Independent Ombudsman
for the Texas Juvenile Justice Department

 

 

 

Evins Regional Juvenile Center
Site Visit Report 
February 21-23, 2017

 

Observer: 
Purpose: Routine Secure Facilitv Site Visit
Report: This report is designed to identify problems and seek remedies that help secure the rights and ensure

the safety of youth housed at the facility. The issues identified in this report are based entirely on the
Ombudsman?s observations, interviews with staff and youth, and collected data. Unless otherwise
noted, the issues identified in this report do not constitute formal legal findings.

Last Review Date: January 17-18, 2017
Facility Budgeted Capacity: 136
Facility Population: 128

Number of Youth Interviewed: 20

Summary:

FACILITY, PROGRAMS, PROCESSES or ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTIONS:

There were 22 youth being housed in the Security Unit with 12 youth assigned to the Security Program, 8 youth assigned to the Re-Direct
program, and 2 youth on temporary assignment (TA). The Security unit pods and common area were clean and organized. A review of the
security files revealed that documents were being completed correctly within the appropriate time parameters allowed and youth were
receiving their due process rights. On dorms 3 and 4 there continues to be a lack of structured activities and redirection from the staff for
negative behavior. Youth were observed running around the dorms, horse playing, gathering in the bathroom area while other youth used the
restroom and/or just sitting around the dorm. Both youth and staff reported that the 16 hour schedule is not up to date and is not consistently
followed. On 3B the behavior of the youth and the lack of intervention from the staff created major safety concerns for both staff and youth
(this issue is discussed below). Dorm 1, housing the Alcohol and Other Drugs (AOD) program and dorm 4A, housing the Violent Offender
Program (VOP) were observed to be doing well. Youth were quiet and engaged in activities or were participating in group with their
staff/counselors. The education building was also observed to be quiet with the youth engaged in the classroom completing their work or

listening to the teacher. Several youth were in the vocational area working outside in the garden. The overall appearance of the campus
grounds and facilities were clean and well-kept.

INTERVIEWS:

Twenty youth were interviewed during this visit. No youth interviewed reported concerns for their safety or concerns of being extorted by
other youth. Several youth requested information about being released home, to a halfway house or to another facility and voiced concern
about not being able to meet with their case manager as much as they would like. The youth reported that they are bored while on the dorm
and do not have much to do. They stated that the daily schedule is not always followed and they sit around a lot and get in trouble. One youth
reported that a staff has been making inappropriate comments to him about his family. This concern was reported to the IRC.

SUMMARY:

There are numerous CO vacancies on the campus and three case manager positions are yet to be filled. Staff report that gang related
assaults are the biggest concern on campus as the number of incidents has quadrupled since December, 2016. The specialized treatment
programs were reported to be doing well. The therapist for the VOP recently resigned and the case manager reported that other mental health
professionals have been stepping in to ensure that youth are receiving the treatment needed to complete the program. Youth and staff reported
that the Capstone program is doing well and youth are participating in vocational activities outside as well as learning individual life skills.

The chart below is based on data collected by TJJD. The data shows that the number of restraints and the use of OC spray have continued to
increase during the month of January, 2017. There has been a tremendous increase in the number of gang related incidents and major
disruptions since November, 2016.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Feb-16 Mar-16 Apr-16 May?16 Jun-16 Jul-16 Aug-16 Sep-16 Oct-16 Nov-16 Dec-16 Jan?Restraints 165 261 197 152 108 95 159 112 176 131 153 163
Assaults Gang related Staff Assault Part. Major DistEvins RJC, February 21-23, 2017

Page 2 of 11

300 . 

250??-Map? .

Esuesldentified



 

  
    

.1-

Jun-16 NEW-719.!- 
. "q 

Q. I .



 

3391.17.



-?I?Restraints

.. ~Assault5 Y-Y
+Gang related
~Hf~$taff Assault

-Part. Major Dist.

 

lssuesfrom previous site visits remain on the report until the ombudsman has con?rmed that the response presented by Tij has been

completed and implemented.

 



 

 

Offenders Program dorm reported that the
licensed therapist that facilitated treatment
groups recently resigned. The youth
reported concern about not having the
opportunity to complete treatment and
their time being extended if a therapist is
not available to facilitate groups. This
concern would also affect the youth
waiting to enter the VOP program. What
plan of action can be implemented to
ensure that the youth are provided the
opportunity to receive the treatment that
they need from a licensed professional in
a timely manner without delaying the
youths' transition through the program?

 

 

 

manner in which the youth currently in the
program or waiting to enter will not be
impacted with delaying their individual
transition through the program. Youth on
the waiting list will enter the VOP Dorm
according to their individualized projected
entry date. in regards to the treatment
groups they will continue to be facilitated
by a licensed professional from the
department. Considering the
state-wide hiring freeze, the position will be
posted if and when it is approved.

 

Date i . . . 
Issue TDD Response Follow Up
2/21/17 The staff and youth on the Violent The VOP Dorm will continue to operate in a

 

Evins RJC, February 21-23, 2017

Page 3 of 11

 

 

 

2/21/17

 

Dorm BB was observed to be very chaotic
and unsafe during the evening shift on
February 21, 2017. Youth were seen
horse playing, running around the dorm,
and play fighting with little intervention or
redirection from the staff. One youth
began taking toilet paper out of the trash
can and putting it on doors around the
pod. Other youth began following this
youth and seemed to be encouraging his
negative behavior as they ran back and
forth through the dorm. The staff did very
little to de-escalate this situation and in
fact reported (on two occasions) that
everything was fine on the pod when the
picket staff asked over the intercom
speaker if they needed assistance.
Eventually this situation escalated to the
point that the youth was physically
restrained by the staff. Once the restraint
was in progress, the other youth gathered
around and seemed to be encouraging
the youth to struggle with the staff.
Another youth had to be restrained by
staff for interfering in the restraint that was
already in progress. At this point, none of
the youth had been directed away from
the area and back up had not been called.
When back up staff did arrive on the pod,
the youth were still not directed away from
the area for safety precautions. They were
allowed to sit on the tables and wall and
crowd around the restraint area. One
youth was seen reaching down and trying
to take something off of the staff?s belt or
out of his pocket while that staff was on
the floor in a restraint. Please provide a
plan to address the lack of supervision
and intervention from the staff to de-
escalate this situation and provide a safe
and secure environment for the youth.
Why are youth allowed to be in the area

 

ERJC facility has reviewed surveillance
video of the mentioned incident. The staff
was identified in this incident and the
supervisors spoke with the staff about
proper monitoring and redirection of the
youth's behavior. As of 2/28/2017 a plan of
action has been implemented for the
campus regarding proper supervision,
structure on the dorm, utilizing behavior
intervention to redirect youth's behavior
and safety on the dorm.

 

 

Evins RJC, February 21-23, 2017

Page 4 of 11

 

 

 

during the restraint of another youth?
What plan can be implemented to ensure
that youth are removed from the area and
not allowed to become involved in safety
issues with other youth?

 

2/21/17

 

 

During the shower routine on dorm SC,

two youth were observed entering the
shower area at the same time, undressing
in the common area and entering
(separate) stalls to complete their
showers. The staff on the dorm was not
providing appropriate supervision of the
youth during this time. It is the
understanding of the Ombudsman?s Office
that the shower routine procedure allows
for only one youth at a time to shower.
Please provide a plan of action to improve
the supervision of youth during the shower
routine and ensure that only one youth at
a time is allowed to shower.

 

ERJC previously implemented a procedure
that only one youth will be allowed out of
their room to shower at a time due to non?
structure during the routine. Once the JCO
staff are properly trained on the shower
routine and overall dorm behavior has
improved to which a structure shower
routine can be performed, the routine will
resume to two (2) youth showering at a
time. Administration will review the overall
dorm behavior to include reduction in
incidents, aggressive behavior and
compliance with the daily schedule. At this
current time the only dorm approved to
shower two youth at a time is Glory Dorm
(Dorm 1). The Manager 1?s will address the
appropriate supervisors to ensure the
proper process is followed regarding
shower routine.

 

 

 

Evins RJC, February 21-23, 2017

Page 5 of 11

 

 

1/17/17

Review of Security files revealed paper
work was incomplete, inaccurate and at
times duplicated. The required justification
for admission to security on the 225's
usually stated "admitted to control
behavior" instead of providing the actual
reason for admission. Several of the Level
admission or extension hearings and
security rules notification were not signed
by the youth as required; and the
comment ?youth in the shower" was
written on the signature line. Several
incident reports indicated requests for
extensions of receiving a 225 in security
were granted before the documented
incident time. The Security Unit Extension
forms for 2 youth were not signed by the
ADO or Superintendent as required by
agency policy. Please provide a plan of
action that will be implemented to ensure
youth?s due process rights are not violated
in the security program; and appropriate
documentation is provided for each
admission.

 

On 2/8/2017, the Manager of Operations
addressed the security case managers
regarding the process of admitting and
releasing a youth in accordance to GAP
Policy 380.9740. The Director of Security
will continue to provide additional and
ongoing training for the new hired security
case manager. if a youth is in the shower,
the security decision officer will wait until
the youth has completed his shower
routine and then obtain the youth's
signature. If other reasons prevent the staff
from obtaining the youth's signature, the
reason will be documented on the youth?s
log and the security decision officer will
obtain a witness?s signature. All extension
decision will be reviewed by the Director of
Security within one working day. The
decision on an appeal will be addressed
within 18 hours by the ADO, Assistant
Superintendent or Superintendent.

2/21/17 A review of the Security files 1
revealed that paper work had been
completed accurately and within the time
parameters allowed. This issue will be
closed.

 

 

1/17/17

 

The Manager of Security Operations
signed a Use of Force Report as the
Director of Security and Chair of the Use
of Force Review Board. The signature
was dated 01.14.2017 which was a
Saturday. It is the IO understanding the
Use of Force Review Board does not
meet on Saturday?s and the Manager 1 is
not the Chair of the Use of Force Review
Board. This gives the appearance of
inappropriate approval of a Use of Force.
What plan will be implemented to ensure
all Use of Force is reviewed in accordance
with agency policy and not by just 1
individual?

 

Both the Assistant Superintendent and the
Manager of Security Operations have
been made aware that the Use of Force
Review Board is to be chaired by the
Assistant Superintendent and in the
absence of the Assistant Superintendent,
the Manager of Operations may be
appointed to serve as the Chair of the Use
of Force Review Board. The Assistant
Superintendent has informed all staff that
are required to attend the Use of Force
Review Board the process and procedure
for the meeting. The Use of Force Review
Board is conducted weekly and
notifications are sent to the staff that is
required to attend. The minutes are posted

 

2/21/17- A review of paper work showed
that Use of Force Reports were
completed correctly. This issue will be
closed.

 

 

Evins RJC, February 21-23, 2017

Page 6 of 11

 

 

 

within one week of the Use of Force
Review Board.

 

1/17/17

 

The review of the Room/Cell Checks
(INS-100) on numerous dorms and
security revealed room checks were not
being completed at random intervals not
exceeding 15 minutes, as required by
agency This was
primarily occurring on the evening and
late night shifts, raising questions of
appropriate supervision. What plan of
action will be implemented to address this
matter and ensure compliance with this
safety/welfare issue?

 

The lNS.91.07-Room Checks policy will be
reviewed in Dorm Meetings, JCO and
Dorm Supervisors meetings by 3-11-2017.
The JCO and JCO Supervisors are
required to check at least 3 from
their respective dorm and documented the
review on the INS-100 daily. The Dorm
Supervisors will review a minimum of one
hour of archived video footage weekly. The
review will include all 3 shifts from their
respective dorms. Their review will be
documented on the Quality Assurance
Report (COG-275) and submitted to the
Manager 1, Assistant Superintendent, and
Superintendent. Any deficiencies noted will
be properly be addressed. The Quality
Assurance Report will be posted on the 
dnve.

 

February 21, 2017 A review of the
Room/Cell Checks (INS-100) revealed
that there continues to be an issue with
checks not being completed at random
intervals not exceeding 15 minutes as
required by agency policy 
What plan of action will be implemented
to address this matter and ensure
compliance with this safety/welfare
issue?

The JCO staff will continue to conduct
room checks not to exceed the 15
minutes. However the staff, at a
minimum will be required to conduct one
random motion check with in every hour.
The Assistance Superintendent will meet
with the Manager l, Dorm and JCO
Supervisors to review the expectations.
This expectation will be reviewed in the
upcoming TownHall Meeting schedule
for March 29, 2017 to include the late
night JCO staff. By March 31, 2017 the
expectations will be reviewed with all
JCO staff and all TRN-955's will be
submitted to the training and
administration department. The
Supervisors will continue to monitor
room checks for compliance.

 

Evins RJC, February 21-23, 2017

Page 7 of 11

 

 

 

1/17/17

 

During walk throughs of some dorms an
apparent lack of routine structure was
observed. On 2 pods JCO staff were
heard yelling instructions at youth and the
instructions were being ignored. Youth
were heard yelling at each other as well
as at staff. On one pod the case manager
was not present for core group and a 1
page worksheet had been left for youth to
complete. They did so in a few minutes
which left a lot of unstructured time. JCO
staff stated they ?improvise" a lot when it
comes to structured routine. Control room
staff and floor staff were unable to provide
a written routine schedule. Dorm staff also
indicated they were not provided a
schedule to follow when a pod/dorm were
on slow down or restrictions. One JCO
stated a Supervisor had shown him the
slow down schedule on his cell phone,
and then left the pod. What plan will the
facility implement to ensure daily routines
are posted on all pods, and staff youth
receive training on the schedules. Further
when a pod/dorm are placed on slow
down or restriction how will the facility
ensure all staff have access to the
approved routine for same?

 

 

The Manager 1?Treatment and Program
Services has met with the dorm case
managers regarding core group and having
a trained designee to cover the core group
in their absences. By 2/20/2017 all dorm
schedule will be reviewed and the
necessary changes will be made to include
providing a structure leisure activity
schedule.

Once a dorm is placed on shutdown, the
JCO and/or Dorm Supervisor are
responsible for meeting and informing both
youth and staff the reason for the dorm
being placed on shutdown, reviews the
shutdown schedule with both youth and
staff, and document that this occurred on
the dorm A copy of the dorm
shutdown schedule will be provided to the
dorm staff, all JCO and Dorm Supervisors,
a copy placed in the dorm picket, and the
gatehouse. Each day that the dorm is on
shutdown the JCO and/or Dorm Supervisor
are to inform the staff prior to the being on
their shift the status of the dorm shutdown
and ensure that they have a shutdown
schedule.

 

February 21, 2017' The lack of a
structured routine for the youth while on
the dorm continues to be a concern. The
16 hour schedules posted on the dorms
have not been updated and the staff and
youth report that this schedule does not
accurately reflect expectations of when
activities are to take place. On dorms
three and four youth were observed
wandering around the dorm talking,
horse playing and/orjust sitting at the
table with nothing to do. On dorm 3D
youth were observed gathered behind
the wall that separates the bathroom
from the day area talking while one
youth was using the toilet and the others
standing at the stalls. On SB youth were
observed running all over the dorm,
horse playing and not following any
direction from the staff. On 4C, 4 youth
that were on restriction during school
hours remained on the dorm. Two of the
youth were observed asleep in their
rooms and the other two were in the clay
area with the staff. What plan will the
facility implement to ensure daily
routines are posted on all pods, and staff
youth receive training on the
schedules. Please provide a plan to
update the 16 hour daily schedules and
the expected time for it to be completed.

The Facility Schedules have been
updated to reflect the day to day
activities and Education scheduled set
forth in place. Supervisors will ensure
that the facility daily schedule is posted
on all Pods housing youths. The
Managers of Operations and Treatment
will complete Weekly Dorm lnspections
to ensure that all Facility Dorm Daily
Schedules are Posted appropriately and

 

Evins RJC, February 21-23, 2017

Page 8 of 11

 

 

 

visible for all who enter the Dorms. Dorm
Supervisors will cover the expectations
of the schedule in their schedule March
2017 Dorm meetings and direct
staffs to follow the schedule posted. By
3/31/2017 all JCO staff and Supervisors
will be trained on the current dorm
schedules, training sheets will be
submitted to the training department and
administration.

 

?12/28/16

 

 

Youth from dorm BB reported that they
were held in security over the weekend of
12/16/16 thru 12/19/16 without justification
for holding them there. They reported that
they participated in a major disruption on
their dorm on 12/16/16 and were admitted
to security and were informed that they
would be held over the weekend. Security
unit documentation was reviewed for this
time period. The shows that five
youths from dorm SB were admitted to the
security program on 12/16/16. The
Security Unit: Individual Youth Records
showed that these youth
displayed no behavioral issues but
continued to receive time extensions until
released on 12/19/16. The incident reports
documenting the need for extensions
state "Extension necessary the youth is
likely to interfere with a pending/ongoing
investigation or a requested/scheduled
due process hearing." On this same date
(12/16/16) youth from other dorms were
placed in the security program for
?participation in a major disruption of
facility operations". However, these youth
were released from the security program
without extensions being applied. Several
staff interviewed reported that they feel

 

that these youth from 38 were held in

Evins RJC, February 21?23, 2017

TJJD/Facility Response: The youth on
Dorm SB were held in Security due to
causing a major disruption on the dorm
while other major disruptions were also
occurring simultaneously on campus. They
continued to be held in security due to
verbal threats to cause a riot on campus,
making them a danger to safety and
security. All the youth from dorm 3A
participated in a major disruption staff were
instructed to place those youth on security
program in their dormitory. This was done
because there wasn?t adequate bed space
in the security unit. 8 reported to
Superintendent a that a review of
security program paperwork on SA
revealed that the youth did not receive
proper due process. In keeping with policy,
those youth were released from security
program back to dorm program, however
the dorm was placed on dorm restrictions
because the majority of the kids assigned
had participated in disruptive behavior and
remained a risk to campus safety and
security. Dorm 3A was removed from dorm
restriction on December 18, 2016.

 

 

1/17/17 - During the first day of this site
visit there were at least seven youth
being extended in security without
appropriate documented justification.
These youth were admitted to security
on January 12, 2017 for participating in
?passing a kite". On January 14, 2017
there was an email sent out stating that
the directive of the Manager I was not to
release these youth and to ?continue
with extension protocol". Security staff
reported they were instructed to extend
these youth in security until their Level l 
disciplinary hearing had been completed
(01. 25.17). A review of security
paperwork revealed these youth had not
displayed behavioral problems nor met
requirements to be extended in security,
yet they continued to be extended each
day. The daily level extension hearing
reports cited "extorting others, gang
activity, assault of youth, and threatening
others," but the Incident Reports (225?s)
did not offer any evidence to support
these allegations. The 225?s for most of
these youth routinely stated that youth
would be extended due to ?possible
interference in an ongoing investigation"
but offered no supporting
documentation. These youth were

 

Page 9 of 11

 

 

 

 

security without justifiable reason. The
incident in which they participated was on
the dorm and video recorded the
disruption. What actions were staff
worried these youth would take to
interfere with the investigation or due
process hearing that justified keeping
them in security? What reason can be
offered as to why the youth in dorm BB
were held in security while youth from
other dorms participated in similar (but
separate) incidents and were released
from the security program?

 

released from Security after the
Ombudsman?s departure from the facility
on the first day of the site visit. Specific
to this incident what justification can be
offered as the reason(s) for the
continued extension for these youth?
What plan will be implemented to ensure
compliance with agency policy
GAP.380.9740 regarding extensions
past 24 hours in the security program,
ensuring youth?s rights are not violated?

The youth mentioned were observed on
DVR review. It appeared they were
"passing a kite? that that described a
planned assault of a particular youth.
Those youth were referred to security for
further investigation of the incident. On
2/8/2017 the Superintendent met with
the Case Managers and Dorm
Supervisors to review GAP.380.9740
and the security extension process.

As of 2/8/ 17 a staff requesting to extend
a youth beyond 24 hours for non-security
rule violations will document the
reason(s) on a 225 and the 22D,
provide the appropriate documentation
to support reason(s) for the extension
request and communicate with the on
duty security case manager that a
request has been made to extend the
youth. The security dorm supervisor
(Director of Security) and JCO
Supervisor will review all 225?s daily,
ensure admission and release criteria
have been met and properly
documented. The ADO, Manager 1's
and Assistant Superintendent will review
the files of those youth that have been
extended for proper extensions,

 

documentation and appropriately

 

Evins RJC, February 21?23, 2017

Page 10 of 11

 

 

 

 

 

 

address any deficiencies.

2/21/17- A review of the Security unit
paper work revealed that the youth being
held in security were afforded their due
process and all documents were
completed as required. This issue will be
closed.

 

I certify that this report represents a true and accurate assessment of all issues identified.

 

Submitted by:
Allen M. Hall l/ 
Deputy Ombudsman

Evins RJC, February 21-23, 2017

?zzr/ 7

 

Date

Page 11 of 11