Adult Prisons and Jails with Immigration Supplement Lockups Juvenile Facilities Community Corrections

National Prison Rape Elimination Commission logo

Standards:

For The Prevention, Detection, Response, and Monitoring of
Sexual Abuse in:

Adult Prisons and Jails

 

I. PREVENTION AND RESPONSE PLANNING

(PP)

PREVENTION PLANNING (PP)

(PP1)

Zero tolerance of sexual abuse

The agency has a written policy mandating zero tolerance toward all forms of sexual abuse and enforces that policy by ensuring all of its facilities comply with the PREA standards. The agency employs or designates a PREA coordinator to develop, implement, and oversee agency efforts to comply with the PREA standards.

Assessment Checklist

YES

NO

(a) Does the agency have a written policy mandating zero tolerance toward all forms of sexual abuse?

(b) Does the agency ensure that all of its facilities comply with the PREA standards?

(c) Does the agency employ or designate a PREA coordinator to develop, implement,
and oversee agency efforts to comply with the PREA standards?

Discussion

Eliminating sexual abuse in confinement requires first and foremost a commitment to safety as a core mandate of confinement operations. Agency and facility heads will be responsible not only for ensuring that staff and inmates are informed of the agency’s zero-tolerance policy toward sexual abuse but for setting a tone that signals true commitment to an institutional culture of safety and security for all inmates and staff. The agency head will also be responsible for employing or designating a PREA coordinator to manage and oversee the agency’s efforts to comply with the PREA standards. The PREA coordinator’s job should include: (1) developing written policies that follow correctional best practices and meet the intent of the PREA standards; (2) developing and implementing a training plan that fulfills the PREA training standards; (3) monitoring inmate screening procedures, investigations, and medical and mental health care treatment according to the PREA standards; (4) supervising the agency’s data collection efforts; and (5) providing appropriate access and materials to auditors. By definition, the PREA coordinator will be a senior-level position reporting directly to the agency head. In that capacity, the PREA coordinator should provide routine updates to the agency head, including at executive-level meetings, on his or her areas of responsibility; progress reports on standards implementation and compliance; and notice of any problems or challenges that need to be addressed.

To ensure successful compliance with the PREA standards, the PREA coordinator may need to develop strategies to address the culture of the agency or facility(ies) to determine the levels of staff and inmate resistance or openness to PREA standards implementation. Examples of strategies may include conducting or coordinating assessments by surveying staff members and inmates to understand their attitudes, beliefs, and values that support or conflict with a “reporting” culture that creates safety and security. Based on the results of the assessment, the PREA coordinator and facility head(s) should work with key staff on all levels to design strategies that create a cultural “readiness” for change (e.g., development of new policies, staff briefings, video briefings from leadership for staff, and strategic planning meetings), training programs, and other systems to change the culture to one in which staff and inmates embrace the goals and values of PREA and institutional safety.

(PP2)

Contracting with other entities for the confinement of inmates

If public correctional agencies contract for the confinement of their inmates, they do so only with private agencies or other entities, including other government agencies, committed to eliminating sexual abuse in their facilities, as evidenced by their adoption of and compliance with the PREA standards. Any new contracts or contract renewals include the entity’s obligation to adopt and comply with the PREA standards and specify that the public agency will monitor the entity’s compliance with these standards as part of its monitoring of the entity’s performance.

Assessment Checklist

YES

NO

(a) Does the public agency contract for the confinement of inmates only with private agencies and other entities, including other government agencies, that agree to adopt and comply with the PREA standards?

(b) Do all new contracts and contract renewals include an obligation to adopt and comply with the PREA standards?

(c) Do all new contracts and contract renewals specify that the public agency will
monitor the entity’s compliance with the PREA standards as part of its monitoring of the entity’s performance?

Discussion

The goal of this standard is to ensure that all inmates, regardless of whether they are housed in public or private confinement settings, are protected from sexual abuse. Public agencies that contract with private agencies or other entities, including other government agencies, to confine their inmates are responsible for ensuring such protection of all inmates by contracting only with those companies or other entities that adopt and comply with PREA standards.

(PP3)

Inmate supervision

Security staff provides the inmate supervision necessary to protect inmates from sexual abuse. The upper management officials responsible for reviewing critical incidents must examine areas in the facility where sexual abuse has occurred to assess whether physical barriers may have enabled the abuse, the adequacy of staffing levels in those areas during different shifts, and the need for monitoring technology to supplement security staff supervision (DC-1). When problems or needs are identified, the agency takes corrective action (DC-3).

Assessment Checklist

YES

NO

(a) Does security staff provide the supervision of inmates necessary to protect them from sexual abuse?

(b) Do the upper management officials responsible for reviewing critical incidents
examine areas in the facility where sexual abuse has occurred to assess the following?

• Physical barriers that may have enabled the abuse

• Adequacy of staffing levels in those areas during different shifts

• Monitoring technology needs

(c) When problems or needs are identified, does the agency take corrective action?
(Attach description of corrective actions taken.)

Discussion

Adequate security staff supervision of inmates is an essential component of any agency’s sexual abuse prevention strategy. It enables security staff to identify aggressive or coercive inmate behavior before it escalates to sexual abuse, to identify signs of inappropriate staff relationships developing with inmates before they become abuse, to respond immediately to prevent or end incidents of abuse by inmates or staff, and, when an incident does occur, to rapidly take the steps necessary for an effective response. For many facilities, adequate security staff supervision is achieved by using a direct supervision model to manage the inmate population. Direct supervision, widely extolled as a best practice, is a method of inmate management whereby officers are in continuous direct contact with inmates, enabling them to interact with and observe inmates at all or most times. When feasible, given the security level of the inmate population and any constraints stemming from the physical design of the facility, the Commission recommends that facilities strive to meet this standard by employing a direct supervision model.

Additionally, to ensure that any deficiencies in inmate supervision are promptly identified and corrected, the standard requires the upper management officials responsible for reviewing critical incidents to examine known areas where sexual abuse has occurred to assess and take corrective action regarding any physical barriers that may have enabled the abuse, any problems with staffing levels in those areas at different times of the day, and any needs for monitoring technology to supplement security staff supervision. In examining known areas where sexual abuse has occurred, for example, they may find blind spots or inadequate staffing patterns on particular shifts, which require new or different staff deployment schemes and/or the addition or adjustment of cameras. More sophisticated video security monitoring systems and/or radio frequency identification systems may also be useful tools for monitoring staff and inmate movement and location. The team of upper management officials may also discover that, to remedy the risk posed by physical barriers, other creative adaptations to facility design may be required. They ought to examine each area carefully and take corrective action to ensure that inmates in all areas of the facility are safe from sexual abuse. Moreover, when patterns of abuse have been identified in reviews (DC-1, DC-3), either at a given time of day, in a particular area, or involving certain types of inmates, facility leadership should take action to ensure increased supervision during those times, in those areas, or for those groups of inmates.

(PP4)

Limits to cross-gender viewing and searches

Except in the case of emergency, the facility prohibits cross-gender strip and visual body cavity searches. Except in the case of emergency or other extraordinary or unforeseen circumstances, the facility restricts nonmedical staff from viewing inmates of the opposite gender who are nude or performing bodily functions and similarly restricts cross-gender pat-down searches. Medical practitioners conduct examinations of transgender individuals to determine their genital status only in private settings and only when an individual’s genital status is unknown.

Assessment Checklist

YES

NO

(a) Except in the case of emergency, does the facility prohibit cross-gender searches of the following types?

• Strip

• Visual body cavity

(b) Except in the case of emergency or other extraordinary or unforeseen circumstances, does the facility restrict cross-gender viewing by nonmedical staff of inmates who are nude or performing bodily functions?

(c) Except in the case of emergency or other extraordinary or unforeseen circumstances, does the facility restrict cross-gender pat-down searches?

(d) Are examinations of transgender individuals to determine their genital status conducted only by medical practitioners in private settings and only when an individual’s genital status is unknown?

Discussion

The goal of this standard is to protect the privacy and dignity of inmates and to reduce opportunities for staff-on-inmate sexual abuse by prohibiting cross-gender strip and visual body cavity searches, setting limits on cross-gender viewing of inmates by nonmedical staff, and restricting cross-gender pat-down searches.

This standard imposes a strong prohibition on cross-gender strip and visual body cavity searches, except in the case of emergency. Performance of these more intrusive strip and body cavity searches should be undertaken only by specially trained, designated employees of the same gender and conducted in conformance with hygienic procedures and professional practices. Agencies without adequate security staff of the same gender as the inmate population may want to consider training non-security staff to conduct these searches.

This standard does not place a prohibition on cross-gender pat-down searches and viewing of inmates but requires these actions to be strictly limited in practice and only in the case of emergency or other extraordinary or unforeseen circumstances. The Commission recognizes that many State and local laws already restrict cross-gender viewing of inmates and encourages agencies to consult and follow their relevant State and local laws. The Commission likewise acknowledges that cross-gender supervision, in general, can prove beneficial in certain confinement settings and in no way intends for this standard to limit employment (or post assignment) opportunities for men or women.

Agencies are encouraged to use a number of tools to aid compliance with this standard, including the use of privacy panels for shower and toilet areas and making verbal announcements when a staff member of the opposite gender is in an area. Also, in addition to prohibiting cross-gender strip and visual body cavity searches, each agency is encouraged to have a strong, legally based policy regarding all searches (including same-gender searches) that gives proper regard to the inmate’s rights to privacy and dignity.

In some facilities, employees conduct strip or body cavity searches of transgender individuals ostensibly to determine their genital status. All too frequently, such examinations are not necessary because the individual’s genital status was already determined at an initial medical screening. To protect the privacy and dignity of transgender individuals, this standard prohibits examinations to determine genital status when that status has already been ascertained.
Additionally, this standard requires that examinations to determine genital status be conducted in private and by medical practitioners.

(PP5)

Accommodating inmates with special needs

The agency ensures that inmates who are limited English proficient (LEP), deaf, or disabled are able to report sexual abuse to staff directly, through interpretive technology, or through non-inmate interpreters. Accommodations are made to convey all written information about sexual abuse policies, including how to report sexual abuse, verbally to inmates who have limited reading skills or who are visually impaired.

Assessment Checklist

YES

NO

(a) Are all LEP, deaf, and disabled inmates able to report sexual abuse to staff directly, through interpretive technology, or through non-inmate interpreters?

(b) Are accommodations made to convey all written information about sexual abuse policies, including how to report sexual abuse, verbally to inmates with limited reading skills or who are visually impaired?

Discussion

The ability of all inmates to communicate effectively and directly with staff, without having to rely on inmate interpreters, is crucial for ensuring that they are able to report sexual abuse as discreetly as possible. It is never desirable or sufficient for inmates to serve as interpreters or translators for other inmates to report abuse because it compromises confidentiality and places some inmates in a position of undue influence over others. It is likewise critical that all inmates be informed of the agency’s policies, including how to report, in a way and format that they understand. If the language and communication needs of the inmate population are unknown, the facility head or PREA coordinator may need to conduct an assessment of those needs and develop policies and protocols to address them. Having strong policies and protocols will help staff ensure the safety of LEP, deaf, and disabled inmates as well as those inmates who have limited reading skills or who are visually impaired.

(PP6)

Hiring and promotion decisions

The agency does not hire or promote anyone who has engaged in sexual abuse in an institutional setting or who has engaged in sexual activity in the community facilitated by force, the threat of force, or coercion. Consistent with Federal, State, and local law, the agency makes its best effort to contact all prior institutional employers for information on substantiated allegations of sexual abuse; must run criminal background checks for all applicants and employees being considered for promotion; and must examine and carefully weigh any history of criminal activity at work or in the community, including convictions for domestic violence, stalking, and sex offenses. The agency also asks all applicants and employees directly about previous misconduct during interviews and reviews.

Assessment Checklist

YES

NO

(a) Consistent with Federal, State, and local law, does the agency make its best effort to contact all prior institutional employers for information on substantiated allegations of sexual abuse?

(b) Does the agency disqualify applicants or employees being considered for promotion upon learning of the following?

• Any history of substantiated allegations of sexual abuse in an institutional setting

• That they have engaged in sexual activity in the community facilitated by force, the threat of force, or coercion

(c) Does the agency run criminal background checks for all applicants and employees being considered for promotion?

(d) Does the agency carefully consider any history of criminal activity at work or in the community, including the following?

• Any convictions for domestic violence

• Any convictions for stalking

• Any convictions for sex offenses committed in the community

(e) Does the agency ask all applicants and employees directly about previous misconduct during interviews and reviews?

Discussion

An agency will not be able to meet its zero-tolerance goal if it employs or promotes anyone who has engaged in sexual abuse in an institutional setting or who has engaged in sexual activity facilitated by force, the threat of force, or coercion. Coercion includes but is not limited to using a position of authority or power to compel someone to engage in sexual activity. Changing institutional culture and eliminating sexual abuse can be difficult enough without adding the unnecessary additional risk of hiring or retaining individuals whose conduct has demonstrated a lack of personal commitment to PREA’s goals. In addition to making its best effort to contact all prior institutional employers for information on substantiated allegations of sexual abuse, the agency should have a consistent, proactive policy on asking applicants and employees directly about previous misconduct during interviews or reviews. In jurisdictions in which prospective employers are limited in their inquiry of previous employment or criminal background, the agency should consider having job applicants sign waivers, if not prohibited by law, stating that they waive their legal rights to claim libel, defamation, or slander regarding any information given during reference checks about their disciplinary history involving sexual abuse.

Although many agencies already run routine criminal background checks for applicants, the standard requires agencies to run criminal background checks, where allowable by law, both for all applicants and for employees being considered for promotion to ensure that agencies are always up to date on any criminal activity perpetrated by applicants or employees since gaining employment. The standard does not prescribe how to evaluate criminal histories because the Commission recognizes that the agency will have to consider each criminal history on a case-by-case basis and within a larger context of the person’s background, life experiences, and work history. When considering previous criminal activity, the agency will have to weigh a number of factors, including the nature and number of offenses and how much time has passed since any convictions, to determine whether to hire or promote an individual.

(PP7)

Assessment and use of monitoring technology

The agency uses video monitoring systems and other cost-effective and appropriate technology to supplement its sexual abuse prevention, detection, and response efforts. The agency assesses, at least annually, the feasibility of and need for new or additional monitoring technology and develops a plan for securing such technology.

Assessment Checklist

YES

NO

(a) Does the agency use video monitoring systems and other cost-effective and
appropriate technology to supplement its sexual abuse prevention, detection,
and response efforts?

(b) At least annually, does the agency assess the feasibility of and need for new or
additional monitoring technology and develop a plan for securing such technology?

Discussion

Video monitoring systems and other technology are invaluable tools for eliminating sexual abuse. Video monitoring systems, when properly designed, managed, maintained, updated, and fully integrated into the agency’s various other security systems, can serve as highly objective mechanisms for preventing, detecting, and responding to sexual abuse. The Commission recognizes, however, that some agencies may not have the resources immediately available to acquire and implement new technology solutions or improve existing ones and so requires those agencies to conduct an annual assessment of technology needs and to develop a plan to secure new or additional monitoring technology if needed. For all agencies, technology should be adapted to the population as well as to the age and design of each particular facility.

(RP)

Response Planning (RP)

(RP1)

Evidence protocol and forensic medical exams

The agency follows a uniform evidence protocol that maximizes the potential for obtaining usable physical evidence for administrative proceedings and criminal prosecutions. The protocol must be adapted from or otherwise based on the 2004 U.S. Department of Justice’s Office on Violence Against Women publication “A National Protocol for Sexual Assault Medical Forensic Examinations, Adults/Adolescents,” subsequent updated editions, or similarly comprehensive and authoritative protocols developed after 2004. As part of the agency’s evidence collection protocol, all victims of inmate-on-inmate sexually abusive penetration or staff-on-inmate sexually abusive penetration are provided access to forensic medical exams performed by qualified forensic medical examiners. Forensic medical exams are provided free of charge to the victim. The facility makes available a victim advocate to accompany the victim through the forensic medical exam process.

Assessment Checklist

YES

NO

(a) Has the agency developed a written protocol adapted from or otherwise based on the U.S. Department of Justice’s “A National Protocol for Sexual Assault Medical Forensic Examinations, Adults/Adolescents,” any subsequent updated editions, or similarly comprehensive and authoritative protocols developed after 2004?

(b) Does the facility provide victims of inmate-on-inmate sexually abusive penetration or staff-on-inmate sexually abusive penetration with access to a forensic medical exam?

(c) Are all forensic medical exams provided by the facility performed by a qualified forensic medical examiner?

(d) Are forensic medical exams provided free of charge to the victim?

(e) Does the facility make available a victim advocate to accompany the victim through the forensic medical exam process?

Discussion

At the time of publication of this body of standards, the 2004 U.S. Department of Justice’s Office on Violence Against Women publication “A National Protocol for Sexual Assault Medical Forensic Examinations, Adults/Adolescents” is considered the “gold standard” of sexual assault evidence protocols by both the law enforcement and the forensic medical examiner communities. The protocol can be found electronically at the following Web address: http://www.ncjrs.gov/
pdffiles1/ovw/206554.pdf. The agency head should review the national protocol or a subsequent updated edition and incorporate it into the agency’s current protocol or use it to develop a new agency protocol by adapting the national protocol to fit the agency’s needs, resources, and policies. The agency head may find it particularly helpful to consult Appendix A of the national protocol, which provides guidance on how jurisdictions can customize the national protocol to meet specific local needs, challenges, policies, and statutes.

The agency head should ensure that all medical and mental health practitioners who treat inmate victims of sexual abuse understand the importance of conducting prompt examinations to identify medical and mental health needs and minimize the loss of evidence. It is critical that victims’ acute medical and mental health needs be evaluated and addressed before evidence is collected on-site or before they are transported off-site for evidence collection. Key elements of proper evidence collection, discussed at length in the national protocol, include: (1) instructing victims not to wash, brush their teeth, change their clothes, urinate, defecate, smoke, drink, or eat until they have been initially evaluated by a forensic medical examiner (OR-3) and (2) educating individuals involved in the handling, documentation, transfer, and storage of evidence about how to preserve evidence and maintain the chain of custody.

Additionally, the forensic medical exam is an important element of both evidence collection and treatment for recent sexual abuse victims. When possible, it is considered best practice to transport victims to outside health care providers for forensic medical exams to avoid any conflict or appearance of conflict of interest regarding potential evidence or treatment of the victim. If a facility does not have access to any community providers able to perform forensic medical exams or if a specific inmate in need of an exam has been deemed a flight risk or too dangerous to transport out of the facility, it should take steps to contract with qualified independent medical practitioners to perform the forensic exams at the facility. When an individual inmate has been deemed a flight risk or too dangerous to transport out of the facility, the facility head should document in writing at the time the decision is made the factors that led to the decision not to transport the inmate off-site. Please see Appendix A for more on the responsibilities of forensic medical examiners.

(RP2)

Agreements with outside public entities and community service providers

The agency maintains or attempts to enter into memoranda of understanding (MOUs) or other agreements with an outside public entity or office that is able to receive and immediately
forward inmate reports of sexual abuse to facility heads (RE-1). The agency also maintains or attempts to enter into MOUs or other agreements with community service providers that are able to: (1) provide inmates with confidential emotional support services related to sexual abuse and (2) help victims of sexual abuse during their transition from incarceration to the community (RE-3, MM-3). The agency maintains copies of agreements or documentation showing attempts to enter into agreements.

Assessment Checklist

YES

NO

(a) Does the agency maintain an agreement or attempt to enter into an agreement with an outside public entity or office that is able to receive and immediately forward inmate reports of sexual abuse to facility heads?

b) Does the agency maintain or attempt to enter into agreements with community service providers that are able to do the following?

• Provide inmates with confidential emotional support services related to sexual abuse

• Help victims of sexual abuse during their transition from incarceration to the community

(c) Does the agency maintain copies of agreements or documentation showing attempts to enter into agreements?

Discussion

Working to establish partnerships with outside public entities and community service providers will enable the agency to meet the requirements of standards RE-1, RE-3, and MM-3 most effectively. Forging these partnerships will allow the agency to provide the range of services available in the community and will give inmates the choice to speak to someone not affiliated with the agency if they feel more comfortable doing so. When an agency establishes an MOU with an outside public entity or office to receive inmate reports of sexual abuse, it should make clear that the outside public entity is responsible for forwarding those reports back to the agency immediately upon receipt, unless the inmate requests confidentiality (RE-1). For cases in which facilities are located in areas lacking adequate community service providers willing to provide transition services to inmates, the agency head should consider researching regional or national agencies or groups that inmates may be able to access by telephone or, if no other alternative is possible, by mail and provide inmates with that contact information. For cases in which facilities are located in areas lacking adequate community service providers willing to provide victim support services to inmates, the agency or facility head is required by RE-3 to identify regional and/or national agencies or groups that inmates may be able to access by telephone or, if no other alternative is possible, by mail and provide inmates with that contact information.

Although the Commission recognizes that correctional agencies may not be able to persuade outside public entities or community service providers to enter into agreements, it nonetheless requires agencies to try to enter into agreements. For correctional agencies that successfully enter into agreements with outside public entities and community service providers, the Commission recommends that agreements contain the following elements: (1) the purpose of the agreement; (2) the respective roles and responsibilities of the correctional agency and outside public entity or community service provider; (3) the procedures for how and when community service providers are able to gain entry into a facility; (4) the level of security supervision community service providers will have while in a facility; (5) the safety precautions that community service providers should take when working with inmates; and (6) any laws, rules, and/or regulations relevant to the service being provided, including laws granting privilege and agency rules governing confidentiality for disclosures about sexual abuse made to community service providers.

(RP3)

Agreements with outside law enforcement agencies

If an agency does not have the legal authority to conduct criminal investigations or has elected to permit an outside agency to conduct criminal or administrative investigations of staff or inmates, the agency maintains or attempts to enter into a written MOU or other agreement specific to investigations of sexual abuse with the law enforcement agency responsible for conducting investigations. If the agency confines inmates under the age of 18 or other inmates who fall under State and local vulnerable persons statutes, the agency maintains or attempts to enter into an MOU with the designated State or local services agency with the jurisdiction and authority to conduct investigations related to the sexual abuse of vulnerable persons within confinement facilities. When the agency already has an existing agreement or long-standing policy covering responsibilities for all criminal investigations, including sexual abuse investigations, it does not need to enter into a new agreement. The agency maintains a copy of the agreement or documentation showing attempts to enter into an agreement.

Assessment Checklist

YES

NO

(a) If the agency does not have the legal authority to conduct criminal investigations or has elected to permit an outside agency to conduct criminal or administrative investigations of staff or inmates, has the agency established or attempted to establish a written MOU or other agreement specific to investigations of sexual abuse with the law enforcement agency responsible for conducting investigations?

(b) If the agency confines inmates under the age of 18 or other inmates who fall under State and local vulnerable persons statutes, has the agency established or attempted to establish an MOU with the designated State or local services agency with the jurisdiction and authority to conduct investigations related to the sexual abuse of vulnerable persons within confinement facilities?

(c) Does the agency maintain a copy of the agreement or documentation showing attempts to enter into an agreement?

Discussion

Standing agreements between correctional agencies and outside law enforcement agencies outlining how they will work together while investigating an incident of sexual abuse are important for ensuring that investigations into allegations of sexual abuse are timely and effective. Although the Commission recognizes that correctional agencies may not be able to persuade outside law enforcement agencies to enter into agreements, it nonetheless requires agencies to try to enter into agreements. For correctional agencies that successfully enter into agreements with outside law enforcement agencies, the Commission recommends that agreements contain the following elements: (1) the criteria, protocol, and timetables for referring an allegation of sexual abuse to the outside law enforcement agency for investigation; (2) the respective roles and responsibilities for conducting sexual abuse investigations; (3) the respective roles and responsibilities of the correctional and law enforcement agencies for collecting evidence in accordance with the correctional or law enforcement agency’s evidence protocol; (4) detailed information on how criminal and administrative investigations will be coordinated between the agencies; (5) description of what information will and will not be shared between agencies; (6) the protocol for reporting progress on investigations to corrections officials; (7) the location where closed case files will be maintained; (8) the protocol for informing the victim of the progress and outcome of the investigation(s); and (9) a schedule of regular meetings between the agency and law enforcement supervisors to review the efficacy of the agreement and to recommend or make any changes, as necessary.

If the agency confines any inmates under the age of 18 or inmates who fall under State or local vulnerable persons statutes, an outside services agency will likely have the authority and jurisdiction to conduct separate investigations into allegations of sexual abuse committed against such vulnerable persons in confinement. If this is the case, the agency should enter or attempt to enter into an MOU with the State or local services agency, as it would with any law enforcement agency with the authority to conduct investigations, and follow the same recommendations listed above.

(RP4)

Agreements with the prosecuting authority

The agency maintains or attempts to enter into a written MOU or other agreement with the authority responsible for prosecuting violations of criminal law. The agency maintains a copy of the agreement or documentation showing attempts to enter into an agreement.

Assessment Checklist

YES

NO

(a) Has the agency established or attempted to establish a written MOU or other agreement with the authority responsible for prosecuting violations of criminal law?

(b) Does the agency maintain a copy of the agreement or documentation showing attempts to enter into an agreement?

Discussion

Greater collaboration and communication between correctional agencies and prosecutors can dramatically affect the success of sexual abuse prosecutions, improving accountability and preventing the recurrence of incidents of sexual abuse. The Commission urges the agency head to maintain regular, ongoing discussions with prosecutors about issues related to any allegations of criminal conduct in the agency.

Although the Commission recognizes that correctional agencies may not be able to persuade prosecuting authorities to enter into agreements, it nonetheless requires agencies to try to enter into agreements. For correctional agencies that successfully enter into agreements with prosecutors, the Commission recommends that agreements contain the following elements: (1) the purpose of the agreement (e.g., to ensure effective prosecution of sexual abuse in confinement settings), (2) identification of the liaison position within each agency/office, (3) a schedule for joint training of investigators and prosecutors, (4) objective criteria for prosecution referral, (5) a description of the necessary evidence and relevant paperwork prosecutors will need from the agency to prosecute a case of sexual abuse, (6) timeframes for submission of criminal cases to prosecutors, (7) a requirement that prosecutors report back to correctional agencies after each case is reviewed, (8) the respective roles and responsibilities of the correctional agency and the prosecuting authority if the prosecutor decides to prosecute, and (9) a schedule of regular meetings between the agency and prosecution supervisors to review the efficacy of the agreement and to recommend or make any changes, as necessary.