed as per this Commissioner's Directive.

25. The decisional process is the same as for an interregional transfer as per CD 710-2 - Transfer of Inmates.

26. Consultation process for an interregional penitentiary placement in a Healing Lodge (section 81) will follow the same process as described in CD 710-2 – Transfer of Inmates, but the decision maker is the Regional Deputy Commissioner of the receiving region.

27. The above procedures will also apply in situations when the sending region was not able to finish the Offender Intake Assessment prior to the interregional transfer for penitentiary placement purposes. The responsibility for incomplete case preparation rests with the sending region, unless otherwise agreed upon by the two regions.

Decision On Security Classification

28. The decision on security classification will follow the normal process as outlined in this Commissioner's Directive. The recommendation for security classification is made within the Assessment for Decision for initial penitentiary placement, and the sending Institutional Head makes the final decision.