United States. Bureau of Prisons
The segregated housing unit practices of the United States Bureau of Prisons (BOP) and compliance with them are reviewed. Sections comprising this report are: background to the investigation; Segregated Housing Unit population and number of cells have increased since Fiscal Year 2008; BOP’s monitoring of segregated housing policies varies by type of unit, and some facilities’ documentation is incomplete; BOP estimates that segregated housing costs more than housing inmates in the general population; BOP has not evaluated the impact of segregated housing units on institutional safety or the impacts of long-term segregation on inmates; concluding remarks; recommendations for Executive Action; and BOP comments and GAO evaluation. “GAO recommends that BOP (1) develop ADX-specific monitoring requirements; (2) develop a plan that clarifies how BOP will address documentation concerns GAO identified, through the new software program; (3) ensure that any current study to assess segregated housing also includes reviews of its impact on institutional safety; and (4) assess the impact of long-term segregation. BOP agreed with these recommendations and reported it would take actions to address them.”
“The purpose of this toolkit is to help facilitate communication and cooperation between child welfare agencies and federal prisons so that parents can stay engaged in their children’s lives” (p. 3). This toolkit contains: FAQS (frequently asked questions) for Social Workers; FAQS for Unit Teams; FAQS for Residential Reentry Centers (RRCs); Glossary of Commonly Used Terms; Child Welfare Myth Buster; Incarnation Timeline; Child Welfare Timeline; State Child Welfare Agency Contact Information; and additional resources.
This Program Statement explains how the United States Bureau of Prisons (BOP) determines and implements requests from inmates for compassionate release or reduction in sentence. “Under 18 U.S.C. 4205(g), a sentencing court, on motion of the Bureau of Prisons, may make an inmate with a minimum term sentence immediately eligible for parole by reducing the minimum term of the sentence to time served. Under 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(1)(A), a sentencing court, on motion of the Director of the Bureau of Prisons, may reduce the term of imprisonment of an inmate sentenced under the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984. The Bureau uses 18 U.S.C. 4205(g) and 18 U.S.C. 3582(c)(1)(A) in particularly extraordinary or compelling circumstances which could not reasonably have been foreseen by the court at the time of sentencing” (p. 1). Procedures cover; initiation of request under extraordinary or compelling circumstances; requests based on medical circumstances; requests based on non-medical circumstance for elderly inmates; requests based on non-medical circumstances concerning the death or incapacitation of the family member caregiver of an inmate’s child(ren); requests based on non-medical circumstances regarding the incapacitation of a spouse or registered partner; factors and evaluation of circumstances in RIS (reduction in sentence) requests; approval of request; denial of request; ineligible offenders; and tracking reduction in sentence requests.
This Special Report presents "a description of drug offenders in federal prison, including criminal history, demographics, gun involvement in the offense, and sentence imposed. The report examines each characteristics by type of drug involved in the offense. It also examines demographic information for the entire federally sentenced population and discusses alternative methods for defining drug offenders. Data are from a linked file created with data from the Federal Bureau of Prisons and United States Sentencing Commission. Highlights: This study is based on 94,678 offenders in federal prison at fiscal yearend 2012 who were sentenced on a new U.S. district court commitment and whose most serious offense (as classified by the Federal Bureau of Prisons) was a drug offense; Almost all (99.5%) drug offenders in federal prison were serving sentences for drug trafficking; Cocaine (powder or crack) was the primary drug type for more than half (54%) of drug offenders in federal prison; Race of drug offenders varied greatly by drug type. Blacks were 88% of crack cocaine offenders, Hispanics or Latinos were 54% of powder cocaine offenders, and whites were 48% of methamphetamine offenders; [and] More than a third (35%) of drug offenders in federal prison at sentencing, had either no or minimal criminal history."
This Amnesty International report discusses "concerns about conditions of severe isolation at the United States Penitentiary, Administrative Maximum facility in Colorado. It also examines conditions in Special Management Units and Security Housing Units operated at other federal prison facilities." Sections include: introduction--restrictions on access to ADX, lack of transparency regarding BOP use of isolation and long-term isolation in other parts of the federal system, and prisoners held in solitary confinement in pre-trial federal detention; further observations on conditions in ADX--conditions in General Population UNITS, exercise, in cell activities and programming, contact with staff, the Step-Down Program (SDP), prisoners in ADX more isolated than before, length of time in isolation/access to the SDP, lack of clear criteria or safeguards for progressions to the SDP, Special Security Unit (SSU) H-Unit, Control Unit, SHU, and Range 13, and mentally Ill Prisoners at ADX; overview of US obligations under international law and standards and U.S. Law and Standards; and recommendations.
"This publication is intended to serve as a guide to relevant statutes, regulations, policy documents, and current case law concerning issues the BOP faces today. It provides a general overview of the BOP, its services, and its programs" (p. 1). Sections of this document include: introduction; pretrial issues; evaluation of offender mental capacity; sentencing issues—probation and conditions of probation, imprisonment, and judgment in a criminal case; post-conviction issues—designation to a facility for service of a term of imprisonment, admission and orientation program for inmates, programs and general services, visiting, telephones, and correspondence, inmate discipline procedure, inmate access to court, administrative remedy program, personal property, inmate liens, special administrative measures, family emergencies and temporary releases, release, and notification to community of the release of an offender; and conclusion.
Millbrook was being held in the custody of the U.S. Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) when she was sexually assaulted. She contends that sovereign immunity does not apply to the officers in this instance since the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) waives their immunity. The Supreme Court agreed that the FTCA allows for suits to be brought against federal law enforcement officers for committing intentional torts during the performance of their jobs. This judgement will positively impact the ability of federal inmates to file lawsuits against federal officers who commit sexual attacks in federal correctional facilities.
“Presented before a House of Representatives briefing sponsored by Rep. Jared Polis of Colorado on September 13, 2012, [this report] … chronicles the May 2012 Adams County Correctional Center uprising in Natchez, Mississippi, a private for-profit facility operated by Corrections Corporation of America [CCA], under contract with the Federal Bureau of Prisons.” Sections of this publication address: how lucrative federal prison contracts enrich Wall Street corporations; deadly conditions; the route to a for-profit private prison in Mississippi; prison health care disaster; May 20, 2012—the prisoner uprising; FBI investigation—prisoners were protesting mistreatment—lack of adequate food and health care, and abuse by guards; another private prison under contract with the BOP had similar problems—GEO at Pecos, Texas; a brief history if prison privatization in the U.S.; the industry’s close ties to politicians and public officials; the bubble breaks for the private prison market; a case in point—CCA at Youngstown, Ohio; the private prison industry bubble reinflates after 9/11; a convoy of CARS (criminal alien requirements) arrives just in time to rescue CCA from bankruptcy; the CARS lurch forward; and the post-9/11 crackdown on immigrants trumps unfavorable findings regarding substandard conditions in private prisons.
This document intends to “provide a written policy that implements zero tolerance toward all forms of sexual activity, including sexual abuse and sexual harassment, and to provide guidelines to address the following prohibited and/or illegal sexually abusive behavior involving: Inmate perpetrator against staff victim; Inmate perpetrator against inmate victim; [and] Staff perpetrator against inmate victim. This policy also covers incidents involving contractors and volunteers. These guidelines are provided to: Help detect incidents, perpetrators, and inmate victims of sexually abusive behavior; Help prevent sexually abusive behavior; Educate staff to intervene properly and in a timely manner; Document, report, and investigate reported incidents; [and] Discipline and/or prosecute perpetrators” (p. 1). Procedures explain: prevention planning; responsive planning; training and education; screening for risk of sexual victimization and abusiveness; reporting; official response following an inmate report; investigations; discipline; medical and mental care; data collection and review; and audits. Also attached is the “PREA Intake Objective Screening Instrument”.
“The federal prison population has risen dramatically over the past few decades, as more people are sentenced to prison and for longer terms. The result? Dangerously overcrowded facilities and an increasing expense to taxpayers. In [this] new Urban Institute report, the authors project the population and cost savings impact of a variety of strategies designed to reduce the inmate population without compromising public safety. They find that the most effective approach is a combination of strategies, including early release for current prisoners and reducing the length of stay for future offenders, particularly those convicted of drug trafficking.” Sections of this publication following an executive summary include: introduction to the impact of federal prison growth; understanding the federal prison population and drivers of growth—the main drivers being who goes to prison and for how long; policy options to ease growth and reduce costs—front-end changes and back-end changes; and conclusion.