Warden Derral Adams One-Year Audit, Corcoran State Prison

CALIFORNIA STATE PRISON, CORCORAN WARDEN DERRAL ADAMS ONE-YEAR AUDIT OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL DAVID R. SHAW INSPECTOR GENERAL STATE OF CALIFORNIA AUGUST 2009 Contents Results in Brief.............................................................................................1 One-Year Evaluation of Warden Derral Adams............................................2 Background of Warden......................................................................2 Institution Overview...........................................................................2 Objectives, Scope, and Methodology................................................4 Review Results..................................................................................6 Category 1 – Safety and Security...................................................6 Category 2 – Inmate Programming.................................................8 Category 3 – Business Operations.................................................10 Category 4 – Employee-Management Relations............................15 Overall Summary...............................................................................18 Appendix – Employee Survey Responses...................................................20 California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s Response..........22 Results in Brief Overall, employees gave Derral Adams high marks as warden From its review, the Office of the Inspector CSP, CORCORAN General (OIG) found that Warden Adams has FACTS AT A GLANCE successfully performed his job as warden at the California State Prison, Corcoran (Corcoran). Location: Corcoran, CA With over 29 years of experience with the California Department of Corrections and Opened: 1988 Rehabilitation (CDCR) and over nine years in the Mission: High Security warden or acting warden position, he has demonstrated the skills necessary to manage a Inmate Population: 5,737 complex prison like Corcoran. Designed Capacity: 3,116 inmates Corcoran employees we interviewed told us the Employees: 2,081 institution’s operations have improved since Adams became warden in July 2007. While we Budget: $267 million, FY 2008-09 found some areas that the warden could improve upon, many of the employees we spoke to told us that Adams is the best warden for whom they have ever worked. During our review, we surveyed Corcoran employees, key stakeholders, and department executives; analyzed operational data compiled and maintained by the department; interviewed Corcoran employees, including the warden; and toured the institution. We compiled the results and categorized them into four areas: safety and security, inmate programming, business operations, and employee- management relations. We received mainly positive responses regarding the warden’s performance. In some areas where the warden scored low, such as business operations, our interviews with employees indicate that the warden appears to be aggressively Warden Derral Adams addressing employee concerns. On average, the warden was rated by his managers and employees between very good and outstanding. Effective April 20, 2009, the department temporarily assigned Warden Adams to headquarters as acting Associate Director for High Security and Transitional Housing. Bureau of Audits and Investigations Office of the Inspector General Page 1 One-Year Evaluation of Warden Derral Adams California Penal Code section 6126(a)(2) requires the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) to audit each warden of an institution one year after his or her appointment. To satisfy this requirement, we evaluated Warden Derral Adam’s performance at California State Prison, Corcoran (Corcoran) since his appointment. Background of Warden Warden Derral Adams has worked for CDCR over 29 years, beginning in 1979 as a carpenter at San Quentin State Prison. He progressed within the plant operations area and in 1987 was promoted to correctional business manager at San Quentin. In June 1990, Adams helped activate Wasco State Prison where he was responsible for developing and implementing policies, procedures, and programs for the new prison. He also served as the Equal Employment Opportunity coordinator for the prison. In February 1995, he became the chief deputy warden at the Central California Women’s Facility, and in 2000 he became acting warden. In July 2000, Adams became the permanent warden at the Substance Abuse Treatment Facility and State Prison. In January 2006, he transferred to the neighboring California State Prison, Corcoran as the acting warden. On July 24, 2007, Governor Schwarzenegger appointed him warden of California State Prison, Corcoran. Effective April 20, 2009, Warden Adams was temporarily assigned to headquarters as acting Associate Director for High Security and Transitional Housing. Institution Overview Corcoran is one of the 33 adult prisons operated by CDCR. The institution, which opened in 1988, was designed as a maximum security prison to house some of the state’s most violent inmates. The institution consists of seven facilities (or “yards”) including a 75 bed acute care hospital that is open twenty-four hours a day, seven Corcoran State Prison days a week. The hospital provides general acute medical, surgical, medical health crisis, and specialty outpatient services. Inmate Housing Corcoran was the first California prison with a dedicated section specially designed with added security features to house inmates whose conduct endangers the institution’s Bureau of Audits and Investigations Office of the Inspector General Page 2 security or the safety of others. This type of inmate housing is called a security housing unit (SHU). Inmates are generally moved to a SHU because they committed a serious rules violation while incarcerated such as participating in gang activity, assault, or murder. Currently, over 21 percent of the institution’s inmate population resides in these high security living units. Corcoran also has a general population yard, a sensitive needs yard1 (SNY), an administrative segregation unit2 (ASU), and a protective housing unit (PHU) for some of the states most infamous inmates. The institution’s various facilities house level I (low security), level III (medium-high security) and level IV (high security) inmates. As of December 31, 2008, Corcoran housed 5,737 inmates in a facility originally designed for 3,116 inmates. Rehabilitation Programs Corcoran offers a variety of work, education, and other rehabilitation programs. For example, the prison’s vocational opportunities include computer technology, electronics, machine shop, mill and cabinet, sheet metal, upholstery, and welding. Inmates also work in the Prison Industry Authority’s (PIA) work programs that include crop farming, dairy/milk processing, laundry, manufacturing, metal fabrication, and wood products. Corcoran’s academic offerings include adult basic education, general educational development, English as a second language, pre-release courses, and literacy programs. Other programs include community service crews, youth diversion, religious services, arts in corrections, and victim awareness. Budget and Staffing For fiscal year 2008-09, Corcoran’s budget was $267 million. This includes $190 million for institution and education operations plus $77 million for medical related services. Corcoran has 2,232 budgeted positions, of which 1,409 (or 63 percent) represent custody employees. Table 1 compares Corcoran’s budgeted and filled positions as of December 31, 2008. Overall, the institution has 93 percent of its total budgeted positions filled. Table 1: Staffing Levels at California State Prison, Corcoran Position Filled Positions Budgeted Positions Percent Filled Custody 1,359 1,409 96.5% Education 38 39 97.4% Medical 310 341 90.9% Support 202 259 78.0% Trades 156 167 93.4% Management 16 17 94.1% Total 2,081 2,232 93.2% Source: California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, CompStat for December 31, 2008 California State Prison, Corcoran. Unaudited data. 1 Because of their crimes, notoriety, or gang affiliations, inmates placed on sensitive needs yards cannot mix with general population inmates. 2 General population inmates that engage in violent or dangerous behavior or inmates that need temporary protection are placed in more secured housing units known as administrative segregation units (ASU). Bureau of Audits and Investigations Office of the Inspector General Page 3 Objectives, Scope, and Methodology To fulfill our objective of assessing the warden’s performance, we employed a three-part approach. First, we used surveys to solicit opinions and comments from employees, department management team members, and other stakeholders. Next, we analyzed operational data maintained by the department and compared it with the averages for like institutions3 and all institutions statewide. In addition, we reviewed relevant reports prepared by the department or other external agencies. Finally, we visited the institution to interview various employees and follow-up on noteworthy concerns we identified from the surveys, operational data, or reports. To understand how the staff members and other stakeholders view the warden’s performance, we sent surveys to three distinct groups: department and Corcoran managers, Corcoran employees, and key stakeholders outside the department. For our employee survey, we randomly selected 256 of the institution’s employees and sent them a survey. The survey provides us with information about employees’ perception of the warden’s overall performance plus information about specific operational areas at the prison—Safety and Security, Inmate Programming, Business Operations, and Employee- Management Relations. To simplify our analysis of the survey results, we grouped survey respondents into three employment categories: Custody, Health Care, and Other (which includes employees in education, plant operations, administration, and clerical positions.) Then, to identify strong trends or patterns, we classified the responses to our questions as either positive or negative. For example, if the respondent ‘agreed’ or ‘strongly agreed’ with our question, we classified it as positive; and, if the respondent ‘disagreed’ or ‘strongly disagreed’ with our question we classified it as negative. Our inspectors also analyzed operational data maintained by the department (called CompStat – comparable statistics) and analyzed the responses to our surveys. We also reviewed relevant reports related to the institution’s operations prepared by the department or external agencies. From these efforts we identified strong trends or patterns – either negative or positive – or other issues to help us identify topics for further review and evaluation during our on-site visit to Corcoran. 3 Institutions with a similar mission include: California Correctional Institution, Kern Valley State Prison, High Desert State Prison, Pelican Bay State Prison, California State Prison – Sacramento, and Salinas Valley State Prison. Bureau of Audits and Investigations Office of the Inspector General Page 4 During our visit to Corcoran, we gained insight into the work environment in which the warden works. We interviewed certain key employees and other randomly selected employees, using information gathered from our analysis of statistical information and from employee surveys to identify potential issues for review. Our interviews involved employees in various operational areas throughout the prison, including: (cid:131) Business services (cid:131) In-service training (cid:131) Fleet operations (cid:131) Investigative services (cid:131) Educational programs (cid:131) Human resources (cid:131) Employee/labor relations (cid:131) Litigation (cid:131) Food services (cid:131) Personnel assignment (cid:131) Health care (cid:131) Plant operations (cid:131) Housing units (cid:131) Prison industry authority (cid:131) Information technology (cid:131) Receiving and release (cid:131) Inmate appeals (cid:131) Use of force review (cid:131) Inmate assignments (cid:131) Vocational programs (cid:131) Inmate case records (cid:131) Warehouse management We performed our site visit the week of March 9, 2009. During our visit, we interviewed 51 individuals throughout the prison and asked them to describe and rate the warden’s performance. These individuals included custody employees, executive management team members, education employees, and health care professionals. Bureau of Audits and Investigations Office of the Inspector General Page 5 Review Results We found that most responding stakeholders including CDCR (department) management, institutional managers, and employees believe the warden is doing a very good to outstanding job. In the four categories of safety and security, inmate programming, business operations, and employee-management relations, we received mostly positive responses with the exception of business operations, which had more negative responses. Category 1: Safety and Security The department’s mission is, in part, Table 2: Safety and Security – Employee Survey Results Respondents Positive Negative to enhance public safety through Custody 68% 32% safe and secure incarceration of Health Care 78% 22% Admin, Plant Operations, and Other 73% 27% offenders. The importance of safety Weighted Average 71% 29% and security is embodied in the Source: OIG Survey of Corcoran Employees. See Appendix for details. department’s requirement that custodial security and the safety of staff, inmates, and the public must take precedence over all other considerations in the operation of all the department’s programs and activities. As shown in Table 2 above, 71 percent of the prison employees we surveyed had positive opinions about the safety and security of the institution. During our review of the safety and security category, we heard mostly favorable opinions from the employees we interviewed during our field visit. However, after considering the interviews in conjunction with comments from the warden, results from our employee survey, and departmental data on segregation housing and use of force incidents, we noted three areas for further discussion: Survey Results, Interview Results, and Use of Force. Survey Results The survey questions we asked related to safety and security issues scored the most positive responses of all survey questions. For example, 86 percent of the respondents indicated that they have all of the safety equipment they need, and 88 percent indicated that they have received all required training. In addition, 76 percent of the employees responded that they are able to complete all required mission critical assignments. In contrast to the relative strong scores for equipment and training, only 28 percent of the custody staff members surveyed felt that lockdown time and modified programming time for disruptive inmates was sufficient. As a result, we interviewed institutional management team members and found that they meet regularly with the warden during periods of lockdowns or modified programming to discuss the appropriate ways to re- introduce inmates into normal programming without jeopardizing the safety and security of the institution. We found this approach for resuming programming to be reasonable. Bureau of Audits and Investigations Office of the Inspector General Page 6 Interview Results During our site visit, we interviewed many members of the warden’s executive management team and other institutional employees. In fact, we interviewed over 50 employees and asked for their biggest concerns related to safety and security. We specifically discussed the institution’s security operations and employees raised no systemic problems. A few employees had safety concerns related to reliable transportation, but recently, the department has corrected the issue by updating the institution’s vehicle fleet. Several of the employees also commented that the warden is very proactive at addressing issues related to safety and security, once they were brought to his attention. Use of Force The number of incidents where force is necessary to subdue an attacker, overcome resistance, effect custody, or gain compliance with a lawful order is a measure of inmate behavior and the institution’s ability to safely incarcerate inmates. To assess Corcoran’s use of force, we reviewed the department’s use of force data for the 13-month period of December 1, 2007 through December 31, 2008. As shown in Chart 1, the institution’s rate is slightly higher than the statewide average, which is not surprising given that Corcoran is a maximum security prison. In comparing other institutions with similar high security missions, Corcoran’s use of force rate is consistently below average. We asked one facility captain why the institution’s use of force rate was lower and his response was that they teach employees not to be “heavy-handed” and employees are disciplined when the force they use is deemed unreasonable. Chart 1: Documented Use of Force 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Dec- 0 7 J an- 0 8 Feb- 08 Mar- 08 Apr- 08 May- 08 J un- 0 8 J ul- 08 Aug- 08 Sep- 08 Oct- 08 Nov- 0 8 Dec- 0 8 setamnI 000,1 reP rebmuN COR Mission Statewide Source: California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, CompStat for December 31, 2008, California State Prison, Corcoran. Unaudited data. Bureau of Audits and Investigations Office of the Inspector General Page 7 Category 2: Inmate Programming Research shows that inmate programs Table 3: Inmate Programming – Employee Survey Results can reduce the likelihood that Respondents Positive Negative Custody 70% 30% offenders will commit new crimes and Health Care 83% 17% return to prison. In fact, a 2006 Admin, Plant Operations, and Other 56% 44% Weighted Average 68% 32% Washington State Institute for Public Source: OIG Survey of Corcoran Employees. See Appendix for details. Policy study of adult basic and vocational education programs found that such programs reduce inmate recidivism by an average of 5.1 percent and 12.6 percent, respectively.4 The department recognizes these benefits and provides academic and vocational training and a number of self-help and self improvement services including substance abuse programs to inmates. An added benefit is that programming requires inmates to have a more structured day and less idle time. As a general rule, inmates with a structured day tend to be easier to manage. As a result, the institution’s safety and security can be affected by the amount of available inmate programming. Overall, as shown in Table 3 above, 68 percent of all respondents gave favorable ratings to questions related to inmate programming. After our analysis of the information gathered from departmental statistics, employee survey results, and employee interviews we found three areas for more detailed comment: Programming Opportunities, Inmate Attendance, and Programming Improvements. Programming Opportunities According to Corcoran’s mission statement, the prison is committed to providing the best medical, mental health, education, vocational and self help programs for all inmates confined to Corcoran. Further, the institution currently offers at least 18 different types of programs to its inmates. They include: • Vocational: Computer technology, electronics, machine shop, mill and cabinet, sheet metal, upholstery, and welding • Academic: Adult Basic Education, High School/GED, Pre-Release, English as a Second Language, and Literacy Program • Other: Substance abuse program, community service crews, youth diversion, religious services, arts in corrections, and victim awareness. Based on our survey results, we found many positive comments related to inmate programming. As noted above, 68 percent of all respondents gave favorable ratings to questions related to inmate programming. More specifically, 75 percent of the non- custody respondents indicated that the institution is meeting its inmate programming mission under the current warden’s leadership. Additionally, 61 percent indicated that the process under which inmates are assigned to vocational, academic, or other placements works as intended. Finally, 71 percent responded that inmate programming is adequate 4 Washington State Institute for Public Policy, “Evidence-Based Adult Corrections Programs: What Works and What Does Not,” January 2006. Bureau of Audits and Investigations Office of the Inspector General Page 8 with a sufficient number of education and work placement opportunities. According to the December 2008 departmental data, 2,650 inmates were in work assignments and another 2,214 inmates were on lists waiting for assignment to an inmate program. Inmate Attendance The department establishes the amount of time that assigned inmates must attend academic and vocational training classes each day. As a result, each institution can be evaluated as to how effectively it complies with school-day attendance requirements because administrators must track inmate class absences. The department refers to absences caused by circumstances beyond the inmate’s control as “S-time.” Such absences may result from security-related needs such as lockdowns, modified programming, investigations, and inmate medical appointments. Education-related absences, such as teachers calling in sick, also contribute to S-time. Institutions with high or increasing patterns of S-time indicate that prison management may be ineffectively using their academic and vocational programs, or even wasting the resources that give the inmates what they need to succeed upon parole. Maximizing an inmate’s exposure to rehabilitative programming is a positive step towards reducing recidivism. Conversely, the amount of time that inmates do not receive normal programming can indicate an inefficient use of both institutional teaching resources and available inmate programming time. The lost time is measureable and is tracked by the department. Chart 2 below reflects the average per inmate S-time at Corcoran, and it is generally less than the average of other comparable institutions as well as the average of all institutions statewide. The school principal told us that getting inmates to school each day is a challenge; however, as discussed below, the institution implemented a program to prevent inmates without proper authorization from skipping their education programs. In addition, to avoid cancelling classes due to absent teachers, the institution uses teachers affected by partial lockdowns as substitute teachers in other parts of the education program. Strategies such as these have a direct impact in reducing the amount of S-time accumulated each day. Bureau of Audits and Investigations Office of the Inspector General Page 9 Chart 2: Total S-Time Hours Per Inmate (Average per Month) 100.0 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0 0.0 D ec-07 J a n-0 8 F eb- 08 Mar- 08 Apr- 08 May- 0 8 J u n-0 8 J ul- 0 8 Au g-0 8 Sep-08 Oct- 0 8 N ov-08 D ec-08 etamnI reP sruoH egarevA COR Mission Statewide Source: California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, CompStat for December 31, 2008, California State Prison, Corcoran. Unaudited data. Programming Improvements Our employee interviews identified several areas where the warden influences what appear to be significant and positive changes to inmate programming. First, effective April 2008, the warden implemented a requirement that all inmates must read at the ninth grade level before they are eligible to work in a paying job. Second, to help maximize education learning time, the institution recently developed a daily morning protocol that identifies those inmates absent from education classes without prior authorization. Custody officers are then quickly summoned to find the inmate and get him to school before too much of the day’s learning time elapses. Finally, according to one Prison Industry Authority (PIA) administrator to whom we spoke, the warden is very proactive during lockdown periods in getting inmates to their PIA job assignments, which is important because other prisons and state agencies rely on the timely supply of goods produced by the inmates working for PIA. Category 3: Business Operations An institution’s business Table 4: Business Operations – Employee Survey Results operations include budget Respondents Positive Negative Custody 43% 57% planning and control; personnel Health Care 45% 55% administration; accounting and Admin, Plant Operations, and Other 41% 59% Weighted Average 43% 57% procurement services; employee Source: OIG Survey of Corcoran Employees. See Appendix for details. training and development; and, facility maintenance and operations. It is important for the warden to be knowledgeable in these areas to effectively perform his duties. Bureau of Audits and Investigations Office of the Inspector General Page 10 As shown in Table 4, 43 percent of the prison employees had positive responses about the institution’s business operations and 57 percent had negative responses. Our analysis of the information gathered from the department’s data, employee survey responses, and employee interviews uncovered four specific areas that we discussed further with the warden and other management team members: Overtime Usage, Administrative Segregation Housing, Staffing Shortage, and Facility Maintenance. Overtime Usage The control of overtime is one indicator of a warden’s ability to manage his institution’s overall operations because it requires the warden to ensure that good budgeting, planning, and personnel administration practices are in place. To assess Corcoran’s overtime usage, we compared its overtime statistics to both the statewide average for all prisons, as well as the average for the other seven prisons with a similar high security mission. We found that since June 2008, Corcoran incurred fewer overtime hours per employee, on average, than other prisons. As displayed in the Chart 3 below, since June 2008, Corcoran’s average overtime hours per employee are 5.43 and 2.86 hours per month fewer compared to the statewide average and its peer mission prisons, respectively. Based on the data, the warden appears to be doing a good job at controlling overtime. In our interviews with employees at the prison, we asked knowledgeable employees why Corcoran does better in controlling overtime. Employees told us that overtime usage is partly a function of sick leave usage because when employees assigned to mandatory posts call in sick, other staff members must work overtime to fill the post. Employees told us that Corcoran’s overtime figures were lower because the warden supports an aggressive statewide program to hold employees accountable for their sick leave usage. The program includes holding regular meetings to identify the worst or most habitual users of sick leave. These meetings result in holding those identified employees accountable to provide adequate justification for their illnesses. Chart 3: Overtime 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Dec- 0 7 J an- 0 8 Feb- 08 Mar- 08 Apr- 08 May- 08 J un- 0 8 J ul- 08 Aug- 08 Sep- 08 Oct- 08 Nov- 0 8 Dec- 0 8 eeyolpmE reP sruoH egarevA COR Mission Statewide Source: California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, CompStat for December 31, 2008, California State Prison, Corcoran. Unaudited data. Bureau of Audits and Investigations Office of the Inspector General Page 11 Administrative Segregation Housing Inmates that are either disruptive to other inmates or victimized by other inmates are temporarily placed in segregated housing areas known as Administrative Segregation Units (ASU) until employees investigate the level of threat to the institution or inmate. ASU housing areas are more expensive to operate than general population housing units because they have increased security requirements. Effectively managing the time it takes the institution to investigate the level of threat can significantly reduce the average length of stay, and in turn, the cost of housing an inmate in ASU. As a result, the average length of stay in ASU is an indicator of how well an institution is managing its resources. We reviewed the institution’s data for the average length of stay in ASU for the period of December 1, 2007 through December 31, 2008. Based on the data, Corcoran’s average is significantly higher than the statewide average. However, we would expect Corcoran to be higher than the statewide average because of the types of inmates incarcerated at the institution. When compared to other prisons that have similar high security missions, Corcoran appears to be about average. Chart 4: Average Length of Stay in Administrative Segregated Housing 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Dec- 0 7 J an- 0 8 Feb- 08 Mar- 08 Apr- 08 May- 08 J un- 0 8 J ul- 08 Aug- 08 Sep- 08 Oct- 08 Nov- 0 8 Dec- 0 8 syaD COR Mission Statewide Source: California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, CompStat for December 31, 2008, California State Prison, Corcoran. Unaudited data. Staffing Shortage Responses to our employee survey also indicated that some respondents believe staffing shortages exist at the prison, particularly in the plant operations areas. In fact, 42 percent of those responding indicated that the institution did not have enough employees to get all required work done. We followed up on this concern by interviewing a personnel employee who indicated that the warden is very proactive at getting vacant positions filled. In addition, according to staffing data, 93 percent of the institution’s 2,232 budgeted positions were filled as of December 2008 (see Table 1) including 93 percent of the trades positions. In fact, as discussed below, we found that the warden has been successful in establishing and filling several new positions since his appointment. Bureau of Audits and Investigations Office of the Inspector General Page 12 However, we would note that in the area of support positions, Corcoran had a 22 percent vacancy rate. Facility Maintenance Survey responses identified specific concerns with staffing levels and infrastructure maintenance upkeep. Based on the survey responses, 70 percent of those responding indicated that plant operations was not able to meet repair needs in assigned work areas, and 62 percent indicated that the repairs in inmate areas were inadequate. We heard many comments on how the previous wardens had allowed plant operations to be neglected over the Figure 1 – Recently renovated parking lot years. In fact, the current warden told us that when he arrived, the prison was only twenty years old, but it looked fifty years old due to neglect. We followed up on this concern by physically observing many areas of the facility and interviewing employees in order to identify areas of the institution that need improvement. During our site visit, we observed numerous areas where the infrastructure improvements were underway. They included renovating employee parking lots (Figure 1), moving case records to a new and expanded location (Figure 2,3), adding exercise yard fence lines (Figure 4) and sewage plant improvements (Figure 5). Figure 2 – Modernized case records work space Although the survey responses initially indicated that the prison was run down and in disrepair, of those employees we subsequently spoke to, the vast majority indicated that the warden was actively working to repair the institution’s infrastructure with fresh paint, renovated parking areas (Figure 1), and new kitchen equipment. Figure 3 – Expanded case records work area, formerly cafeteria space Bureau of Audits and Investigations Office of the Inspector General Page 13 Several employees interviewed credited the warden for the recent expansion of the plant operations work force. According to state budget information, Corcoran’s approved facility operations grew by 13 percent from 73 positions for the fiscal year 2006-07 to 82.5 positions for the fiscal year 2008-09. In addition to getting more employees for the plant operations program, the institution also pursued getting authorization for additional infrastructure improvements. We were also told that during fiscal year 2007-08, the institution received approval for an additional $11.8 million in infrastructure improvements above the normal facility operations allotment of $2.5 million. Figure 4 – New Security Fence Figure 5 - New sewage clean-out system Bureau of Audits and Investigations Office of the Inspector General Page 14 Category 4: Employee-Management Relations “Successful leaders invite Table 5: Employee-Management Relations – Employee Survey Results communication, listen well, and Respondents Positive Negative Custody 51% 49% prove themselves trustworthy Health Care 69% 31% by exhibiting rational, caring, Admin, Plant Operations, and Other 63% 37% Weighted Average 58% 42% and predictable behavior in Source: OIG Survey of Corcoran Employees. See Appendix for details. their interpersonal relationships.”5 The warden’s ability to communicate plays an important role in employee relations and is vital in implementing the department’s vision and mission at the institution level. Not only must the warden interact with employees at all levels and communicate instructions and directions clearly and effectively, but the warden must also communicate effectively with departmental headquarters as well as the surrounding community. As shown in Table 5 above, 58 percent of the prison employees had positive opinions about various areas related to employee-management relations. Although the opinions of employees and other stakeholders provide one measure of the warden’s employee- management relations, another measure can be found in the number of grievances filed by the institution’s employees. Our analysis of employees’ responses to our surveys; interviews with the warden’s management team and other employees; and statistics on employee grievances resulted in five topics for further consideration: Values and Communication, Management Communication, Knowledge of Operations, Employee Grievances, and Survey and Interview Comments. Values and Communication The questions we asked in the employee-management relations category dealt with such areas as the warden’s accessibility, knowledge, communication abilities, and cultural environment and sensitivity. As shown in Table 5 above, only 58 percent of the prison employees had positive opinions about various areas related to employee-management relations. We further found the individual question responses in the employee- management relations category to be of mixed opinions. Of those employees that we randomly surveyed, 87 percent indicated that the warden emphasizes an institutional culture calling for staff to have integrity, ethics, professionalism, honesty, motivation and respect. We also found that custody employees, the largest category of survey respondents, gave the warden the lowest overall rating at 51 percent favorable while the other two categories of survey respondents (Health Care, Other) gave more favorable ratings of 69 percent and 63 percent, respectively. We also noted that only 44 percent of the survey respondents indicated that the warden had a good relationship with their local union. Based on negative comments from some employees, the warden’s relationship with the correctional officer’s local union representative was an issue of initial concern to the OIG. We interviewed both the union 5 Adapted from Correctional Leadership Competencies for the 21st Century, U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Corrections (December 2006). Bureau of Audits and Investigations Office of the Inspector General Page 15 representative and the warden and found the line of communication between the two individuals to be strained. The union representative told us that the warden is not communicating. Conversely, the warden told us that he has a standing offer for the union representative to attend his weekly meetings to discuss issues; however, the union representative has not done so. Overall, based on our discussions with the local union representative, he did not present any significant labor issues other than his lack of open communication with the warden. Management Communication Opinions from the management team regarding communication were more positive than the opinions from other employees. We interviewed nearly all management team members including program managers, facility captains, associate wardens, and both chief deputy wardens, and found that the warden generally is very receptive to input from his employees and is a good listener. Some team members commented that the warden is open-minded, values input, receptive to suggestions, and has “a lot of experience to bring to the table.” Our interviews also found that members of the management team believe they work well together as a group and get work done despite small conflicts. Some managers commented that the warden’s management team is filled with “Type A” personalities. In contrast, our employee survey revealed an area of concern related to communication. Sixty-one percent of those surveyed indicated that warden did not welcome feed back, including criticisms from the employees. Knowledge of Operations An important warden skill is the ability to confidently convey an understanding of the institution’s day-to-day operations. The warden scored very high in this area of our employee-management relations category of our survey. Almost 73 percent of all the respondents indicated that the warden was knowledgeable in the daily operations of the prison. Another 60 percent of the respondents indicated that the warden was knowledgeable of the daily operations in their own assigned work area. Employees commented that the warden is very knowledgeable in the non-custody aspects of the prison operations because he progressed from a trades carpenter through to the correctional business manager side of the operations. Employees gave the warden credit for learning the custody side of operations without having actually ever served as a custody officer. Employee Grievances All employees have the right to express their grievances through an established departmental procedure. Based on Chart 5 below, Corcoran appears to be well below both the statewide average and the mission average for number of employees that filed a grievance during the period of December 1, 2007 to December 31, 2008. In addition, the institution did not have any large swings in recent grievance filings suggesting that employee morale has been relatively stable in recent months. However, according to our Bureau of Audits and Investigations Office of the Inspector General Page 16 survey results, 47 percent of the respondents indicated that they do not believe that the grievance process works as intended. Chart 5: Employee Grievances 35 s 30 eeyolpmE 0 25 20 15 10 5 0 Dec- 0 7 J an- 0 8 Feb- 08 Mar- 08 Apr- 08 May- 08 J un- 0 8 J ul- 08 Aug- 08 Sep- 08 Oct- 08 Nov- 0 8 Dec- 0 8 00,1 reP rebmuN COR Mission Statewide Source: California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, CompStat for December 31, 2008, California State Prison, Corcoran. Unaudited data. Survey and Interview Comments Employees cited other activities the warden has completed to improve his relationship with staff members. Some of the activities include hosting an annual crab feed fundraiser to generate funds for periodic employee appreciation days. The warden also schedules his employee appreciation days in a manner that allows all three work shifts to participate at times just prior to or after their normal work hours. The warden also hosts an annual Christmas dinner for employees and their families. In addition, department officials and Corcoran managers we Table 6: Rating of Warden’s Management Skills and Qualities surveyed rated Adams favorably Category Average Rating for his management skills and Personal Characteristics/Traits Very Good qualities. In our survey, we asked Relationships with Others Very Good the officials and managers to Leadership Outstanding consider the warden’s Communication Very Good performance in six management Decision Making Outstanding skills and qualities and rate the Organization/Planning Outstanding performance as either Source: OIG Survey of CDCR and CORCORAN Management. unacceptable, improvement needed, satisfactory, very good, or outstanding. As shown in Table 6, the survey results indicate that Warden Adams is performing at a level of “very good” to “outstanding” in various management related categories. Bureau of Audits and Investigations Office of the Inspector General Page 17 Overall, the results of this survey are consistent with many comments we received from employees during our site visit. In several instances, we did hear negative comments from employees such as the warden needs to work on his people skills and that he could be rated even higher as a warden if his treatment of people were better. On the other hand, we also heard many positive comments such as the warden is a “doer” and looking to improve the institution and serve the inmates, employees are held accountable, he takes input and makes good decisions, and he has the knowledge and confidence to run the institution. Overall Summary In our survey, we asked employees whether they agree that, given all of the institutional challenges, the warden was an effective leader. Of those respondents providing either a positive or negative opinion, 59 percent gave positive responses that they either agree or strongly agree with the statement. The remaining 41 percent stated that they disagree or strongly disagree that he is an effective leader. Our analysis of the responses identified that custody employees in particular did not support the assertion that the warden was an effective leader. We suspect that the strained relationship between the warden and the custody officer’s union representative might be affecting custody employee’s opinions. In addition to our review of the four key areas identified above, our assessment of the warden’s performance also included an overall performance rating. We based the rating on survey responses from department officials and Corcoran managers and from interviews we conducted with Corcoran employees during our site visit. As shown in Chart 6 below, those individuals rated Warden Adams’ overall performance between “outstanding” and “very good”. Chart 6: atpeccanU Respondents elb yrotcafsitaS dooG yreV gnidnatstuO WARDEN OVERALL JOB PERFORMANCE 13 4 5 5.0 1 Response 15 Responses 4.3 49 Responses tnemevorpmI eN 2 de 4.6 de CDCR Executive Management Survey Institutional Management Survey Staff Interviews Although only one person from CDCR’s executive management team responded to our inquiries regarding the warden’s performance, that person indicated that the warden is Bureau of Audits and Investigations Office of the Inspector General Page 18 doing an outstanding job. In addition, fifteen persons responding to our institutional management survey gave an overall warden rating that averaged between very good and outstanding. Finally, of the 49 interviews we conducted with employees who answered the question, the average warden rating response was also between very good and outstanding. Overall, we found the institution’s safety and security, inmate programming, business operations, and employee-management relations to be at a satisfactory or higher level. Collectively, the survey and interview responses identified no areas of systemic problems impacting the institution or the warden’s ability to be an effective leader. In conclusion, the Inspector General’s review of Warden Adams’ performance approximately one year after appointment indicates that he is doing a very good to outstanding job at managing the prison’s operations. Bureau of Audits and Investigations Office of the Inspector General Page 19 Appendix Results from our survey of institution employees To prepare for our site visit, we randomly selected 256 of the institution’s employees and sent them a survey. The survey provides us with information about employees’ perception of the warden’s overall performance plus information about specific operational areas at the prison—Safety and Security, Inmate Programming, Business Operations, and Employee-Management Communication. Eighty-four Corcoran employees responded to our survey―a 33 percent response rate. To simplify our analysis of the survey results, we grouped survey respondents by category and identified response trends. Specifically, we grouped the respondents into three employment categories: Custody, Health Care, and Other (which includes employees in education, plant operations, administration, and clerical positions.) Then, to identify strong trends or patterns, we classified the responses to our questions as either positive or negative. For example, if the respondent ‘agreed’ or ‘strongly agreed’ with our question, we classified it as positive; and, if the respondent ‘disagreed’ or ‘strongly disagreed’ with our question we classified it as negative. We did not include passive responses. If employees responded that they were ‘neutral’ or responded ‘unknown’ to our question, we excluded their response. We report the results of our employee survey in a table on the following page. Bureau of Audits and Investigations Office of the Inspector General Page 20 Appendix: Compilation of Institutional Employee Survey Responses - California State Prison, Corcoran Respondents' Employment Category Total Responses Custody Health Care Other Operational Area/Question Pos Neg Pos Neg Pos Neg Pos (%) Neg (%) Safety and Security •You are able to complete required (mission critical) assignments in your work area. 25 5 13 5 13 6 51 76% 16 24% •You have been issued or have access to all of the safety equipment you need. 31 2 12 2 12 5 55 86% 9 14% •You receive all required (mandatory) training. 29 5 15 2 17 1 61 88% 8 12% •The employee investigation/disciplinary process works as intended (is appropriate and 14 15 5 4 7 7 26 50% 26 50% timely). •The CDC-115, inmate disciplinary process works as intended (is appropriate and 27 10 6 2 9 2 42 75% 14 25% timely). •The CDC-602, inmate appeal process works as intended (is appropriate and timely). 26 8 10 3 8 3 44 76% 14 24% •The use and duration of inmate lockdown time or modified program time is 10 26 6 1 6 2 22 43% 29 57% appropriate. •The institution is meeting its mission(s) under the current warden's leadership.¹ 10 10 10 50% 10 50% Totals 172 81 67 19 72 26 311 126 Percent of Respondents by Category 68% 32% 78% 22% 73% 27% 71% 29% Inmate Programming •The inmate assignment process works as intended (appropriate placement). 19 9 4 1 5 8 28 61% 18 39% •Inmate programming is adequate (sufficient number of education and work 19 7 3 0 5 4 27 71% 11 29% placements). •The institution is meeting its mission(s) under the current warden's leadership.¹ 8 2 10 4 18 75% 6 25% Totals 38 16 15 3 20 16 73 35 Percent of Respondents by Category 70% 30% 83% 17% 56% 44% 68% 32% Business Operations •Your assigned work area has enough staff to get all of the required work done. 22 16 11 6 10 9 43 58% 31 42% •Plant Operations is able to meet maintenance / repair needs in your assigned work 9 24 6 11 4 10 19 30% 45 70% area. •Plant Operations is able to meet maintenance / repair needs in inmate areas. 14 19 1 5 4 7 19 38% 31 62% Totals 45 59 18 22 18 26 81 107 Percent of Respondents by Category 43% 57% 45% 55% 41% 59% 43% 57% Employee-Management Relations •The warden is knowledgeable about the day to day operations in your work area. 12 11 9 2 8 6 29 60% 19 40% •The employee grievance process works as intended (is appropriate and timely). 12 13 6 4 6 4 24 53% 21 47% •The warden works effectively with the local bargaining unit representatives. 7 19 4 1 6 2 17 44% 22 56% •The warden regularly speaks or meets with inmates. 4 10 0 1 2 2 6 32% 13 68% •You are kept up to date on issues that affect CDCR as a whole. 14 15 12 4 10 8 36 57% 27 43% •The warden regularly visits your workplace. 6 25 4 9 5 14 15 24% 48 76% •The warden welcomes feedback, including criticism from institution staff. 7 15 3 6 6 4 16 39% 25 61% •The warden is knowledgeable about the day to day operations. 16 6 6 1 7 4 29 73% 11 28% •The warden is accessible to you to discuss issues. 16 8 5 2 8 4 29 67% 14 33% •The warden does not abuse his/her power or authority. 11 15 6 1 8 2 25 58% 18 42% •The warden emphasizes an institutional culture calling for staff to have integrity and be 24 4 9 1 12 2 45 87% 7 13% highly ethical, professional, honest, motivated, and respectful. •The warden emphasizes an institutional culture calling for cultural sensitivity and 23 3 11 1 12 0 46 92% 4 8% discrimination prevention, including sexual harassment prevention. Totals 152 144 75 33 90 52 317 229 Percent of Respondents by Category 51% 49% 69% 31% 63% 37% 58% 42% Overall Warden Rating Considering all institutional challenges, the current warden is an effective leader. 13 18 9 1 10 3 32 59% 22 41% Percent of Respondents by Category 42% 58% 90% 10% 77% 23% 59% 41% Source: OIG, Institutional Employee Survey Results for Corcoran 1This question applies to more than one operational area. Bureau of Audits and Investigations Office of the Inspector General Page 21 California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s Response Bureau of Audits and Investigations Office of the Inspector General Page 22