September 2023 Centralized Screening Monitoring Team Case Blocks

Amarik K. Singh OIG OFFICE of the Inspector General INSPECTOR GENERAL Neil Robertson Chief Deputy Inspector General September 2023 Centralized Screening Monitoring Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight During September 2023, the OIG’s Centralized Screening Monitoring Team randomly selected and opened 299 grievances for monitoring. This document presents five notable cases monitored and closed by the OIG during September 2023. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment Poor 23-0060837-CSMT Incident Summary On July 13, 2023, a nurse allegedly walked by an incarcerated person’s cell door to intentionally disrupt the incarcerated person’s sleep while he was on suicide watch. A second nurse allegedly then stood outside the incarcerated person’s cell, stared at the incarcerated person’s genitals, and allegedly told the incarcerated person to look at her and masturbate, while a third nurse was allegedly present. The second nurse allegedly called the incarcerated person a “weirdo” several times in front of an officer. Disposition The department’s Centralized Screening Team (screening team) routed a single allegation of contesting medical care back to the prison as a routine issue. While the OIG concurred with the routing, the screening team failed to identify allegations of staff sexual misconduct and discourteous treatment against nursing staff. The OIG elevated the omission to screening team administrators who then amended their decision and opened a new grievance to address the staff sexual misconduct and discourteous treatment allegations, which they routed to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit for an investigation. Case Rating Overall, the department performed poorly. The screening team failed to identify the allegation that a nurse stared at an incarcerated person’s genitals and asked the incarcerated person to masturbate while the nurse, and a second nurse allegedly watched. The screening team failed to identify an allegation of discourteous treatment by the same nurse, who allegedly called the incarcerated person a “weirdo” several times in front of an officer. On July 28, 2023, and August 4, 2023, the OIG elevated concerns with the decision to screening team administrators. On August 25, 2023, 20 business days following the OIG’s first notification, screening team administrators responded by opening a new grievance log to address the allegations of staff sexual misconduct and discourteous treatment. Although the OIG credited the department with taking the appropriate corrective measures, the initial screening decision was a significant oversight considering the issue they missed was an allegation of serious staff misconduct. Page 1 of 5 10111 Old Placerville Road, Suite 110, Sacramento, California 95827 5 Telephone: (916) 288-4233 5 www.oig.ca.gov Amarik K. Singh OIG OFFICE of the Inspector General INSPECTOR GENERAL Neil Robertson Chief Deputy Inspector General September 2023 Centralized Screening Monitoring Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0063041-CSMT Poor Incident Summary On August 4, 2023, a sergeant and three officers allegedly left an incarcerated person’s cell in disarray, took his property, placed him in restraints, and tried to break his wrist. Further, the sergeant and other unidentified staff allegedly brought weapons, drugs, and mobile phones into the prison. Disposition The department’s Centralized Screening Team (screening team) merged allegations that a sergeant and officers left an incarcerated person’s cell in disarray, took his property, and tried to break his wrist, into a single allegation and referred the allegation to the hiring authority for a local inquiry. The screening team also routed a second allegation that the sergeant and other staff brought weapons, drugs, and mobile phones into the prison as a routine issue. The OIG did not concur with the screening team’s decision. The screening team inappropriately merged allegations concerning the incarcerated person’s cell and property with an allegation of unreasonable use of force. Further, the screening team inappropriately routed the allegation concerning the introduction of contraband into the prison as a routine issue rather than referring the allegation to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit for an investigation. Case Rating Overall, the department performed poorly. The screening team referred an allegation of unreasonable use of force to the hiring authority for a local inquiry, rather than to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit for an investigation as required by the department’s Allegation Decision Index. Further, after the incarcerated person refused to participate in a clarifying interview to provide more information about staff who allegedly brought weapons, drugs, and mobile phones into the prison, the screening team determined the allegation to be “solely conjecture” and routine in nature. Following an inquiry by the OIG, the screening team responded by stating, “It is up to the institution to determine if [the allegation] is rejected as not involving offender which may result in [the standard employee misconduct] process. However, after [the screening team] identifies as routine, that is out of our scope.” The screening team also noted, “In this specific case, claimant states that staff are bringing in weapons. We routed routine due to no information to support it. We also note we wouldn’t make note of not involving offender as the statement (with or without substance) reflects that weapons being brought in would likely involve the inmates (bringing in contraband for the inmates).” Following a discussion with department executives, the OIG confirmed the department did not treat the allegation that staff brought weapons, drugs, and mobile phones into the prison as an allegation of staff misconduct involving Page 2 of 5 10111 Old Placerville Road, Suite 110, Sacramento, California 95827 5 Telephone: (916) 288-4233 5 www.oig.ca.gov Amarik K. Singh OIG OFFICE of the Inspector General INSPECTOR GENERAL Neil Robertson Chief Deputy Inspector General September 2023 Centralized Screening Monitoring Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight an incarcerated person. Additionally, the department did not route the allegation to the hiring authority or to the investigative services unit for consideration as standard employee misconduct. Instead, the department inappropriately routed this allegation of serious staff misconduct to the prison’s supervisory staff for a routine fact finding, rather than routing to the Office of Internal Affairs. OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0062684-CSMT Poor Incident Summary On August 15, 2023, an officer allegedly lifted an incarcerated person’s arms toward his head while his hands were handcuffed behind his back, which caused him pain. The officer allegedly grabbed the incarcerated person’s head, attempted to remove his cap, and banged his head into a wall which caused him to fall to the ground and drift in and out of consciousness. The officer also allegedly threatened to place the incarcerated person in the administrative segregation unit if he filed a grievance. Disposition The department’s Centralized Screening Team (screening team) referred the allegations against the officer to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit for an investigation. The screening team also routed the incarcerated person’s request for video footage from the incident back to the prison as a routine issue. The OIG concurred with the routing but challenged the screening team’s failure to identify an imminent risk related to the use-of-force allegation, and to notify the prison so they could complete the required use-of-force allegation interview within 48-hours of the incident as required by departmental policy. Case Rating Overall, the department performed poorly. Although the screening team correctly identified and routed the allegations, it failed to classify the use-of-force allegation as a risk, and failed to notify prison staff so they could timely interview the incarcerated person about the allegation. The screening team violated the use-of-force policy, which requires prison staff to interview an incarcerated person alleging unreasonable use-of-force within 48-hours of receiving the complaint. In this case, the department received the complaint on August 17, 2023, but failed to notify prison staff until August 23, 2023, six days thereafter. Page 3 of 5 10111 Old Placerville Road, Suite 110, Sacramento, California 95827 5 Telephone: (916) 288-4233 5 www.oig.ca.gov Amarik K. Singh OIG OFFICE of the Inspector General INSPECTOR GENERAL Neil Robertson Chief Deputy Inspector General September 2023 Centralized Screening Monitoring Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-0063014-CSMT Satisfactory Incident Summary On July 17, 2023, an officer allegedly planted a mobile phone in an incarcerated person’s cell and fabricated a rules violation report against him. Officers also allegedly targeted the incarcerated person because he refused to assault other incarcerated people for misbehaving in the housing unit. On July 24, 2023, a lieutenant allegedly violated the incarcerated person’s due process rights by failing to ask appropriate questions during the disciplinary hearing and finding him guilty of possessing a mobile phone. Disposition The department’s Centralized Screening Team (screening team) divided the complaint into two allegations and routed a portion of the allegations to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit and a portion of the allegations back to the prison as a routine issue. The screening team initially received the complaint on August 16, 2023, and on August 21, 2023, and determined the complaint needed reassignment to another prison. Prison staff reassigned the complaint on August 24, 2023, and the screening team made a final decision on August 29, 2023, three days thereafter. Although the OIG concurred with the screening team’s routing, the complaint’s reassignment to another prison caused critical information to not properly transfer, which eliminated the referral to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit for investigation. The OIG elevated the discrepancy to the screening team, who determined a system glitch caused the incorrect data transfer. The department took immediate action to ensure the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit received the proper allegation. Case Rating Overall, the department performed satisfactorily. However, following the screening team’s reassignment of the complaint to another prison on August 24, 2023, the complaint details failed to properly transfer to the new grievance log number. On September 14, 2023, the OIG requested clarification regarding the missing complaint details. On September 20, 2023, the screening team updated the database with the correct details. The OIG learned that a database problem caused a delay in the referral to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit. Without the OIG’s intervention, the department may not have initiated the investigation. The OIG is unaware if this issue also impacted other complaints not monitored by our office. Page 4 of 5 10111 Old Placerville Road, Suite 110, Sacramento, California 95827 5 Telephone: (916) 288-4233 5 www.oig.ca.gov Amarik K. Singh OIG OFFICE of the Inspector General INSPECTOR GENERAL Neil Robertson Chief Deputy Inspector General September 2023 Centralized Screening Monitoring Team Case Blocks Independent Published in November 2023 Prison Oversight OIG Case Number Rating Assessment 23-63428-CSMT Poor Incident Summary On August 30, 2023, an unidentified person harassed an incarcerated person while he slept, showered, and used the restroom. A sergeant allegedly threatened the incarcerated person with a rules violation report if he did not return to his currently assigned housing unit after the incarcerated person made a request for a housing move to escape the harassment. Further, an officer allegedly used profanity toward the incarcerated person. On August 31, 2023, an incarcerated person submitted three separate grievance forms related to a housing move. During a clarifying interview on September 19, 2023, the incarcerated person stated the unidentified person was two officers, one who allegedly screamed, “What are you doing?” at the incarcerated person, and a second officer who allegedly harassed the incarcerated person by constantly watching him. Disposition The department’s Centralized Screening Team (screening team) referred the allegation that an officer used profanity toward the incarcerated person to the Office of Internal Affairs’ Allegation Investigation Unit for an investigation. The screening team assigned the rules violation report threat back to the prison as a routine issue. The OIG concurred; however, the screening team failed to identify the incarcerated person’s allegation that he was harassed while he slept, showered, and used the restroom. The OIG elevated the issue to the screening team, and the screening team conducted a clarification interview with the incarcerated person about the alleged harassment. Subsequently, the screening team opened a new grievance log to address the allegations identified during the incarcerated person’s interview. Case Rating Overall, the department performed poorly. The complaint contained three separate grievance forms, and the screening team initially overlooked the second form in the record. Thus, the screening team failed to identify an allegation of harassment by an unidentified person, and failed to conduct a clarifying interview to determine if staff or another incarcerated person harassed the incarcerated person who submitted the complaint. The OIG elevated the oversight to the screening team and recommended the screening team conduct a clarification interview. The screening team took the appropriate steps to interview the incarcerated person. The incarcerated person alleged harassment by two officers, one of whom allegedly screamed, “What are you doing?” at the incarcerated person, and another who allegedly “constantly watched” the incarcerated person. After the OIG raised the issue, the screening team opened a new grievance to address the harassment allegation. Without the OIG’s intervention, the department may not have identified and addressed the additional allegations. Page 5 of 5 10111 Old Placerville Road, Suite 110, Sacramento, California 95827 5 Telephone: (916) 288-4233 5 www.oig.ca.gov