Skip navigation

Private Audit of Orange County Jails, OCJAP, 2008

Download original document:
Brief thumbnail
This text is machine-read, and may contain errors. Check the original document to verify accuracy.
November 18, 2008

CROUTaSrD.
CROUTaSrDA
CRIMINAL JUSTICE CONSULTANTS, INC.

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Crout & Sida Criminal Justice Consultants
www.crout-sida-consulting.com

Preface
The Jail Security and Staffing Assessments (OCJAP) project began in July 2008 and
encompassed a comprehensive assessment of one of the largest, most complex local
adult detention systems in California – the Orange County Jail.
Because of the very tight time frame of 120 days for this project, the onsite portion of
the OCJAP project involved the work of six (6) evaluators who spent nearly 1,000 staff
hours at the five Orange County Jail facilities, including the court holding facilities and
divisions and units supporting the custody mission. The onsite evaluation of jail
facilities was conducted on each shift, or a portion of each shift, in order to understand
the work flow and activities that occur in this 24-hour day and 7-day per week
operation.
In order for the study to provide immediate value to the Orange County Sheriff’s
Department, a special executive summary was prepared for each individual facility
assessment during the OCJAP project. These detailed documents provided the
opportunity for Sheriff’s jail managers to review the material, provide feedback to
Crout & Sida Criminal Justice Consultants and, most importantly, served in the first
step of the development of implementation plans to address many of the issues
identified in the reports. Other significant items addressed in an Interim Report, and
this final report involve near, middle and long-term planning, which in most cases will
require additional work and funding through the normal county budget process.
This final report contains information that may have been presented in the executive
summaries and Interim Reports dating from the beginning of the project. Time
pressures did not allow CSCJC to 'circle back' to show the progress that has been
made in remedying the deficiencies identified in the Interim Reports, however we have
been made aware of several changes being made to the operation of the jail based
upon our ongoing evaluation.
For that reason, we caution the reader to confer with the Orange County Sheriff’s
Department before reaching conclusions about specific elements or findings of the
OCJAP Final Report. Our ongoing discussions with jail facility managers indicate that
many issues identified in the Interim Reports have been vigorously attended to, and
these corrections will not be reflected in the OCJAP Final Report. We strongly urge
any interested individuals, agencies or departments to contact the Sheriff’s
Department to verify what actions have been taken on specific areas of the
assessment since the initial recommendations were made.

Preface

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Table of Contents
Executive Summary ............................................................................................

1

Forward ................................................................................................................

9

Background..........................................................................................................

11

OCJAP System View ...........................................................................................

13

OCJAP Findings...................................................................................................

14

Staffing Analysis and Findings .........................................................................

23

Implementation Planning Construction Needs .............................................

75

OCJAP System View Conclusions.....................................................................

76

Summary of Findings – Central Jail Complex (CJX) ......................................

80

Summary of Findings – Theo Lacy Facility .....................................................

85

Summary of Findings – James A. Musick Facility ..........................................

90

Summary of Findings – Court Holding Facilities ...........................................

94

Summary of Findings – Inmate Programs Division ....................................... 101
Considerations for Further Studies .................................................................. 105
Appendix A – Project Methodologies ............................................................. 107
Appendix B – OCJAP Assessment Staff .......................................................... 118
Appendix C – Policy Assessment Checklist .................................................... 119
Appendix D – Security Assessment Checklist ................................................ 130
Appendix D1 – Security Assessment Anchor Points..................................... 134
Appendix E – Staffing Table ............................................................................. 135
Appendix E 1 – Annual Leave Table ............................................................... 136
Appendix E 2 – Shift Relief Factor Worksheets ............................................. 137
Appendix F – Jail Population Trend Analysis ................................................ 151
Appendix G – Literature/Document Review ................................................. 159
Appendix H – Scenario Drill Evaluation Instrument ..................................... 163
Appendix I – Acknowledgements ................................................................... 165
Appendix I – High Performance Training....................................................... 168

Contents

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Executive Summary
On June 10, 2008, the Orange County Board of Supervisors appointed Sheriff
Sandra Hutchens to lead the Orange County Sheriff’s Department after the
resignation of former Sheriff Michael Carona. The Orange County Sheriff’s
Department had been buffeted in recent years by allegations of mismanagement
and with special notoriety attached to the homicide of inmate, John Derek
Chamberlain who was being held in the jail.
Upon her appointment, Sheriff Hutchens, made an inquiry to hire an expert
consultant to develop and complete a comprehensive assessment of the Orange
County jails. Crout & Sida Criminal Justice Consultants (CSCJC) was
subsequently selected by the Sheriff’s Department and the County Board of
Supervisors to conduct a study of the five separate jail facilities operated by the
Sheriff’s Department, along with an assessment of the court holding facilities and
jail programs.

In accordance with the contract for consulting services, the final report was
required to be completed within a 120 days in order to provide a timely and
credible assessment of the jail system and enabling the Sheriff to quickly address
operational issues, to effect course corrections in the jail, wherever necessary.
In order to harvest objective and credible information, CSCJC developed a
template containing evaluation criteria to conduct the assessments. We trained
our team of consultants on the criteria, began onsite inspections and evaluations
of the jail system in July 2008 and concluded them in November 2008. To
enable immediate attention to deficiencies identified during the assessment,
CSCJC provided periodic executive reports to the Sheriff, executive staff and jail
managers.
Additionally, Interim Reports to the Sheriff’s Department describing our findings
for each facility/bureau and unit that was assessed was provided to the Custody
Operations Command and contains detailed observations gleaned from the
evaluation instruments developed for this project. Throughout the project, the
CSCJC consulting team has made 115 recommendations and provided
implementation-planning tools to OCSD jail managers for further action based
upon the information provided in the reports 1.
This OCJAP Final Report represents a compilation of data and observations
made for each of the custody entities examined and is the comprehensive view
of the findings and recommendations of the OCJAP.
As noted above, the catalyst that precipitated the OCJAP was the need to
provide Sheriff Hutchens with an objective assessment of the jail system in order
to affect new policies, procedures and directives wherever indicated.
Additionally, a detailed examination of the jail operation would provide
information on performance of staff to insure that it was properly aligned with
statutes, regulations, policies and directives.
1

Some recommendations while identified at each facility may be duplicated across the entire Orange County
jail system.

1

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

While the CSCJC assessment team was fully apprised about a number of jail
related irregularities that culminated in a homicide in the jail, it was not our
mission to reopen an investigation into this matter. Given the material that we
reviewed, we could not imagine what additional insights could be provided nor
could we be at all critical of the action taken in the aftermath of this incident by
the Sheriff’s Department.
It is the reasoned conclusion of the OCJAP that the Orange County jail system is
generally in good shape and effectively managed. Additionally, for the most part,
the Orange County jail is a relatively safe
place when compared to some other
Understaffing at the facility doesn’t
mean that I get to duck my job. It
jurisdictions. Despite this hopeful sign, the
means that I have to do my job
CSCJC evaluation team could not help but
better.
note that all of the ingredients, which
include a changing inmate population, low
As expressed to CSCJC by a Deputy
staffing levels and outdated jail facilities,
at the Musick Facility.
are decidedly not a good sign. CSCJC is
of the opinion that over time, these problem areas are a good predictor that jail
conditions are likely to reach critical mass and will change this heretofore good
safety record. Clearly, custody staff has been instrumental in maintaining jail
safety. We found that custody and support staff at all levels are engaged and
enthusiastic about the work they perform in the jail and openly express pride in
their Department.
With only a few exceptions, the OCJAP did not identify major system wide
operational flaws that caused great concern. Overall, we found staff to be
relieved to have some stability in the leadership of the department and many
expressed that they are looking forward to moving the department out of the
glaring light of public scrutiny and regain a positive public image that has been
enjoyed for many years.
Having said that, the assessment team did identify a number of areas in which a
course correction is indicated. Most of the issues identified in the individual
facility Interim Reports are easy fixes that involve missing or confusing policies
and procedures and/or the alignment of practices in conformance to policy.
As a precursor to our onsite evaluation, based upon information obtained from
the Corrections Standards Authority, periodicals and environmental scanning, we
noted some of the issues that give perspective to the challenges facing the
Sheriff the Department and county leaders.
1. A More Challenging Inmate Population: Changes in the dynamics of the
inmate population are apparent, not only in Orange County, but throughout
California and the nation's adult local detention facilities. Jails everywhere
are struggling with the reality that today’s inmate is in poorer health, more
drug addicted, more mentally ill and more prone to violence than were
inmates of a decade or more ago. Jail violence is also exacerbated by the
influence of gang activity that has percolated up from the streets and down
from state prisons.
While Orange County has been spared so far from the most serious
consequences of these changes in the inmate profile, the observations,
2

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

interviews and data collected during this assessment clearly show the impact
of these changes on the jail system, which contribute in a significant way to
jail violence and the overall security of the jail system.
The Orange County Jail inmate and population data indicate that:
Inmate population has been steadily trending upward since 2001 when there
was a reported system wide ADP of 4,771 inmates to the current level in
2007, where the ADP had climbed to 6,360 inmates. An analysis of other
information captured in the Jail Profile Survey reveals that:
•

The number of inmates who are unsentenced is steadily rising (from
2,142 in 1997 to 3,351 in 2007). As the unsentenced population rises,
significant problems are created in the classification and housing of these
inmates, including the high reliance on sentenced minimum security
inmates to perform janitorial, food service and other required activities
needed to operate the jail.

•

The number of felony inmates in the jail is rising (from 64% in 1997 to
73% in 2007). As the unsentenced population rises, significant problems
are created in the classification and housing of these inmates. Low-level
offenders, who are vanishing from the jail system, are the easiest group
to manage. Felons who have less to lose (e.g. 2nd/3rd strikers) are often
more prone to violence and less cooperative and difficult to deal with.



Orange County reported 1,561 “daily open mental health cases” to the
Corrections Standards Authority (CSA) Jail Profile Survey at the end of
2007. This number is up from 1,348 reported cases in 2002. This means
that many of the jail inmates need mental health services; most exhibit
behavior related to their mental disorders. Mentally ill offenders pose
significant problems with regard to classification, housing and
supervision. Additionally, the cost of housing these inmates is very
expensive due to the high cost of psychotropic medications.

•

We noted that the identification of the undocumented alien population has
showed a marked increase. Up until recently this data element was
somewhat suspect, inasmuch as the data depended on self reporting.
CSCJC evaluators credit the Sheriff’s Department with the aggressive effort in
partnering with the Department of Homeland Security in the identification of
criminal aliens, many of which will be sent to their country of origin by I.C.E.

•

We noted in our assessment that a recent court decision that could have
given the Sheriff’s Department authority to release inmates early due to
overcrowding was denied. In this case the District Attorney argued that the
letter of the law centers on the inmate population, vis-à-vis crowded
conditions. While technically correct, what the District Attorney and the Judge
did not take into account was the ever increasing demand to classify and
separate greater numbers of inmates, which in turn limits space availability.
Even if there is some housing capacity (based on inmate population numbers
alone) legitimate classification concerns by jail staff demonstrates that filling
every bed would put the safety of inmates in jeopardy, therefore many of
those beds are not available under any circumstances.
3

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

2. Outdated, Inappropriate and Insufficient Jail Facilities: The Orange
County Jail system is lacking in jail beds appropriate to the number and
classifications of inmates that are currently being incarcerated at the James
Musick Facility. This jail has a large number of dormitory beds in a barracks
style setting that does not adequately accommodate today’s inmate
population.
Additionally, several jail facilities within the James Musick Facility are nearing,
or have reached the end of, their useful life spans. We draw specific
attention to the tents and wooden barracks that were erected on a temporary
basis pending additional capacity at the Theo Lacy Facility. These tents and
dilapidated wooden structures should be removed very soon. The
assessment team’s findings clearly indicate that many of the Musick facilities
are too small and too poorly designed to afford adequate safety for inmates
and custody staff.
CSCJC strongly supports the current plans for jail expansion at the James
Musick Facility.
The data driving these conclusions include the following facts:


The surge in the size of the unsentenced population is reducing the
capacity to house sentenced inmates. The “worsening” of the inmate
population reduces the options for housing and releasing inmates.



All the numbers in this report are based on the “average” daily population
and averages are, of course, constructed from highs and lows. Proper jail
management requires that a system be able to accommodate peak
demands (the highs). This is very difficult for OCSD jail managers, as
there is barely enough jail capacity to handle non-peak populations.



Effective jail management in consideration of inmate and staff safety
require a certain percentage of vacant jail beds to allow for housing
assignments consistent with the inmate classification system. In the
current system, such beds are either not available, or at a very high
premium.



The Orange County Jail system relies on inmate labor to provide vital
functions, such as food preparation, sanitation and maintenance in the jail
facilities. It was appropriate to count on inmate workers when there was
an abundance of very low security inmates to do jail maintenance
functions. However, this classification of inmate is quickly vanishing.
Ultimately what happens in jail systems is that low-level offenders are not
jailed; a higher security inmate is now performing inmate labor. While the
Orange County jail continues to house minimum security inmates, as the
inmate profile changes, the practice of using higher security inmates to
perform work assignments in the jail is antithetical to good jail
management and security practices.

4

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

3. Insufficient Jail Staffing: Staffing shortages significantly impact the ability
of the OCSD to safely operate and manage the county jail system. These
shortages, including a significant gap in supervisory staff, have been the
cause of the high use of overtime. We believe that adding custody staff in the
jails is the most immediate,
The Theo Lacy housing unit (P, Q
essential and expeditious step that
and R Modules) was opened lacking
can be taken to reduce the level of
adequate staff (40 positions) to fully
violence in the Orange County Jails.
operate this addition.
We urge that increasing staffing be
acted upon swiftly.
It is our finding that 454.65 additional custody personnel are necessary to
supplement the current staffing in the Orange County jail system in order to
insure the safety and security of the county jail system. The addition of
personnel will enable the Custody Operations Command to successfully
accomplish all of the required activities contained in Title 15, CCR, which is
the baseline used in this study. The addition of this recommended staff will
significantly reduce the need for overtime in the jail. Current authorized
staffing in the Orange County jail facilities is 1067. The inclusion of a revised
staffing plan with a rational shift relief factor will increase staffing system-wide
to 1521.65 custody and support staff.
Above and beyond the 'big three' vital issues, there are other significant issues
affecting security in the Orange County Jails. Important concerns suggest the
addition of, or improvement in, the following:


Inmate Feeding - Currently the Orange County Jail provides two-hot
meals and one-cold meal per day to inmates at the Central Men’s and
Women’s facilities. At the Theo Lacy facility, inmates are escorted out of
their housing areas (barracks) to a central dining hall for the two meals
that are served hot.
Based on the security level of inmates housed in these facilities, coupled
with the need to divert large numbers of staff from other duty stations
during feeding period to supervise inmates, CSCJC recommends
changing the meal service to one-hot meal per day. This
recommendation is consistent with many local detention systems
throughout California, particularly among the larger agencies. Nothing in
the minimum jail standards prohibits feeding inmate’s two cold meals a
day provided that the meals contain the nutritional content prescribed in
minimum standards. Indeed, many individuals of every stripe in the
community prefer two cold meals per day.
Costs associated with this change in practice are most likely lower or
neutral than the two-hot meals. The primary advantage of making this
policy change is that security is enhanced by reducing the mass
movement of inmates by one third. Staff currently needed to supervise
this activity can better direct their efforts in other areas of inmate
management.

•

Confidential Medical Screening -There is a significant problem with the
lack of confidentiality provided to inmates at the medical screening area in
5

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

IRC. Currently, confidential communication is not only nil, but broadcast
via a speaker system. When inmates are reluctant to talk about medical
concerns due to confidentiality issues then there is a strong likelihood that
they will not reveal serious illness or contagious disease. This is a high
liability issue that should be addressed quickly.
•

Strip Search Policy - The CSCJC assessment team is of the opinion that
the current strip search policy is too restrictive. Furthermore we found
that there was a great deal of confusion by staff over the proper
application of strip searches. Clearly, there is a legitimate penology
interest in conducting strip searches in the jail. We recommend that the
Custody Operations Command work with risk managers and the training
division to arrive at a more effective use of this security practice.

•

Inmate Classification - The inmate classification system, while
adequate, needs at a minimum, to be validated in order to insure that too
much subjectivity is not introduced into this critical process.

•

Weekender Program - The current practice of maintaining a weekender
program should be thoroughly discussed with the judiciary, District
Attorney and Public Defender to assess its effectiveness. Many jails in
California have discontinued housing weekenders. To the extent that this
practice continues, we recommend that weekenders not be housed with
the general population due to concerns about smuggling contraband or
providing a communications link for gang members. Additionally, there is
no need to medically screen every inmate upon their reporting for their
weekend incarceration beyond the first screening. A short question by
the booking deputy to inquire if there has been any change in the inmates
health status since they were last booked will suffice and meet the intent
of the regulations.

•

Shift Pattern Configuration - Currently the OCSD utilizes a variety of
shifts to accomplish the jail mission. We believe that the current 12-hour
shift pattern that covers the 80 hour bi-weekly time period has a number
of inefficiencies including one 8-hour flop day, in order to fit into the 80hour requirement. CSCJC recommends an 84 hour, 12-hour shift plan as
a better deployment of staffing resources.

•

Short Interval Training - The Custody Operations Command should
direct each facility captain to develop a short interval training curricula
based upon the directives contained in the Jail Operations Manual.
These training interventions lasting between 10-15 minutes should be
delivered daily during the shift briefing. Furthermore, testing should be
incorporated in these modules in order to document transfer of knowledge
in policies and procedures.

Recommended Technology Enhancements
•

Better training management data systems are needed to improve
documentation and storage of staff training information. This is
particularly important to glean pertinent information necessary to develop
a relevant training needs assessment and will serve to support good
6

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

training practices in the event that selection and training are a part of a
lawsuit.
•

To support the jails' security mission, it is important that the Sheriff’s
Department continue with their plan to install high quality digital video
systems in all of the jails. One such system, currently used at the Theo
Lacy Facility, clearly demonstrates its value in the investigation of inmate
violence and with regard to accusations of staff-on-inmate violence or
abuse and in risk management in general.

•

Another important technology that should be considered is video visiting.
Video visiting enhances safety and accommodates families, who are
often burdened by the time and cost of traveling long distances to visit
loved ones in jail. This technology has the potential to provide better
inmate visiting, save staff time by no longer moving inmates to visits,
which in turn would allow for more visiting time for families and inmates.
Use of this technology will enhance jail safety and security in the facilities.
We specifically recommend that a pilot program be initiated at the James
Musick Facility, where the issue of contact visits was identified as a major
security issue.

7

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Challenges of Managing a Large Local Correctional System
Jails are rarely a popular subject and especially not when they are brought up in
the context of competing requests for precious tax dollars. Nonetheless,
operating safe and secure jails is an essential government function and must be
accorded the full measure of attention and funding to be carried out
appropriately. Inaction or half measures will result in continued jail violence and
the potential for serious assaults or homicides in the jail, which no one – not jail
staff, inmates, law abiding citizens or government leaders – wants to see
happen.
Furthermore, the recent experience by the OCSD concerning the intervention of
the Federal Court in the operation of the Orange County Jails is a sobering
reminder of the necessity to attend to jail issues. One needs only to look at the
current crisis in the California prison system to understand the unfavorable
financial, control and public policy consequences of failing to proactively manage
the correctional infrastructure.
Our hope is that Orange County leaders chart an assertive course to mitigate the
serious problems encountered daily in the county's jails. Doing so will ultimately
benefit all the people of Orange County because it will ensure that the jail system
can and will operate in ways that protect both the public and people incarcerated
in jail.
In conclusion, the CSCJC project team would like to thank the men and women
serving in the Orange County Sheriff’s Department for their openness, honesty
and cooperation during the OCJAP. Their enthusiasm and dedication to public
service give the people of Orange County much to be proud of.

8

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Forward
The operation and maintenance of jails is a necessary, yet extraordinarily
complex task that is, in most cases, statutorily assigned to the elected sheriff.
Since the jail is usually one of the largest county expenditures, problems in the
jail often become big news items that draw the sheriff and other government
leaders into the spotlight. Thus, the jail, in any county, is an unavoidable and
prominent concern.
While counties have some flexibility in terms of alternatives to jail programs, it
remains a fact that legislators pass the laws that determine who should be locked
up. Arresting agencies, including the sheriff, meet the law enforcement needs of
the communities they serve, and judges’ sentence people who are convicted of
violating the law. The sheriff’s and their custody staff are required by law to
accept into custody those people sent to them and to manage those offenders as
safely, constitutionally and effectively as possible.
While the Orange County Sheriff's Department has experienced a myriad of
problems in its jails, it is worth noting that these problems have also been
experienced in county jails throughout California and the nation. Of course the
fact that the Orange County Sheriff’s Department operates the second largest jail
system in California magnifies those problems exponentially and draws close
scrutiny from the public and press.
Nonetheless, Orange County is not alone; as a reference point, consider the
following information reflecting some of the problems experienced in county jails
throughout California:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

•
•

The Average Daily Population (ADP) of jail systems statewide is trending
upward; however, with only very few new jail beds added since 1992.
Jail beds needed during periods of peak jail population exceed the current
rated capacity2.
Jail bookings are up.
The number of unsentenced inmates in jails has increased dramatically.
The ratio of felony versus misdemeanor offenders in jails has shifted
statewide. Felons in the jail system have gone up, while the number of
misdemeanants has gone down.
Maximum and medium security inmates have been trending upward and
minimum-security inmates have been trending downward.
Jails have become California's de facto mental hospitals. Mentally ill
people in jails create burdens in terms of both jails' costs and their ability
to house people safely and securely, let alone provide them appropriate
treatment interventions.
The number of served misdemeanor warrants has plummeted over the
past ten years, in large part due to the lack of available jail space to
house misdemeanants if they are brought in.
Despite the best efforts of custody staff, violence in jails throughout
California is increasing.

2

Jail population data is often presented as the average daily population, however peak jail population needs to
be taken in account when planning or determining jail needs.

9

November 18, 2008

•
•

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

California is short 66,385 jail beds statewide right now to meet current
public safety demands.
Looking to the future, California’s inexorable population growth will
require 40,943 new beds by 2050 to address population growth alone.

In California’s local adult system, jail facilities are bursting at the seams. Twelve
percent of our jails are more than 60 years old and nearly half are 30 years old or
older. Dangerous crowding is a daily fact of life in many of the state’s 460 jails.
Simply put, California does not have enough local detention capacity or adequate
program space to meet public safety demands.
Time and experience have demonstrated that there is no natural constituency
supporting jails and it is for precisely this reason that all too often, government
policy makers ignore this vital yet unpopular sector of public responsibility.
This was not the case in Orange County where Crout and Sida Criminal Justice
Consultants found considerable interest in the county's jails throughout the
OCJAP.
While sometimes an uncomfortable process, an objective assessment of the
strengths and weaknesses of a jail system is important to local leaders for
several reasons. The county will be called upon to make decisions about jail
budgets that typically involve requests for increased funding. It is helpful, and
important, for government leaders to know if there are any significant problems in
the way the jail is administered that might contribute to legal problems or rising
costs. In the interest of sound decision making, it is critical that the Sheriff, Board
of Supervisors and other members of the criminal justice community have
information that will help them sort out sometimes misguided rhetoric about jails
which could cloud decision-making. It is our hope that the Orange County Jail
Assessment Project will prove to be a valuable asset to Orange County leaders
in this regard.

10

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Background
The Orange County Sheriff’s Department (OCSD) operates the second largest
county jail system in California and eighth largest in the United States. The
Sheriff is responsible for the care, custody, security and rehabilitation of all
sentenced and pre-trial inmates detained or housed within the Department’s five
operational facilities. In 2007 3, the county jail system housed an average daily
population of 6,360 inmates. During that same year, the OCSD received
(booked) 66,000 persons from throughout Orange County.
In addition to custody and control, the Sheriff's Department is responsible for
transporting inmates to and from court and among the multiple facilities that
comprise the jail system. Data collected for 2007 reports that the Transportation
Bureau moved a total of 437,318 inmates throughout Orange County and the
state of California.
On June 10, 2008, the Orange County Board of Supervisors appointed Sheriff
Sandra Hutchens to lead the Orange County Sheriff’s Department after the
resignation of former Sheriff Michael Carona. The Orange County Sheriff’s
Department had been buffeted in recent years by allegations of mismanagement
and with special notoriety concerning the homicide of inmate, John Derek
Chamberlain who was being held in the jail
Upon her appointment, Sheriff Hutchens, made an inquiry to hire an expert
consultant to develop and complete a comprehensive security and staffing
assessment of the Orange County jails. The assessments were to study the 5
separate jail facilities operated by the OCSD, along with an assessment of the
court holding facilities and jail programs.

On June 12, 2006, Crout and Sida Criminal Justice Consultants, Inc. (CSCJC)
responded to the inquiry concerning the Jail Security and Staffing Assessment
(OCJAP). CSCJC was subsequently selected by the OCSD and the County
Board of Supervisors to conduct a system wide assessment of the jail that
includes the following:
Standards Assessment – Utilizing Title 15 and Title 24, California Code of
Regulations (CCR) as a baseline, CSCJC conducted an evaluation of each of the
jail facilities currently in operation and observed the activities of personnel on
each shift during a 24-hour period. Using these standards as the objective
baseline, CSCJC was able to determine if staffing, operating policies and
procedures, as well as physical space, adequately met the requirements
contained in the minimum standards (e.g., are staff able to make security rounds,
are directives being followed as written, are other programs and activities relating
to health, sanitation, food service and inmate programs being completed as
required?) CSCJC evaluated, documented and made recommendations on
issues involving minimum jail standards with special emphasis on issues dealing
with the safety and security and best correctional practices of each facility.
Policy Assessment – CSCJC reviewed and evaluated selected sections of the
Department’s Jail Operations Manual, emergency plans/duty statements, unit
orders and other written directives to ensure that OCSD is in compliance with
3

Based on CSA Jail Profile Survey.

11

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Title 15, CCR (A complete listing of documents reviewed during this assessment
is contained in Appendix G). Additionally, CSCJC made recommendations
designed to improve policies, procedures and other written directives that may
serve to affect a course of correction in the operation of a jail or, when indicated,
serve as an example to be considered for replication in other facilities operated
by the department.
Security Assessment – CSCJC examined and made recommendations on
current policies, procedures and other directives as they related to facility safety
and security and best correctional practices. As with all other aspects of this
assessment, minimum jail standards served as the objective baseline on which
the evaluation was conducted. CSCJC developed a set of scenarios and drills,
along with an evaluation checklist that were used in each facility for the purpose
of evaluating staff’s ability to respond to emergencies.
Staffing Assessment – CSCJC evaluated the existing staffing in each facility in
order to develop a rational staffing model based on a shift relief factor in order to
accurately and objectively determine staffing requirements. Based on this model
CSCJC made recommendations for a staffing plan designed to assist the
department in meeting all of the requirements contained in the California
Minimum Jail Standards, with special emphasis on jail safety and security and
best correctional practices.
Inmate Population and Trend Analysis – CSCJC conducted an analysis of the
inmate population in the Orange County jails based on data derived from the
Corrections Standards Authority (CSA) Jail Profile Survey and data from the
California Department of Finance that was designed to provide information useful
in jail planning. This information also provided a broad view of the Orange
County Jail system and dynamics that might influence the project assessment.
The results of the individual assessment conducted by CSCJC for each facility
were presented in Interim Reports and/or Executive Summaries that provide
documentation, including implementation-planning tools, to assist the
department’s effort to improve the overall operations of the county jail system.
Results of the assessments were intended to be available to assist in the
remodeling and/or expansion of existing facilities and/or the construction of future
jails.

12

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

OCJAP System View
In the planning stage of the OCJAP, CSCJC spent a significant amount of time
identifying and/or developing the evaluation processes to be used to guide the
evaluations, data collection and analysis. The goal was to provide an objective,
pragmatic and credible assessment of the security and staffing of the Orange
County jail system.
Early on, the CSCJC team recognized that each of the detention facilities and
divisions that make up and support the Orange County Jail system is interrelated
to other facilities in the system and therefore, reporting with specificity on some
items identified in the assessment would be premature until all of the facilities
and divisions had been studied and evaluated. In order to provide each facility
command with findings, recommendations and implementation strategies,
CSCJC developed an Interim Report as an aid and working document that can
be useful in making course corrections or long term planning.
While the main focus of the assessment involved operation of the jails, the
OCJAP contract required the review of a number of functions that provided
valuable information on a wide range of issues. While some of these peripheral
areas did not speak directly to jail operation, they nonetheless yielded important
information to the OCJAP project overall.
Each Interim Report is a detailed evaluation of the individual jail facility or division
and includes recommendations and tools to assist jail managers with planning
and implementation of corrective actions. Interim Reports and staffing studies
have been completed and delivered to OCSD management and are related to
the following jail facilities and bureaus, listed here in the order of completion of
the OCJAP:
•

•
•
•
•

CJX Complex
 Inmate Reception Center.
 Central Men’s Jail.
 Central Women’s Jail.
Theo Lacy Facility.
James Musick Facility.
Court Holding Facilities.
Inmate Programs.

13

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

November 18, 2008

OCJAP FINDINGS
After the completion and analysis of all of the Interim Reports, CSCJC evaluators
conclude the following concerning the Orange County Jail system:
Inmate Population – In 2007, the average daily population (ADP) of all OCSD
jail facilities was 6,360. Obviously, the size of the population, changing
demographics, classification and gang affiliation are impacting security and
staffing within the Orange County Jail System.
A review of the jail population data derived from the CSA Jail Profile Survey
(Appendix F) indicates that for quite some time the OCSD has been experiencing
growth in the inmate population. Efforts to adjust to the demands placed upon it
have included moving low security inmates out of the jail system and into
alternative programs. Consequently, inmates who would not be considered for
housing in low security settings are now occupying those spaces. This is a
phenomenon that we describe as “classification creep”, which occurs over time
as a result of more serious offenders representing an ever growing population in
the jail. Our research into the OCSD jail population, along with our observations
and interviews with OCSD staff, have made it apparent that dynamics related to
the inmate population and classification are driving many of the security issues
impacting the department.
ADP fluctuations are illustrated in the following chart and table.

OCSD Jail Facilities - Average Daily Population
7000

-

=.c::::.

e:::.

Co

5000

,=
F

,=
F

,=
F

,=
r=

=
=

~

6000

f--

f--

F

4000

f-

f-

f-

f-

-

-

f-

-

f-

f-

3000

f--

f--

f--

f--

-

-

f--

-

f--

f--

2000

f--

f--

f--

f--

-

-

f--

-

f--

f--

1000

f--

f--

f--

f--

-

-

f--

-

f--

f--

o
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

ADP

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

5,116

5,210

4,890

4,770

4,771

4,772

5,084

5,665

6,165

6,218

6,360

14

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

In 1997, the ADP was 5,116, by 2007 the ADP had risen to 6,360 inmates.
Another remarkable change involved inmate classification as a result of more
serious offenders being housed in the jail. For example, since 1997, the
percentage of felony inmates requiring higher security housing has dramatically
increased. Conversely, lower
100%
security inmates entering the
Felony v. Misdemeanor
system have had a
Inmate Population
73 %
corresponding decrease in
75%
numbers.
64%
Obviously such extreme
changes do not reflect the actual
outcomes of a standardized
classification system, but rather
an attempt to cope with deficits
in terms of system design and
capacity.

50%

36'

27 %
25%

0%

1997 1998 1999 2000
20002001
2001 200220032004
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
• Felony Inmate

• Misdemeaoor
Misdemeanor Inmate

Given these radical swings in the inmate population and classification, one could
speculate that the “demands for jail space” tail is wagging the “good corrections
policy” dog. In other words, the Sheriff’s Department is forced into reactive mode
to deal with the responsibility of incarcerating individuals who have been
arrested, while at the same time attempting to avoid legal scrutiny from the
Federal Court. The data indicates that these, and other forces, are impacting jail
policy and are creating a host of unintended consequences.
Assaults on staff appear to be decreasing; there were an average of 41 assaults
per quarter in 1997 and spiking to 58, 51 and 56 per quarter between 2001 thru
2003. Assaults have steadily decreased since 2005 with the number of reported
assaults per quarter at 37 in 2007.

60

Assaults on Staff

50

40 30
20
10

o
1997 1998 1999 2000

2001

2002 2003

15

2004 2005 2006 2007

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Another major issue that impacts jail security and staffing involves the very large
number of individuals who are severely mentally ill being booked into the jails.
The number of “open mental health cases” at the end of 2006 was reported by the
Sheriff’s Department to be 1,561.
Mental illness impacts, not only the affected individuals and their families, but
also local corrections and society as a whole. In a costly cycle of incarceration,
release and re-incarceration,
mentally ill people come to jail
4,()()()
facilities time and time again for
Open Mental Health Cases
crimes that grow out of their
In the Orange County Jail
mental illnesses.
3,()()()

2,()()()

-

1,348

1,561

1,()()()

02002

2003

2004

2005

2006

According to the Pacific
Research Institute, California’s
annual jail and probation costs
for mentally ill offenders exceed
$300 million a year. 4 Nationally
it is estimated that at least 16
percent of jail inmates are
mentally ill. This translates into
more than 12,000 seriously
mentally ill inmates in
California’s jails.

Statewide, jails do their best to address these issues through the current stock of
1,002 medical treatment beds and 3,095 mental health treatment beds, as well
as in-house programming and treatment services that are offered in liaison with
community providers. But much more is needed; nearly every jail in the state
needs more treatment, program space and professional support to appropriately
work with the people in custody. 5 And so it goes for the Orange County jails that
inmates with severe mental illness are creating significant management and
operational concerns related to safety, security, classification, housing and the
provision of mental health care that is consistent with community standards.
Undocumented Aliens – Analysis of the number of undocumented aliens
housed in the Orange County jail indicates a great deal of variability, particularly
as it relates to data from 2007.
What may appear as an increase in undocumented aliens is more likely a result
of better screening and data collection. The data elements concerning
undocumented aliens harvested in the CSA Jail Profile Survey, while valuable,
have been historically problematic, due to the fact that most of the data collected
relied on self-reporting, in which undocumented aliens were reluctant to do.
CSCJC attributes the increase in undocumented aliens in 2007 as a result of
efforts to train staff to identify individuals who are illegally in the county as a part
of a partnership with the Federal Department of Homeland Security.
4

California Board of Corrections, Mentally Ill Offender Crime Reduction Grant Program, Report to the
Legislature, December 2004, page 2.
5
California State Sheriff’s Association, Do the Crime, Do the Time? Maybe Not in California, June 2006, pages
4-19, and California Board of Corrections, Mentally Ill Offender Crime Reduction Grant Program Report to the
Legislature, December 2004, pages 15-56.

16

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

The Orange County
18.00%
Sheriff’s
Undocumented Aliens Housed In the Orange County Jail
Department has
16.00%
engaged in a
14.00%
Cross-Designation
12.00%
,..
l
rI
Program in
10.00%
accordance with
I
f,8.00%
Section 287(g)
- lf-- If-- - - - 6.00%
Immigration and
- lr-- Ir-- - - - - lr-- Ir-- II--4.00%
Nationality Act that
- lr-- Ir-- - - - - lr-- Ir-- II--2.00%
lays the
0.00%
groundwork for the
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Department of
Homeland Security
to enter into agreements with local law enforcement agencies to train and certify
deputies to perform limited immigration functions.

-

-

-

-

-

~

~

Between January 2007 and August 2008, Orange County custody staff
conducted approximately 111,227 interviews that resulted in 7,041 immigration
holds being placed on individuals believed to be undocumented aliens. More
importantly, as it relates to criminal activity, the department reports that 4,421 of
these individuals were in jail on felony charges and 2,620 were incarcerated on
misdemeanor charges.
While the effective identification of persons in the United States illegally is a good
thing, there may be a corresponding consequence of increasing pressure on the
overall jail capacity depending on how fast I.C.E removes this population from
the county jail to Federal facilities.
Inmate Classification – All inmate classification and facility housing is
centralized and assigned to the IRC. The Classification Unit uses an objective
classification system and most importantly is designed to ensure the appropriate
housing and programming of inmates and is intended to maintain the security of
the facility and the safety of inmates and staff.
The classification plan must be defensible in litigation, so it should be based on
objective criteria and be uniformly understood and applied. The requirement for
objective criteria does not necessarily require a “point system;” rather, it means
the information on which classification is based is repeatable, documented and
substantive, as opposed to subjective and arbitrary. Information for classification
is gleaned from the receiving screening, intake observations, record checks and
any other appropriate sources available for use in classification.
A facility's classification plan should consider:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

The physical layout of the facility.
The security levels available in the facility.
The programs available.
The criteria used for classification.
The appeal process for both staff and inmates.
The time frames for periodic review and reclassification.
The composition and training of the classification staff and the facility divisions
they represent.
17

November 18, 2008

•

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Other personnel issues such as who makes classification decisions and the
lines of communication for classification information.

While there is an objective classification system used in the OCSD jail, it is
important to note that it has been modified to create a new classification of R3.
This R3 classification was developed in the aftermath of the Chamberlain
incident 6 and identifies individuals whose background might otherwise indicate
housing in protective custody is needed. In the case of individuals classified as
R3, our assessment finds that, for all intents and purposes, they are treated in a
similar manner as inmates held in protective custody, however are not readily
recognized by wearing a blue wristband.
When asked about the rationale behind this newly created classification, CSCJC
evaluators were told that limitations in the ability to segregate an ever increasing
micro-classification of the inmate population. The individuals who are classified
as R3 have a background that is often considered borderline when making
classification decisions. Additionally, physical plant limitations make the
classification of these individuals as protective custody more difficult.
While we understand why the decision was made to create this classification, the
CSCJC team could not help but notice that upon examination of the way R3
inmates were handled in the facility that it made little sense to continue to assign
this classification. It appeared that the R3 classification entailed too much
subjectivity on the part of the classification unit.
The ability of classification officers to change an inmate’s classification based on
subjective criteria is problematic. We recommend that the department send a
team to NIC/Jails Division training, or seek NIC technical assistance for a
thorough review of the current system and clarify the need to label someone an
R3, but not consider that grounds for protective custody status. While the
classification system is a useful tool in the management of the jail the CSCJC
team agreed that the classification system in use was shaded a bit too much
toward a subjective assessment.
Racial compatibility and gang affiliation are some of the complex considerations
that must be made as staff puts a fine point on the classification of inmates.
Inmate classification is a dynamic process, needing constant updating. The
transient nature of the inmate population throughout the system challenges the
ability to classify inmates to available housing as well as to provide appropriate
assignments to those who serve as a part of the jail system's labor pool.
An issue that CSCJC evaluators have encountered in other jurisdictions involves
a new classification of inmate identified as Southsiders. Southsiders are
primarily, although not exclusively, Hispanics who are native to California. The
inmates who identify themselves with the Southsider group are at odds with
African-Americans, and other groups, who are incarcerated in the jails.
Numerically superior, Southsiders have been known to suddenly and violently
attack other (non-Southsider) inmates without provocation. Southsiders also

6

John Chamberlain, a Mission Viejo software engineer arrested for possession of child pornography, was
murdered Oct. 5, 2006 while incarcerated at the Theo Lacy Facility.

18

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

have a fairly complex command and control system that regulates the behavior of
group members.
Generally speaking, because of their hierarchy of so-called “shot-callers,”
Southsiders, as a group, are relatively easily managed and well behaved in the
jail as long as they are segregated. OCSD custody staff is aware of the dynamics
of this group as it becomes a greater issue for the personnel assigned to the jail
system.
While CSCJC assessment team understand there is a legitimate penological
reason to segregate this group, we are troubled that Southsiders are yet another
micro-group that must be classified and separated from others when there are
too few facilities in which to appropriately house these potentially dangerous,
groups. We suggest that OCSD staff continue to monitor this complex issue and
the activities of the Southsider group and seek to better understand the
Southsider phenomenon. It is possible that this is a problem that might resolve
itself over time.
In July 2007, the National Institute of Corrections, an agency with the U.S.
Department of Justice, conducted an operational technical assessment of the
Orange County Jail System at the request of the department. The emphasis of
the assessment was the classification system, intake process, records system,
inmate housing plan and supervision. It is recommended that, at a minimum, the
current classification system in place be validated to insure that the classification
system is valid and reliable.
Facilities – Some of the jail facilities (physical plants) in the Orange County Jail
system are reaching the end of their useful life span and over time will become
inadequate to manage the inmate population if current inmate population trends
continue. Despite some of the challenges of older linear and barrack style
facilities the OCSD has done a very good job of maintaining the facilities.
During the assessment of the jail facilities, CSCJC evaluators were impressed by
the overall cleanliness and order in each facility. Even in the older linear facilities
it was noted that items that might otherwise obscure the observation into the cells
were free and clear of clutter.
One issue plaguing the maintenance of the Men’s and Women’s Central Jail
facilities involved the aging cell door and locking mechanisms. Spare parts are
currently not available and must be fabricated by county staff. The continued use
of these jail facilities will require expensive and time consuming machining of
parts, which in turn drive up the cost of maintenance.
With only a few exceptions, the jail facilities are operating in ways for which they
were not originally intended. The inmate population is now comprised mostly of
individuals who are confined for felony offenses and who are generally more
violent and more likely to be gang affiliated than those for whom Orange County
jails were originally designed.
Another design-related problem plaguing the system is that the original design
philosophy was highly dependent on low security inmates providing labor to
operate the facilities. Low security inmates were expected to help in the
preparation of inmate meals, laundry, facility sanitation and maintenance. Since
19

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

fewer minimum-security inmates are now being detained in jail, jail managers
would expect that inmates classified as low-medium to medium security will most
likely be performing the “inmate worker” labor in the facilities.
The inmate profile of days gone by, when it was appropriate for minimum security
inmate workers to provide facility maintenance and other services required in the
daily operation of the jail, are diminishing in the Orange County jail system.
Therefore, any new construction planning should adopt a design that insures
greater security. A physical plant design for greater security can be effectively
used for higher security inmates and provide much needed flexibility in housing.
Facilities in Need of Replacement – While the Men’s and Women’s Central Jail
facilities are aging, the keen attention to maintenance will elongate their use for
some time in the future. Expansion of new jail facilities should focus on the
conditions at the James Musick jail facility.
The Musick Facility is located in an unincorporated area near the City of Irvine
and Lake Forest and serves the County as a minimum security detention facility.
The Musick Facility is commonly referred to as the “Farm” due to its historical use
of inmates to grow food crops on the facility grounds. While this activity
continues to take place, the classification of individuals housed at this facility has
been changing over the years and like many minimum security facilities in the
state, Orange County is witnessing a gradual change in the type of inmates
housed in the Musick Facility.
This is a phenomenon that we call “classification creep” in which the ever
expanding inmate population is incarcerated in the jail are felons and therefore,
as a matter of prioritization and consideration of public safety, those inmates
who were classified as
minimum security are
increasingly being shoved
out of the system and onto
out of custody alternative
work programs.
The safety and security of
any given detention facility
is dependent on two basic
factors, the design of the
facility and the number of
staff assigned to the facility
to supervise the activities
of the inmates. A better
facility design economizes on the number of staff needed to supervise inmates;
even a poorly designed facility, given the inmate classification, can be safely
operated provided that there is a corresponding staffing level to properly
supervise the inmates that are in custody. The task at hand for any correctional
entity is to maintain a balance between facility design, classification of inmates
and staffing levels.
All too often, with respect to “classification creep”, the agency operating the
detention facility continues to staff the facility at the same level when a lower
classification of inmate was housed in the facility. What should occur, but often
20

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

doesn’t, is that custody staff should be increased, commensurate with the
classification of the inmate.
Upon evaluating the Musick Facility, CSCJC concludes that despite
“classification creep” at the facility, the staffing level remains pretty much the
same as when the facility housed lower level inmates. In our view, while not at a
critical stage, it bears evaluating the changing inmate population with staffing
levels. Once again, balance must be maintained in order to diminish the extent
and severity of inmate-on-inmate or inmate-on-staff violence.
It is worth noting that shifts in inmate classification (classification creep) are
oftentimes quite insidious because it happens slowly over time. While there is a
level of awareness of the change, balance is not maintained until after some
unhappy event or hopefully after a third party assessment, such as this project.
The housing units and support buildings located at the Musick Facility vary in age
and design is described as follows:
The James A Musick Facility is an adult detention facility occupied by sentenced
and unsentenced males and females. The facility sits on approximately 100
acres located in an unincorporated area of Orange County in an urban
environment very close to light industrial and residential areas next to the
incorporated communities of Irvine and the Lake Forest. This facility was first
opened in 1964 and the facility was designed (capacity of 200) for the detention
of males sentenced for misdemeanor crimes in a minimum security environment.
Over time, additional low security housing units were added on the facility
grounds and in 1986, as a temporary measure to ease crowded jail conditions,
four 90-bed tents and wooden barracks were added to the facility. The inclusion
of these tents and wooden housing units were approved as an alternative means
of compliance to ease crowded conditions, however they are not counted as part
of the Corrections Standards Authority bed rated capacity.
There is a common observation that in the bureaucratic parlance to describe
something as temporary, it is sure to become the most permanent word in the
government dictionary ─ And so it is with the tent and wooden barracks at the
Musick Facility that were supposed to be removed upon additional jail space
being constructed at the Theo Lacy site. Unfortunately, due to the ever
increasing incarceration rate in Orange County the tents and wooden barracks
continue to be occupied.
The current CSA rated inmate housing capacity at the Musick Facility is 713 beds
and 360 non-rated beds (tents). Combined, the total available beds at the Musick
Facility is 1073. During the 2007 calendar year the Musick Facility held and ADP
of 1027 inmates. The facility also supports two-kitchens, as well as providing
medical/mental and dental services.
Because of the assignment of lower security inmates at the facility, a substantial
number of educational, vocational and lifestyle programs are offered to
individuals sentenced to the Musick Facility. As mentioned in other facility
summary reports, the Orange County Sheriff’s Department is committed to
providing both in custody and post custody programs aimed at providing a range
of services designed to reduce recidivism. It was noted that like many of the
activities at the Musick Facility, the changing (higher security) classification of
21

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

inmates being housed there is impacting the number and type of programs
offered.
At the time of the OCJAP, CSCJC evaluators were aware of planning efforts to
construct a new facility at the Musick site that would accommodate minimum and
medium security inmates, while at the same time provide a higher level of
security. Once this construction is complete, the OCSD has set a course to
eliminate the so-called temporary tents and wooden barracks that currently
house inmates.

22

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Staffing Analysis and Findings
Classification of Personnel Working in the Orange County Jail Facilities
In accordance with the contract to provide consulting services related to the
assessment of the Orange County Jail system, CSCJC agreed to study issues
related to any proposed transition from deputy sheriff to public officer, or other
appropriate classification; and/or an expanded ratio of public officer to deputy to
work in the county jail system. Our objective in this analysis is to provide
information that can be used to determine if a shift in employee classification is a
sound business decision and describe the public policy implications, agency
culture and legal and organizational requirements involved in any shift in
correctional employee classifications.
In order to understand the current state of local corrections workers in California,
it is helpful to understand the historical events that have driven local entities to
shift from using a generic deputy sheriff classification to a dedicated correctional
officer (public officer) position in the jails throughout the State.
For the past 30-years, California’s elected Sheriffs have struggled with the use of
a professional correctional officer (public officer) or a traditional deputy sheriff
(peace officer) to staff local jail facilities in the state. This discussion has
continued for many years mostly juxtaposing the staffing philosophy of the large
urban departments in contrast to the medium and small local jurisdictions around
the State.
First and foremost, the primary factor that has driven this change has been
economics. The use of a non-sworn classification to work in the jails started in
the rural counties, mostly in Northern California, a number of years ago. Unlike
their larger counterparts in the populous, Southern and Bay Area locations,
smaller rural counties have at times, struggled with solvency. In order to stay in
business (literally) and remain solvent, these counties shifted from deputy
sheriffs to a lower cost public officer to operate their jails.
For the most part, given the dynamics of daily life in less populated areas of the
state, the use of public officers as opposed to sworn deputy sheriffs has worked
reasonably well. The fiscal realities that were faced by many of the rural
counties, has in the past, been so dismal that local leaders were able to transition
with little or no opposition from labor or other interest groups. For many
jurisdictions it simply came down to making a fundamental shift in personnel
practices or risk closing the jail.
Over the years, much of the cost savings envisioned by operating of the jail with
non-sworn staff (public officers) has evaporated in order to be competitive in the
recruitment of qualified jail personnel. Over the years, counties have begun to
provide public officers with safety retirement and other benefits usually reserved
for sworn peace officers.
This is not to say that there are not savings to be had in the use of public officers
to work in the jail; clearly there are cost savings or cost avoidance inherent with
this change that mostly relate to some differential in salaries, benefits, training
and equipment. Given the differences in counties and differing populations,
23

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

these cost savings do not necessarily provide an overwhelming case to change
the classification of individuals who work in the jail.
Based upon our observations and many years of experience working with local
agencies, personnel cost is almost always the driving force that initiates the
discussion, and oftentimes the decision, to change course with regard to using a
public officer class as opposed to a deputy sheriff to work in the jail. To the
extent that personnel costs are the driving force in Orange County, our analysis
points to the fact that cost savings alone is a poor justification to move in this
direction.
The fact that large highly populated urban sheriff’s departments continue to
utilize a sworn deputy sheriff in the jail is no accident. Clearly, these local entities
have the same fiscal challenges as any other county in the State and would like
to enjoy the lower employee costs. However, these departments by virtue of the
populous areas that they serve take a much broader view of the law enforcement
mission based upon the impact of a major disaster or catastrophic event that
potentially puts many hundred thousands of citizens and property at risk.
As we have previously mentioned, it is rare that the significant cost savings
envisioned is realized over the long term by the local agency, given the fact that
there are a number of complex issues that must be considered during the
decision making process. Our analysis is intended to shed some light on some
of the intricacies that should drive this discussion, and any decision to make
adjustments in the classification of jail worker, beyond the notion of cost savings.
What are the Legal Classifications of Personnel who can Perform Jail
Duties?
Currently there are four statutorily defined classifications that can be utilized to
supervise inmates in a county jail. Each of these classifications provides a
greater legal authority over the other. The evolution of these classifications of jail
workers have been a matter of compromise mostly driven by agencies who serve
a large urban area as opposed to suburban and rural localities. 7 The tell tale
signs of this evolution are revealed in the statute language that almost always
ties the population of any given county to the type of worker that can be used in
the jail and the scope of authority that those workers can engage in, e.g. arming,
use of force, transportation, etc.
It is worth noting that Orange, and other counties that primarily use deputy
sheriffs in their jails, have also employed, to varying degrees, the use of nonsworn staff to engage in a number of ancillary jail support activities. Oftentimes,
the number of these employees and scope of work that they can perform is
mostly dictated by labor contracts rather than statutory definitions.
This is clearly the case in the Orange County Sheriff’s Department who utilize
three different jail worker classifications (Deputy Sheriff, Correctional Service
Technicians and Special Security Officers) to accomplish the mission involved
with the operation of the county jail.

7

Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Ventura, Riverside

24

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Which Counties Use Public Officers or Classification of Persons to Work in
the County Jails statewide?
Numerically, there are many more counties that utilize non-peace officer or
modified peace officers in the jail. The illustration on page 26 is used to show the
primary worker designation in each of California’s 57 counties (Alpine County
does not have a jail). 8
Despite the overwhelming number of counties that utilize a correctional
classification rather than a traditional deputy sheriff (peace officer), the very
largest counties in California, such as Orange, Los Angeles, San Bernardino and
others identified in the illustration, employ more sworn deputy sheriffs than all of
the other counties who use a contingent of correctional officers combined. In
other words, there are numerically more deputy sheriffs working in California jails
than there are correctional officers.
Interestingly, a number of years ago, Los Angeles County sponsored legislation
to create yet another classification of jail worker which was a hybrid of all of the
classifications with their authority defined in Penal Code 831.1(c). This
classification of worker would enable the county to hire a deputy sheriff who had
limited peace officer powers while working in the jail and transporting inmates
outside the jail. Most importantly, this deputy could be legally utilized by the
department anywhere in the State during a declared state of emergency with full
peace officer powers.
The concept behind this classification is described as follows:
PC 830.1(c) deputies could be hired by the county and allowed to attend
the correctional officer Core Course of 176 hours and work in the jail 9.
Additionally, upon completion of the P.C. 832 course on arrest search and
seizure, this classification would be granted limited duty peace officer
powers while working in the jail or full peace officer powers during a
declared state of emergency. If an individual employed in this class
desired to become a deputy sheriff with full peace officer powers, then
they would be required to pass the POST entry-examination and
complete the POST peace officer academy.
Ironically, the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department only dabbled in the use
of this classification of jail workers for a short time and abandoned the practice
due to operational issues involving the two deputy classes. It is also interesting
to note that since PC 830.1(c) was chaptered into law, a number of other
counties have taken advantage of this new classification for their jail workers.
These counties include Butte, Calaveras, Glenn, Humboldt, Imperial, Inyo, Kern,
Kings, Lake, Lassen, Mariposa, Mendocino, Plumas, Riverside, San Benito, San
Diego, Santa Barbara, Shasta, Siskiyou, Solano, Sonoma, Stanislaus, Sutter,
Tehama, Tulare and Tuolumne County. Despite the legal authority granted to
these counties, not all have made a transition to the P.C. 830.1(c) correctional
worker.

8

Many of these jurisdictions also use non-sworn workers to assist in jail operations; however the illustration
depicts the primary classification of jail workers.
The Orange County Sheriff’s Department exceeds the hourly California training requirement in the Adult
Corrections Officer Core course.

9

25

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

November 18, 2008

While there has been an active interest in this classification of jail worker, there
remain some stubborn issues to deal with such as the need for additional training
for jail personnel that would prepare them to effectively work with street law
enforcement personnel in times of an emergency. In other words, the mere legal
authority to deploy these individuals is not enough; individuals deployed in
widespread emergency incidents must possess the knowledge, skills and abilities
in order to be useful in disaster situations and provide effective service. Failure
to have a competent supplemental work force could, in theory, create more
problems for an agency than they solve.
Jail Worker Classifications in California Counties
Del Norte

County Population

Siskiyou

Rural

Modoc
Humboldt

10

200,000 or Less

Trinity

Suburban

Shasta

201,000 – 700,000

Lassen

Urban

Tehama
Glenn

Mendocino

701,000 and Above

Plumas
Butte

Lake

Sierra

Colusa
Yuba
Sutter
Yolo

Sonoma

Placer

P.C. 831, 831.5, 830.1(c) Jail Workers

El Dorado

Napa
Marin

Nevada

Solano

PC. 830 – Traditional Deputies

Sacramento
Amador

Alpine

Combination of Deputies – Corrections Officers

Calaveras
Contra
Sa
n
Costa Joaquin
Tuolumne
San Mateo Alameda

SanFrancisco

County Does Not Operate Jail

Stanislaus

Mono
Mariposa

Santa Santa
Cruz Clara

Merced
Madera

San
Benito

Fresno

Monterey

Inyo
Tular

Kings

San
Luis
Obispo

Kern

Santa
Barbara
Ventura

San Bernardino
Los Angeles

Orange
Riverside

San Diego
Imperial

10

As defined by the California Department of Finance.

26

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Analysis of Jail Worker Classifications in California
The following is a more in depth analysis of jail workers in California and includes
some of the issues attendant with each classification.
The Corrections Standards Authority (CSA) promulgates selection and training
standards for personnel who work in local jails in accordance with Penal Code
Section 6035. Personnel working in local adult correctional facilities generally fall
into two categories of employees for the purpose of CSA selection and training
standards, they are:



Public Officers - P.C. 831 and 831.5.
Peace Officers - P.C. 830 11 and 830.1(c).

In addition to requirements set forth in Section 830 of the Penal Code and
Section 1029 of the Government Code, the CSA standards in Title 15 CCR,
Sections 130-132 apply to individuals who work in jails. The standards for entry
into adult corrections officer positions include, but not limited to the following:


Basic abilities and other characteristics important for successful job
performance demonstrated by passing the CSA written examination. An
alternative examination may be substituted under Title 15 CCR, Section 132.
The level of competence shall be equal to the cutoff score chosen by the
county or city and consistent with research validation. Agencies employing
deputy sheriffs or police officers who are recruited for law enforcement duties,
but who are temporarily assigned to corrections officer/jail duties, may use
the POST selection examination process instead of the CSA selection
standards; Core Course training must follow CSA minimum standards.



Competence in oral communication as shown in an interview. The level of
competence shall be commensurate with the needs of the individual job
classifications of each county or city.



Past behavior compatible to job requirements as demonstrated and
determined by a psychological assessment and background investigation.
The level of competence shall be commensurate with the needs of the
individual job classifications of each county or city.



Competence in the knowledge, skills and abilities necessary for entry-level
job performance as demonstrated by successful completion of the required
Core Course training curriculum.



Competence in the performance of entry-level duties as demonstrated by
successful completion of the employer’s probationary period.



The ability to perform the essential job functions of the position as
demonstrated by meeting the CSA current guidelines for vision, hearing and
medical screening.

11

Deputy Sheriff Selection and Training is developed by the Commission on California Peace Officer Standards
and Training.

27

November 18, 2008



Orange County Jail Assessment Project

At least 18 years of age before appointment.

Training Requirements for Public Officers
The Adult Corrections Officer Core Course consists of a minimum of 176 hours of
instruction in specific performance instructional objectives (Orange County
exceeds the minimum training standards in Title 15, CCR.). Entry-level staff
must successfully complete course objectives by showing a satisfactory level of
proficiency on relevant achievement tests. This training must be completed in the
first year of job assignment as a corrections officer. Trainees must successfully
complete Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) and First Aid. In accordance
with Penal Code Section 831 and 831.5, public officers must complete a training
course as specified in Penal Code Section 832.
Public officers assigned to jail duties are required to complete 24 hours of STC
certified journey level training annually.
Training Requirements for Peace Officers
The Corrections Officer Basic Academy Supplemental Core Course consists of a
minimum of 56 hours of instruction in specific performance instructional
objectives; it is designed for sworn deputy personnel who have previously
completed the Peace Officers Standards and Training (POST) Basic Peace
Officer Course. Entry-level staff must successfully complete these course
objectives by showing a satisfactory level of proficiency on relevant achievement
tests. This training shall be completed within the first year of job assignment in
the jail.
Peace Officers are required to complete 24 hours of STC certified journey level
training annually 12.
Issues Identified in P.C. 831 and 831.5
Penal Code Section 831 defines the legal authority of custodial officers as a
public officer. This section also prescribes training requirements and time frames
in which that training shall be completed and conditions under which custodial
officers are authorized perform their duties.
Section 831(d) of this code provides that “At any time 20 or more custodial
officers are on duty, there shall be at least one peace officer, as described in
Section 830.1, on duty at the same time to supervise the performance of the
custodial officers.” While the historical basis and rationale for this subsection is
unclear, the language contained in P.C. 831(d) may not adequately reflect the
changing conditions involving the use of custodial officers in county and city jails
throughout California.
The language contained in this subsection mandates that a peace officer, as
defined in Penal Code Section 830.1, supervise the performance of custodial
officers. Penal Code Section 831(d) centers on performance. A requirement that
a peace officer be on duty, involves the limited powers of arrest conferred upon
custodial officers. Custodial officers (public officers), in accordance with the
12

The annual training requirement applies to that period of time an individual is assigned to work in the jail.

28

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

authority granted in Penal Code Sections 831, 831.5 and 836.5, are limited to the
following powers of arrest:
•

Misdemeanors and felonies within the local detention facility pursuant to a
duly issued warrant (P.C. 831(f)).

•

Reasonable cause to believe the person arrested has committed a
misdemeanor in his presence which is a violation of a statue or ordinance
(P.C. 836.5(a)).

Noticeably absent, is the authority of a custodial officer to make an arrest based
upon reasonable cause that a felony has occurred in the officers presence, arrest
for a felony offense not occurring in the officers presence, or arrest on
reasonable cause whether or not a felony has been committed.
Penal Code Section 831.5 is nearly identical to Section 831, however, provides
that custodial officers employed by San Diego County, Fresno County, Kern
County, Stanislaus County, Riverside County, Santa Clara County, or a county
having a population of 425,000 or less may, under the direction of the sheriff or
chief of police, possess firearms in the performance of their prescribed duties
which are specified as:
•
•
•

transporting prisoners
guarding hospitalized prisoners
suppressing jail riots, lynching, escapes or rescues in or about a
detention facility falling under the care of the sheriff or chief of police

Penal Code Section 831.5 requires the governing body of a local agency, by
ordinance, to authorize those persons who have the duty to enforce laws, to
arrest persons for violations of a statute or ordinance. This provision vests those
powers in the governing body rather than the sheriff or chief of police who have
the responsibility for the operation of local detention facilities.
As with Penal Code Section 831, public officers employed in the counties
specified in P.C. 831.5 have limited powers of arrest.
Issues Identified in P.C. 831.1(c) – Limited Duty Peace Officer
As previously mentioned, a hybrid class of peace officer was developed in 1996,
through the enactment of AB 574 that added a new subdivision (c) to P.C. 830.1.
The original statute was specific to Los Angeles County and provided for a
“second tier” of deputy sheriffs “employed to perform duties exclusively or initially
relating to custodial assignments with responsibilities for maintaining the
operations of county custodial facilities, including the custody, care supervision,
security, movement and transportation of inmates.”
The law described those second-tier officers in Los Angeles as peace officers
“whose authority extends to any place in the state only while engaged in the
performance of the duties of his or her respective employment and for the
purpose of carrying out the primary function of employment relating to his or her
custodial assignments, or when performing other law enforcement duties directed
by his or her employing agency during a local state-of-emergency.”
29

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

The circumstances that drove this legislation was that new Los Angeles County
deputy sheriffs were, in fact, assigned to jail duty for a long period of time before
being assigned to a patrol assignment. Often these deputy sheriffs would work in
the jail for periods upwards of 5 to 7 years before they could be transferred out of
the jail. With regard to the Orange County Sheriff’s Department we noted the
same delay in rotating deputies from their jail assignment to the streets. This
hybrid class of peace officers would have enabled the sheriff’s department to hire
individuals and train them in accordance with CSA standards until they were in
line for a street assignment at which time they would be trained in the basic
peace officer academy. Some of the individuals might decline to accept a field
assignment and would remain in the jail in their limited peace officer status.
The other aspect of this hybrid deputy position would be that issues pertaining to
having enough deputies to respond to emergencies would be solved. In other
words, these limited duty peace officers could, in accordance with the law,
exercise full peace officer powers in the event of a declared emergency. After
the emergency, these deputies would resume their full-time (limited peace
officer) duties in the jail.
During the same period of time, a number of other counties who had previously
transitioned to a professional correctional worker wanted to expand their
authority to make probable cause arrests, use force including the use of firearms
and other less lethal weapons and provide flexibility during states of declared
emergency’s.
In July of 2000, San Diego County was added to P.C. 830.1(c). One year later in
July of 2001, Riverside County was added to P.C. 830.1(c); finally in July of
2002, ten additional counties were added to P.C. 830.1(c) – Kern, Humboldt,
Imperial, Mendocino, Plumas, Santa Barbara, Siskiyou, Sonoma, Sutter and
Tehama.
Since nine additional counties were authorized to employ deputy sheriffs under
P.C. 830.1 (c), the CSA has received numerous inquiries from county sheriff’s
departments inquiring as to ramifications for staff selection and training.
CSA and POST management met informally to discuss issues related to this
statute and reached general agreement on the following:
1. Since staff hired under P.C. 830.1(c) are selected “exclusively or initially”
to perform custody assignments, they should be selected and trained
consistent with Title 15, CCR standards.
2. POST selection standards allow local agencies to use an “alternative”
written selection examination. Use of such an alternative (either the STC
exam, or a local alternative) would be permissible, and perhaps
advisable, for deputy sheriffs hired under this statute.
3. Training pursuant to 832 P.C. would need to be completed prior to these
staff exercising peace officer powers (arrest, search and seizure) and
prior to arming them.
4. Some additional training for this category of staff would be required in
order to perform these “other law enforcement duties” during an
30

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

emergency. This training may not be eligible for either POST or STC
subvention funding.
5. Additional training, if any, required to perform “other law enforcement
duties” may be certified through POST. Unless it was directly related to
the custody assignment it would not meet job relevancy requirements
required for STC certification.
Since this law was enacted, a number of issues have been addressed relative to
the use of 831.1(c) officers that has not been included in this analysis. In a
number of cases, counties who were added to this statute have opted not to
utilize this class of employee. A more comprehensive review of those issues by
other counties should be undertaken if this is a path that the Orange County
Sheriff’s Department would want to take.
Public Officers Role in Local Corrections
As we have mentioned public officers are non-sworn employees that are used in
positions that do not necessarily involve the direct supervision of inmates’. 13 In
large agencies these positions generally are provided in support of the
corrections function and may free up custody staff by engaging in nonsupervision activities, e.g. operating control rooms, etc.
For the purposes of this discussion we make the distinction between
vocational/ancillary staff and custody staff in the following attributes of
performance. These vocational/ancillary workers are prohibited from:
•
•
•
•
•

Engaging in inmate discipline.
Making arrests for law violations.
Executing warrants of arrest, search and seizure.
Use of lethal and less lethal force.
Using force of any kind in the performance of their duties.

Many local agencies successfully use this class of personnel in control rooms
and engaging in other activities:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Operation of doors, gates, fire alarms and video monitoring.
Assisting with inmate visiting.
Managing housing unit logs.
Operating communications, radio, telephone, intranet, fire and emergency
alarms.
Fire and Life Safety functions such as equipment maintenance, pressure
testing, etc.
Use in the commissary, vocational laundry and kitchen work,
maintenance and other functions.
Other non-supervision activities in the jail as identified by the Custody
Operations Command.

13

Some counties utilize public officers to supervise inmates in the jail under the specific authority granted in the
Penal Code. Very large counties with populations in excess of 500,000 are limited in their use of public officers
in the jail, mostly related to arrest powers, arming and the use of force.

31

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Cost and Budgeting Considerations
In almost every case, the decision to explore or execute a change in employee
classification in the jail is driven by the desire to reduce the personnel costs
involved in the operation of the jail. While we have mentioned that there are cost
savings and/or cost avoidance in using staff other than sworn peace officers in
the jail, ultimately these savings are much less than what might have been
imagined in the long term. In many cases, non-sworn public officers have been
able to bargain for safety retirement and other benefits normally offered to peace
officers. Oftentimes, the same employee organizations that bargain for deputy
sheriffs also serve the labor needs of public officers.
Generally, the competition for qualified workers drives the local agency to pay
more competitive wages. Given the fact that both peace officer and public officer
must have the same basic entry level requirements, the effective recruitment of
qualified public officers comes into play. Generally, there is usually a 5% to 10%
pay differential between the two classes. Therefore, in assessing which
employee class to use, agencies must pay attention to all of the cost-benefit
aspects and unintended consequences that may come into play.
We would point out that most sheriff departments in California have an agency
culture that has matured over 150 years or more of service to the community.
Therefore, one can effectively argue that the maturation process of a new class
of employee in a very short amount of time is unrealistic without a genuine
commitment to staff development. Development of a cadre of very high quality
employees is neither magical nor accidental; rather it is a result of a concerted
effort and dedication to continuous improvement by leaders and members of the
department.
The other issue that often confounds the transition process is the very notion of
hiring a “cheaper” class of employees to operate the jail. While some cost
savings may occur as a result of utilizing a different classification, the focus
should always be on fitting the right employee with the task at hand. In this
regard, how can anyone aspire to excellence, if they are the “cheaper”
alternative? What exactly does it mean to be a cheaper employee? Does it
mean less qualified, less important, doesn’t have to work as hard, acceptance of
a lower quality of work product? Once again, the quality of employee who works
in the department is the responsibility of the agency leaders and supervisors.
Therefore, the commitment to excellence of the workforce is a decision that is
made by local leaders that requires a significant investment in tending to the
excellence and vitality of the workforce.
If everyone in the organization is resigned to be a “cheaper” employee, is it any
wonder why switching to this classification of employee to work in the jail doesn’t
meet expectations in many cases? Lastly, does the fact that a county desires to
use a “cheaper” correctional worker signal that the jail is not very important?
Jails, by their nature, are complex entities to operate; consider this ─ people
arrested and booked into the jail are the sickest, most addicted, most mentally ill
people in the community and the opportunity for things to go wrong is ever
present. While there is no natural constituency for the jail, public outrage is quick
when they perceive malfeasance in the operation of the jail.

32

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

What Classification of Correctional Employee Should Work in the Orange
County Jail?
In our view, the best argument for utilizing peace officers to operate the jail in
Orange County centers on the need to have highly trained, street ready officers
to respond to natural or manmade disasters. This argument is supported by the
fact that Orange County is a very populated urban area in which a disaster can
pose an extreme hazard to the population and the destruction of property. A
rational risk assessment may reveal that the consequences of failing to respond
quickly to an emergency in the community far outweighs any cost savings of
using public officers in the jail.
Decisions concerning public safety, including personnel and training, should be a
driving force if a change in personnel is contemplated. We strongly believe that
many other objective factors, such as, population density, industry, transportation
and a myriad of factors be given significant weight in any decision that will
radically change emergency response options.
CSCJC recommends the continued use of the deputy sheriff classification to
serve as the primary jail worker in Orange County; our recommendation is based
upon the following:
•

Emergency Risk Factors


•

Orange County and surrounding areas are among the most
populated areas in the United States. Unlike the suburban and
rural areas in other parts of California, a major disaster (manmade or natural) is likely to have enormous consequences that
impact life and property. Because Orange County is so populous,
a highly trained reserve of deputies in the jail that can supplement
street enforcement in the event of an emergency is, in our view
critically important.

Recruitment of Qualified Employees


Because non-sworn jail workers have the same basic employment
requirements as sworn deputies (high school or GED, pass a
written test, pass an oral interview, pass a psychological
evaluation, meet medical, vision and hearing requirements).
These workers come from the same employment pool. Therefore,
agencies must pay a competitive wage to jail workers in order to
meet their recruitment needs. These added costs would most
likely diminish the cost benefit of an all correctional officer class of
employee to work in the Orange County jails.

Alternative Personnel Strategies
While we are recommending the continued use of the deputy sheriff classification
as the primary employee category to work in the jail, we also recommend the use
of other qualified jail workers to supplement deputies in the operation of the jail.
Currently, the Orange County Sheriff’s Department utilizes two other jail worker
classifications in this manner. However, after a thorough evaluation of the
operation of the jail facilities we have concluded that the use of three employee
33

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

classifications to work in the jail (Deputy, SSO, CST) overly complicates the
operation of the jail and serves no useful purpose in our view.
From an administrative perspective this multi-layered approach to personnel
working in the jail involves bargaining with three separate labor organizations.
While we view the relationship with employee labor groups as a necessary
component of human resource relations, too much exposure to labor groups can
only serve to confound the mission of the sheriff’s department, vis-à-vis the jail
operation. Most importantly, the use of three different classes of employees in
the manner in which they are employed in the Orange County Jail does nothing
to enhance the effective operation of the jail.
Key Objectives in Determining the Effective Use of Correctional Workers
1. Assess the job tasks in the jail and determine if public officers (custody
assistants) can assume non-inmate-supervision activities in the jail.
2. Assess issues related to selection and training of public officers.
3. Identify the adjustments that will be required, with respect to jail policies
and procedures.
Recommended Jail Worker Classifications – CSCJC is recommending that
the primary jail worker remain a fully-sworn peace officer in accordance with
Penal Code 830 to be supported by a single classification of public officer (Penal
Code 831). Furthermore, we recommend that personnel realignment involve
reducing the classifications of staff working in the jail from three to two distinct
positions. For the purpose of this report we recommend that the necessary meet
and confer requirements be conducted and that any change occurs over time,
based upon normal personnel attrition or by placing personnel in other positions
of equal pay.
We envision and recommend that a realignment of worker assignments in the jail
involve moving deputy sheriffs out of the control rooms and/or support functions
(scheduling, other administrative functions, fire and life safety inspections).
CSCJC believes strongly that deputies should be on the floor and engaged in the
supervision of inmates. Duties for deputy sheriffs should include, but are not
limited to the following activities:
•

Provide direct supervision of inmates to include cell checks, providing
guidance to inmates, answering custody related questions and problem
solving.

•

Conducting inmate searches and activities directly involving the safety
and security of the jail.

•

Coordination and supervision of general inmate movement and feeding in
the chow hall.

•

Maintain discipline in the jail and housing units. Write reports detailing
rule violations and engage in the informal and formal inmate discipline
proceedings.

•

Serve as primary responders to inmate violence and disturbances may
entail the use of lethal and less lethal force options.
34

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

•

Conduct criminal investigations, searches and seizure of evidence, arrest
individuals for felony and misdemeanor offenses occurring in the jail.

•

Serve in front line emergency response teams.

The following key elements are critical components of success in developing the
cadre of non-sworn correctional workers (public officer) to supplement deputy
sheriffs in the jail.
We envision and recommend that work assignments in the jail involving public
officers include the primary function of managing the control rooms or support
functions (scheduling, other administrative functions, fire and life safety
inspections). A public officer classification should be engaged in, but not be
limited to, the following activities:
•

The public officer would not have direct inmate supervision duties, other
than those duties involving low security inmates or inmates engaged in
vocational/work activities, e.g. cleaning crews, distribution of boxed
meals, distribution of clothing and bedding.

•

Operation of security doors, locks, CCTV, audio equipment, radios and
logs, key control, including other activities not requiring the general
supervision of inmates.

•

Provide assistance and support to deputies on the floor by way of
observing the deputy and inmate movement and other safety and security
related duties in the control modules.

•

Support deputies in emergencies by way of communications and
dispatching other emergency personnel, videotaping incidents of violence
or inmate disturbances, initiating supplemental crime or incident reports in
support of documentation provided by deputy personnel.

•

Coordinate and document inmate movement to court, work assignments,
visiting, medical or mental health appointments.

•

Supervision of low security inmates who are providing vocational/work
activities, such as feeding, clothing exchange, light maintenance and
cleaning.

•

Work in administrative functions such as inmate classification, mail
screening, staff scheduling, fire and life safety inspections, etc.

•

Any other task not requiring the necessity of having peace officer powers.

Ensuring a Successful Transition of Duty Assignments
As previously discussed in this chapter, deputy sheriffs have had decades in
which they have had the opportunity hone their craft and develop general
competencies in law enforcement and jail work. Additionally, the historical use of
35

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

deputies in the jail has created a strong cultural environment that is not easily
changed.
To expect a successful transition of personnel to engage in work that breaks from
historical norms will require time, resources and most important, a great deal of
commitment to the success of the transition. To expect that jail personnel will
evolve quickly into new roles and responsibilities is desirable, yet not very
realistic. The following are some key elements necessary for a successful
change in the use of jail personnel:
•

Set the bar high for achievement. All too often jail administrators have
attempted to initiate personnel changes in a manner that does not adjust
for the appropriate need to maintain high quality employees. Just
because some jail workers are hired at a lower rate of pay does not
negate the need for excellence in the workplace.

•

Sheriff’s executive, management and supervisory staff need to be
committed to a long term transition. Based on our experience this
transition can take up to 10 or more years to complete. During that long
period of time, executive members of the department may come and go.
Mechanisms must be set into motion early on to sustain this long term
transition.

•

Fair compensation based on the ability to recruit quality staff to work in
the jail is critical. Once again, we do not view cost savings as being on
the top of the list of reasons to transition to a different staffing component.

•

There must be a well thought out plan and strong commitment to
providing jail workers with the appropriate skills to meet the challenges in
the jail.

•

Place a high value on the quality of all personnel working in the jail. Each
individual has one share of the company and each share is neither less
nor more valuable than any other share. Nothing can be more poisonous
to the success of a personnel transition than the notion that there are elite
employees who have greater value than other staff who work in the jail.
In this regard we strongly urge department leaders to avoid the real or
imagined impression that working in the jail is strictly for new deputies or
a dumping ground for deputies who may have had problems in other
assignments. During our assessment we encountered several deputy
sheriffs with significant tenure who advised that they voluntarily
transferred back to the jail. One individual who identified a need to take a
break from street enforcement because of medical issues and another
deputy simply desired a more regular shift assignment to spend more
time with his family.
In both cases these individuals were quick to point out that they were
happy with their decision even at the risk of a cultural mindset that the jail
is a less desirable place to work.

•

We estimate a staffing ratio of approximately 35% public officer positions
to 65% deputy sheriffs for deployment in the jail. A more definitive
36

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

assessment can be developed upon a more thorough evaluation and plan
by the Sheriff’s Administration.
Final Thoughts on Employee Classifications
Any decision to change employee classifications in the jail should be done with a
great deal of thought and long-term planning. Nothing could be worse than one
elected official moving in one direction, only to have another person elected at a
later date whipsawing the department in another direction. Elected leaders and
appointed managers and supervisors need to see the process through over the
long term. Anything else will only create chaos and poor morale and serve as a
hindrance in the accomplishment of the jail mission.
For the purpose of this report we have identified the alternative jail worker as a
public officer. The effective realignment of personnel to work in the jail will require
a thoughtful process by county leaders. Therefore we consciously tried to steer
away from the identification of a specific class of employee in order to better
facilitate a process to identify which employee is best suited for work in the
various positions in the jail.
Staffing Analysis for the Orange County Jail
Staffing in a jail system is an extremely important and complex issue with
implications both inside and outside of the jail system. Of course, staffing affects
the County Treasury because it is extremely costly; it affects the inmates
because staffing directly relates to their safety and security in custody; it affects
the staff who work in the jail because it can make the difference between a safe
and an unsafe environment; it affects the Sheriff’s management because jail
managers must allocate precious resources to a host of obligations including, but
not limited to, staffing.
If a staffing plan is too lean then the jail becomes an unsafe environment that can
result in injury to staff and inmates and may lead to costly litigation. Conversely,
a jail too richly staffed may result in the unnecessary expenditure of limited
resources with no objective evidence that conditions are materially improved. So
it is prudent to find the proper balance, to provide the correct number of staff to
safely operate the jail and jail system.
Well meaning individuals, groups or associations that recommend various ways
to determine the number of staff needed to operate a jail often confuse decision
makers by describing an optimal “inmate-to-staff ratio,” or by simply guessing,
along the lines of "If the present number of staff is not working, perhaps adding X
number of additional staff will work.” Still others may compare their jurisdiction
with other jurisdictions with similar sized jail systems, as “If county Y, which has
as many inmates as we have, has twice the staff we have, then we must be
understaffed and need twice the staff to make us safe.” We believe all three of
these methods are largely ineffective and far too costly.
As policy makers wade into the issues involving jail staffing, it is very important to
remember that jails are individual in nature and unique in function; no two jails,
even in the same jail “system” are exactly alike. Some of the variables involved
in staffing decisions include the following:
37

November 18, 2008








Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Each jail has its own design (physical plant) and was constructed using
the technology available at the time it was built.
Jails are different sizes.
Jails hold different classifications of inmates.
Jails may be single story, single story with a second tier or multiplestories.
Jails are located in urban centers, suburban areas and rural
environments.
The philosophy of jail management differs from one jail to the next even
within the same jurisdiction.

Consequently, a “one-size-fits-all” jail-staffing ratio is unlikely to be realistic; there
is no one measure to determine how many custody staff should work in a jail.
There is no easy way to accurately determine the exact number of staff needed
to safely operate a given jail without a detailed analysis of that facility; such an
analysis was accomplished by CSCJC as part of the OCJAP assessment.
In conducting the staffing assessment, we used a standards based measure to
determine the minimum number of staff required to safely operate each jail. Our
key criterion was: the number of staff is adequate to effectively carry out all of the
requirements of Title 15, CCR, also known as the California Minimum Jail
Standards. Title 15 is the benchmark for jail operations in California; it is the
expression of best practices and “community standards” of operation for the
OCSD jail as well as for all other jails in California. If there is not enough staff in
a given jail to consistently carry out the requirements of Title 15, CCR, then the
jail is most probably understaffed. Staffing must be adequate to regularly and
consistently follow “good correctional practices.” A jail or jail system that does
not follow these practices is ripe for adverse incidents and litigation and will lose
in court more often than not.
Background – Jails provide security and safety with two essential resources, the
physical plant – the design, bricks and mortar, door hardware and security
systems -- and the staff who operate the jail. A jail with a poor physical plant
may still be safely operated if there is sufficient staff in place to operate it
effectively. Usually jails with deficient physical plants are very staff intensive.
Conversely, jails with well-designed and constructed physical plants require
fewer staff for safe operation; it is a matter of balance. Each facility must find the
correct number of staff needed to supervise inmates and operate most effectively
in that jail's physical environment given all the variables involved.
Throughout this project, CSCJC made the decision to be conservative in making
recommendations for additional staffing. We believe that making pragmatic
recommendations for incremental change is the best method to realistically
address security and staffing problems, in the OCSD or any other jail system.
Further, we are convinced that the staffing recommendations contained in this
report will help mitigate security and overtime issues in the Orange County Jail
system. It was our aim to develop the right staffing plan that strikes a balance
between economy and the ability of OCSD management and staff to effectively
meet all of the requirements contained in Title 15, CCR.
We strongly recommend that, in light of demographic changes that will likely
keep happening in Southern California, as well as the very high rate of
38

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

incarceration in the Orange County Jail system, the jail staffing analysis be
updated at every two to three years in order to guide appropriate, ongoing
adjustments in jail staffing.
Methodology – CSCJC used the methodology employed by the California
Corrections Standards Authority (formally the Board of Corrections) for many
large counties in California. Based largely on the National Institute of Corrections
(NIC) model, this approach uses two steps to determine the appropriate number
of staff needed to effectively operate a jail facility.
The first step or part of the assessment is to determine the shift relief factor
(SRF) for the facility/agency being studied. For the OCJAP, the Orange County
Financial Services Division gathered key data elements needed in order for
CSCJC to determine this number, which is a mathematical formula, based on
leave absences, which computes the actual number of people that need to be
assigned to staff all of a facility's or system's “post-positions.” Since some posts
are staffed for only 40 hours a week, the relief factor is different for these
positions than for positions staffed every day of the week. The SRF for 40
hour/week staff is determined to be 1.21. This means that to staff a post for 40
hours per week, and accounting for sick, vacation, holiday, and other leaves, the
Sheriff’s Department needs 1.21 people. For a Deputy Sheriff I working a 24/7
post position, the SRF is 5.06.
The complexity of the three employee classes, coupled with different relief
needs, caused the need to develop 15 different SRF’s. We then applied the
correct SRF to the specific post position and employee classification to give us
our numbers for each facility. A summary of these SRFs can be seen in the
tables Appendix E-2.
The second part of this analysis was to visit each posted position and determine
each staff's assignment and workload in order to determine the minimal number
of staff that are needed to operate these facilities. We thoroughly interviewed
staff, reviewed documentation and observed work performance. To ensure the
validity of our evaluation, CSCJC evaluators visited every post during each shift
or work period. CSCJC also conducted a debriefing with the other CSCJC
assessment team members to discuss workload security issues related to
staffing that may have been revealed during the on-site evaluations made by
these other members.
After an extensive review of our notes taken during the on-site portion of the
staffing analysis, we evaluated the appropriateness of existing staffing levels.
Where these staffing levels were not sufficient to meet the regulations in Title
15, as well as safety and security concerns, we recommended the addition of a
minimal number of post positions. Once again we were conservative in our
approach and only made these recommendations based on critical staffing
deficiencies in staffing levels.
The Orange County Detention system consists of five local detention facilities as
described in Title 24, California Code of Regulations. These local detention
facilities are each classified as "Type II" facilities meaning that each "jail" is rated
to house both sentenced and non-sentenced inmates. In addition, we conducted
an analysis of the Correctional Services Technicians (CSTs) who are responsible
for performing services in the three jails that are collectively known as Central
39

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Jail Complex. This section of the staffing analysis is divided into five subsections
that describe recommended additional post positions for each facility.
Central Women's Jail
Central Women's Jail is located as part of the Central Jail Complex that includes
the Central Men's Jail and the Intake and Release Center. Because of its
location, certain staffing efficiencies can be maintained through the adjacent
facilities in terms of "back-up" in the event of an unusual occurrence such as
inmate disturbances. The close proximity to these other two facilities does not
have a beneficial advantage in the event of a shared unusual occurrence such as
an earthquake or a fire. Consequently, internal staffing must be self-sufficient
most of the time.
This facility is an older design that is described as "linear"; inmates in older linear
jails are more difficult to supervise due to poor sight lines into their housing units,
this jail is no exception.
As with all of the jails we assessed, Central Women's Jail is understaffed. Staff
has difficulty being able to perform required safety checks due to frequent
absences of prowlers who have been "temporarily" pulled away from their posts
and assigned to other activities. Staff rarely takes their 30 minute meal breaks.
In addition, cell checks and inmates searches occur much less frequently than
meets good correctional practices.
The most frequent reason that prowler positions are vacated is staff being
assigned to off-site inmate medical transportation runs. With as many as 30
females in this facility being pregnant at any given time, this occurs with some
regularity. In addition, inmates needing dialysis need to be transported away
from the jail and supervised the entire time of their absence.
Therefore, we recommend the addition of the following additions to the basic
staffing level at this facility. We feel that more staffing may be necessary, but we
also believe that adding staff must occur incrementally so that the staffing levels
can be re-assessed in the future.

POST

DAY
Shift

NIGHT
Shift

Facility Rover
Transportation / Search

2

2

40

C Shift
where
applicable

Total

S.R.F.

Number of
Required
Positions

0

4

2.53

10.12 Dep I

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Central Men's Jail
Similar to the Central Women's Jail, the Central Men's Jail is located in the
Central Jail Complex. Also like the female facility, it is a very old linear style
facility that has housing units on four different floors. In addition, the kitchen,
laundry and warehouse are on the basement level. This type of construction
makes inmates difficult to supervise because staff must not only be spread
horizontally, on one floor, but vertically on several floors. This facility also
maintains a roof exercise area.
This facility also shares the same problem that the female facility staff face,
needing to leave some post positions vacant while staff assigned to these posts
are pulled away to perform other functions; this occurs on every shift every day.
Consequently, staff left behind in an understaffed housing unit are forced to
either not conduct safety checks as required or conduct them in a manner that do
not meet guidelines. In addition inmates are frequently not searched and cells
are rarely searched. Again, staff rarely takes their 30 minute meal breaks.
Staff report that as many as six inmates per day require transportation to
hospitals or to dialysis treatments. There is currently no staff available to perform
this function, so prowler positions are vacated. In addition, there must be two
deputies to transport higher security inmates; this only exacerbates the staffing
problem.
Therefore, we recommend the following additions to the basic staffing level at
this facility. We feel that more staffing may be necessary, but we also believe
that adding staff must occur incrementally so that the staffing levels can be reassessed in the future.

POST

DAY
Shift

NIGHT
Shift

Facility Rover
Transportation / Search

4

3

C Shift
Shift
where
applicable

0

Total

S.R.F.

Number of
Required
Positions

7

2.53

17.71 Dep I

The basement level of this facility contains the kitchen and laundry. These areas
in the facility use inmate labor that is rarely, if ever, supervised by deputies in the
performance of their work assignment. Unfortunately the classification level of
inmates has shifted so that inmates who are at higher security levels are now
being used to provide inmate labor. The ability to obtain and smuggle
contraband from this area is very high.

41

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

There are also may sharp tools, including knives that are present in these spaces
that present a serious safety problem. Cooks, who work in this area are not
correctional staff and are not selected and trained to perform the job of deputies.

POST

DAY
Shift

NIGHT
Shift

Kitchen / Laundry Dep

1

1

C Shift
Shift
where
applicable

0

Total

S.R.F.

Number of
Required
Positions

2

2.53

5.06 Dep I

While a staff-to-inmate ratio is not an appropriate measure to determine
adequate staffing, a sergeant-to-deputy ration is. During an average shift, there
are currently approximately 1 sergeant to supervise approximately 30 deputies
and SSO’s. This ratio of more than 30 staff to one sergeant is clearly in excess
of the norm (the norm is 8 to 12 staff per sergeant). This number is further
exacerbated by the fact that many sergeants counted in this calculation are
assigned to specialized areas.
Sergeants must also contend with a significant amount of paperwork that
prevents them from performing their most basic function – to supervise
subordinate staff. Sergeants report that very often they must spend their entire
shift in an office completing personnel evaluations, many who they have rarely
seen working. In addition, they must review reports, inmate grievances and
conduct inmate disciplinary actions.
While line staff appeared to be very motivated and knew their duties, the frequent
absence of supervisors allow for inconsistencies in the way deputies performed
their duties. For example, we observed different deputies conducting hourly
safety checks which are the most basic function in the jail, differently from shift to
shift. Policies as simple as how to perform safety checks must be taught and
frequently inspected by the supervisor, otherwise the inconsistent application of
appropriate inmate supervision becomes extremely difficult and the inmates
become confused and angry as a result. Sergeants are needed to ensure that
deputies consistently enforce jail rules. There are simply too few supervisors to
adequately perform their duties, no matter how hard they work. Our mantra on
the assessment of any facility is quite simply, that which is not inspected – is
not expected.

42

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

We recommend the following:

POST

DAY
Shift

NIGHT
Shift

where
applicable

Total

S.R.F.

Number of
Required
Positions

Housing Sergeant

1

1

0

2

2.65

5.30 Sgts

C Shift

Intake Release Center
The Intake Release Center is the third facility that is included in the Central Jail
Complex. This facility was opened in 1988 and contains "new generation"
podular designed housing units that provide much better sight lines to inmates.
This facility is the primary entry point for all arrestees in the county that are being
processed (booked) into the Orange County jail system.
Staff reported, and we observed, the booking area of this facility to be so backed
up there was over 100 inmates waiting to be processed by 4:00 a.m. during a
weekday. Staff also reports that the back-up is more significant on weekends.
On one recent evening, there were so many arrestees waiting to be processed,
that the facility had to call deputies from other facilities to assist. While it is not
realistic to "staff for the exception", it is necessary to provide staff to meet the day
to day needs of the system. Staff rarely takes their 30 minute meal breaks.
Similar to other facilities, staff is frequently being pulled from their post
assignment to perform other activities. We observed on many occasions that
post positions were vacant while the deputy assigned to their post was assigned
to other activities. At the IRC it was to either provide transportation, or to provide
additional deputies to assist in the booking area.
The IRC is significantly undersized, which exacerbates the staffing problems.
CSCJC is of the collective opinion that adding another booking facility is critical to
the safety and security of the jail system. We strongly recommend that the
proposed new facility at the Musick campus be constructed as soon as possible
in order to mitigate the lack of capacity that we observed at this facility.

43

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

November 18, 2008

We recommend the following:

POST

DAY
Shift

NIGHT
Shift

Facility Rover
Transportation / Search

3

3

Booking Rover

1

2

C Shift
Shift

Total

S.R.F.

Number of
Required
Positions

0

6

2.53

15.18 Dep I

0

3

2.53

7.59 Dep I

where
applicable

Theo Lacy Facility
Theo Lacy Facility contains the newest generation of housing units in the system.
It also contains many housing units that are almost 50 years old. This is a
sprawling jail complex which occupies a very large footprint. It also contains
several housing units that are on two or three levels, each with mezzanine levels.
Similar to the Central Men's Jail, staff must contend with long distances between
housing units as well as several levels. While the newer housing units are much
safer because of improved sight lines, the campus has many challenges.
The Theo Lacy housing unit (P, Q and R Modules.) was opened lacking
adequate staff (40 positions) to fully operate this addition. We are sure that a
great deal of overtime has been spent by the county just to staff these positions.
Not surprisingly, we observed many of the symptoms of understaffing that the
other facilities experience. Among those symptoms, were improper or nonexistent safety checks and the inability to search inmates who leave their housing
cells to attend programs, go to/from court or other activities. Staff rarely takes
their 30 minute meal breaks.
To the credit of the management of this facility they are conducting what is
described as "fast team searches" where staff are pulled from each barracks and
module and used to conduct a thorough search of a particular housing unit for
contraband (weapons, drugs, pruno (alcohol beverage) and tobacco). The up
side of this search is that the facility is much safer because of the searches, both
for inmate and for staff. The downside is that the barracks and modules are left
with fewer staff than needed to operate them.

44

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

November 18, 2008

Consequently we strongly suggest the addition of the following staff:

POST

DAY
Shift

NIGHT
Shift

Facility Rover
Transportation / Search

5

5

Rover Leads

1

1

C Shift
Shift

Total

S.R.F.

Number of
Required
Positions

0

10

2.53

25.3 Dep I

0

2

2.62

5.24 Dep II

where
applicable

Similar to Men's Central Jail, supervision at this facility is extremely difficult with
the staff to deputy ratio extremely high. Without restating all of the issues raised
in Central Men's Jail justification, we simply state that the issues are exactly the
same. While we do not feel that this recommendation is sufficient to meet the
needs, we suggest first adding this new level of supervision, and then re-assess
the housing needs at a later date.

POST

DAY
Shift

NIGHT
Shift

where
applicable

Total

S.R.F.

Number of
Required
Positions

Housing Sergeant

1

1

0

2

2.65

5.30 Sgts

C Shift

N Module has the ancillary responsible for providing supervision to 16 inmates
housed in a disciplinary isolation module. This module that contains single
occupancy cells is located over 100 yards and through several security doors
from the control room of the module. This results in frequent (every half-hour)
absences of one of the two prowlers assigned to this unit. This is particularly
unsafe when the other prowler has been pulled away to perform other functions.
In addition, the inmates housed in the disciplinary isolation module know exactly
when the deputy is making his safety checks.

POST

DAY
Shift

NIGHT
Shift

where
applicable

Total

S.R.F.

Number of
Required
Positions

N Module Prowler

1

1

0

2

2.53

5.06 Dep I

45

C Shift

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

November 18, 2008

The "10 North" and "10 South" are two post positions located adjacent to the
barracks housing units. There is a significant amount of inmate traffic in this
outdoor area. Unescorted inmates use this area to access the programs area.
Inmates also walk through this area to access the chow hall and visiting.
Currently, this post position is staffed with a prowler from a barracks housing unit.
The responsibility for staffing these positions rotates between barracks on an
hourly basis leaving these housing units with unfilled posts for significant
amounts of time. We agree with the need to staff these positions and it should
be done by dedicated staff. Therefore, we recommend the following:

POST

DAY
Shift

NIGHT
Shift

where
applicable

Total

S.R.F.

Number of
Required
Positions

10 North

1

0

0

1

2.53

2.53 Dep I

10 South

1

0

0

1

2.53

2.53 Dep I

C Shift

The kitchen is currently staffed with one part-time deputy. We think that this is
insufficient to cover the many rooms and areas associated with the kitchen.
Unfortunately, the classification level of inmates has shifted so that inmates who
are at higher security levels are now being used to provide inmate labor. The
ability to obtain and smuggle contraband from this area is very high. There are
also may sharp tools, including knives that are present in these spaces that
present a serious safety problem. Cooks, who work in this area are not
correctional staff and are not selected and trained to perform the job of deputies.

POST

DAY
Shift

NIGHT
Shift

where
applicable

Total

S.R.F.

Number of
Required
Positions

Kitchen Dep

1

1

0

2

2.53

5.06 Dep I

C Shift

James Musick Facility
The James Musick Facility was the most understaffed facility visited by the
CSCJC team. We understand that there are a lot of reasons for this, but
nonetheless, we must recommend a number of staffing to make it safer and more
secure for inmates and for staff. The new facility that is being planned for this
site will go a long way to improve conditions for inmate and staff. We strongly
recommend that it be constructed as quickly as possible. It may then be possible
to close some of the other housing units on this site that are extremely difficult to
supervise.
46

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

November 18, 2008

As with all of the other facilities visited, and perhaps worse at this facility, is the
practice of pulling prowler positions from housing units to perform other functions.
Many times however, there are simply no deputies to "pull" and inmates may be
delayed in being transported, of functions may not occur. The addition of staffing
that makes most sense is the rover position that we have recommended for other
jails in the system. These positions will allow the prowlers to stay at their posts
and will help to conduct necessary transportation and searches of inmates.

POST

DAY
Shift

NIGHT
Shift

where
applicable

Total

S.R.F.

Number of
Required
Positions

Facility Rover
Transportation / Search

3

3

0

6

2.53

15.18 Dep I

Rover Leads

1

1

0

2

2.62

5.24 Dep II

C Shift

The Musick facility is located on approximately 100 acres of land that is used for
farming and other inmate programs. It is surrounded by a fence and commercial
industrial buildings have been constructed right next to the fence line. To
maintain security at this minimum security facility it is necessary to provide
random and frequent checks of the site outside of the housing areas and in
particular the perimeter. We recommend adding the following:

POST

DAY
Shift

NIGHT
Shift

Perimeter Control

1

1

C Shift
Shift
where
applicable

0

Total

S.R.F.

Number of
Required
Positions

2

2.53

5.06 Dep I

The significant understaffing is not limited to the line staff; most administrative
functions, so critical to successfully operating a large and diverse facility, have
been vacated and deputies assigned to housing units. In some cases, the
function (such as fire/life safety) is being performed by a deputy in addition to
their regular duties - usually a prowler. In addition, we observed one sergeant
with the responsibility to perform functions that in other facilities would require
three to four sergeants. We strongly recommend that it is time to bring this
facility back to a minimal staffing level.

47

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

November 18, 2008

POST

DAY
Shift

NIGHT
Shift

where
applicable

Total

S.R.F.

Number of
Required
Positions

Maintenance Sgt

1

0

0

1

1.0

1.0 Sgt

Operations Sgt

1

0

0

1

1.0

1.0 Sgt

Admin Dep

1

0

0

1

1.0

1.0 Dep II

Training Dep

1

0

0

1

1.0

1.0 Dep II

Fire/Life Safety Dep

1

0

0

1

2.11

2.11 Dep I

C Shift

The medical area is often not staffed with a deputy. Instead, the medical staff
relies on a prowler from the West Facility to assist when needed. Medical staff is
frequently left alone with inmates. We feel that this is not only dangerous, but
medical staff are not trained, nor is it a part of their job function to supervise
inmates.

POST

DAY
Shift

NIGHT
Shift

where
applicable

Total

S.R.F.

Number of
Required
Positions

Medical Dep

1

1

0

2

2.53

5.06 Dep I

C Shift

Finally, we found visiting, as it is currently practiced, to be risky and the potential
for problems to occur is very high. This process involves "contact visitation"
which means that there are no barriers between the inmates and their visitors.
Unfortunately, there are simply too few staff to supervise the visiting process.
Staff has already found cell phones and chargers being smuggled into this
facility. If contraband of this size is smuggled in, then it is also possible to
smuggle in guns, knives or other dangerous items. In addition, smuggling drugs
into this facility is very simple and we do not doubt that this is occurring on a
regular basis.

48

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

November 18, 2008

Therefore, we recommend the following:

POST

DAY
Shift

NIGHT
Shift

(where
applicable)

Total

S.R.F.

Number of
Required
Positions

Visiting

2

0

0

2

.73

1.46 Dep I

C Shift

Summary of all additional recommended positions:

DAY
Shift

NIGHT
Shift

(where
applicable)

Total

S.R.F.

Number of
Required
Positions

2

2

0

4

2.53

10.12 Dep I

Facility Rover
Transportation / Search

4

3

0

7

2.53

17.71 Dep I

Kitchen / Laundry Dep

1

1

0

2

2.53

5.06 Dep I

Housing Sergeant

1

1

0

2

2.65

5.30 Sgts

Facility Rover
Transportation / Search

3

3

0

6

2.53

15.18 Dep I

Booking Rover

1

2

0

3

2.53

7.59 Dep I

Facility Rover
Transportation / Search

5

5

0

10

2.53

25.3 Dep I

Rover Leads

1

1

0

2

2.62

5.24 Dep II

Housing Sergeant

1

1

0

2

2.65

5.30 Sgts

POST

C Shift

Central Women's Jail
Facility Rover
Transportation / Search
Central Men's Jail

Intake Release Center

Theo Lacy Facility

49

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

November 18, 2008

N Module Prowler

1

1

0

2

2.64

5.28 Dep I

10 North

1

0

0

1

2.53

2.53 Dep I

10 South

1

0

0

1

2.53

2.53 Dep I

Kitchen Dep

1

1

0

2

2.53

5.06 Dep I

POST

DAY
Shift

NIGHT
Shift

C Shift
(where
applicable)

Total

S.R.F.

Number of
Required
Positions

Facility Rover
Transportation / Search

3

3

0

6

2.53

15.18 Dep I

Rover Leads

1

1

0

2

2.62

5.24 Dep II

Perimeter Control

1

1

0

2

2.53

5.06 Dep I

Maintenance Sgt

1

0

0

1

1.0

1.0 Sgt

Operations Sgt

1

0

0

1

1.0

1.0 Sgt

Admin Dep

1

0

0

1

1.0

1.0 Dep II

Training Dep

1

0

0

1

1.0

1.0 Dep II

Fire/Life Safety Dep

1

0

0

1

2.11

2.11 Dep I

Medical Dep

1

1

0

2

2.53

5.06 Dep I

Visiting

2

0

0

2

.73

1.46 Dep I

James Musick Facility

Total additional staff recommended for the OCSD jail facilities

Captain

Lieutenant

Sergeant

DEP II

DEP I

SSO

SR. CST

CST

0

0

12.6 Sgts

12.48

125.23

Dep II

Dep I

0

0

0

50

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

FINDINGS
During our on-site assessment of every post in every facility in the county’s jail
system, we found several common "symptoms" that are consistent with
inadequate staffing levels. These symptoms or problems, by their nature, often
jeopardize the safety and security of staff, inmates and the public. These red flag
symptoms include:
Inadequate or Non-Existent Safety Checks – During the onsite visits to each
post-position, particular attention was paid to whether staff was completing at
least hourly safety checks (Title 15, Section 1027), if they were reporting these
checks as being made and finally how the checks were performed. Hourly safety
checks represent the minimum amount of supervision needed for general inmate
supervision to ensure the safety and security of the facility. We found the
following:


Some facilities relied exclusively on overtime positions to perform these
checks. When these positions were eliminated due to budget problems,
the safety checks were either done in a cursory fashion, or were not done
hourly as required.



Staff performed and documented, what they referred to as safety checks;
however they did not directly observe each inmate in his/her cell. Often
times these “checks” were performed from outside an intervening space
(dayroom) and can be described as only inadequate at best.



Many times safety checks were delayed or not performed when staff was
pulled from their post position and assigned to other functions in the jail.



While staff did conduct appropriate safety checks in all the jails, when
staffing levels were low, which was a large portion of the time, staff was
hard pressed to complete appropriate checks in the prescribed manner.

We want to emphasize that at no time during the jail assessment did we find staff
being indifferent to the need for appropriate safety checks or recalcitrant in any
way. The fact is that the jails were so understaffed it made completing this
important and basic function extremely difficult or impossible at times.
Inadequate Searching of Inmates and Inmate Spaces – In all of the jails that
we visited, we observed large groups of inmates being moved from one point to
another by a very limited number of staff. While other jails may not have, as
frequently, reached this ratio of inmates to staff, they all moved large numbers of
inmates with an inordinately small number of staff. While there are times that
inmates are searched when moving between areas, these times seem to be the
exception rather than the rule, the converse of a good correctional practice.
When inmates move between areas in a jail, they should be frequently searched
by staff for contraband including weapons to ensure safety and security. When
we asked staff why this function was not occurring, the most frequent answer
was the lack of staffing. Indeed, without adequate staffing, the exercise of
frequently searching inmates is too time consuming and dangerous to be
51

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

performed by the few staff that are available. If essential searches cannot be
performed, then it is clear demonstration that there is not enough staff in the
Orange County jail system.
Searching of inmate areas such as cells and dayrooms does not occur with the
frequency needed to adequately keep these areas free of contraband. A vast
majority of the cell searches that do occur are in conjunction with regularly
scheduled clothing and bedding exchanges. For cell and dayroom searches to
be effective, they must be performed at random and on a frequent basis. There
is simply too few staff available at any of the jails to adequately perform this
function
Posts Left Vacant – The most common symptom of inadequate staffing levels in
the Orange County Jail system was the very large number of fixed post positions
that are short staffed for extended periods of time. These post positions are filled
at the beginning of each shift, but custody staff are often “pulled” when needs
occur elsewhere in the jail. We observed the following:
Inadequate Number of Staff to Inmates and Classification Creep – Although
there is no exact “inmate-to-staff ratio” that provides appropriate staffing for every
activity, we found an inordinate number of very large groups of inmates, with high
classifications, being supervised by too few staff. 14
The level of classification is important because of the “creep” that has occurred
over the past decade in nearly all jails. When we refer to “creep” we are noting
that the classification levels of inmates are much higher today than in the past,
slowly “creeping” up over the years. This occurs because, when there are a finite
number of beds available, such as in the Orange County Jail system, lower
security inmates are released to make room for inmates who pose a greater
threat to public safety.
The space vacated by the lower security inmates is usually dormitory-style,
minimum security housing. When this occurs, higher security inmates are
housed in less secure spaces, the physical plant can no longer provide
appropriate security and staffing should be increased to rebalance the jail.
Ironically, instead of staffing being increased to manage the changing inmate
classification, it has decreased due to budget difficulties over time.
Consequently, these areas of the jail are out of balance (the balance provided by
a combination of physical plant and staffing) and become much more dangerous.
Inadequate Supervision of Staff – One of the most glaring staffing deficiencies
of the OCSD jails was the inadequate number of supervisors (sergeants) at all of
the facilities. Sergeants are simply being asked to do too many tasks and to be
responsible for too many line staff. The current number of sergeants is
insufficient and therefore ineffective.
While a staff-to-inmate ratio is not an appropriate measure to determine
adequate staffing, the sergeant-to-custody staff 15 ratio most certainly is and is a
common practice in law enforcement and other management circles. We
14

An estimation of CSCJC evaluators based upon many years of experience in jail management and jail
inspections, including the development of regulations for local adult jail facilities in California.
Deputy, Sheriff Special Officers, Correctional Service Technicians.

15

52

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

observed ratios of more than 20 staff to one sergeant in nearly all of the facilities
we conducted an assessment on. This ratio is clearly in excess of the industryaccepted norm (between 8 to 12 staff per sergeant). This number is further
exacerbated by the fact that many sergeants counted in this calculation are
assigned to specialized areas.
While line staff appeared to be very motivated and were knowledgeable about
their duties, the frequent absence of supervisors allowed for inconsistencies in
the way custody staff performed their duties. As an example, we turn again to
one of the most basic functions in a jail – the hourly safety checks. During our
on-site evaluations, we noted variation in procedures by staff that performed
them differently from one another.
Where there were sergeants on duty, they were all too frequently sequestered in
their offices completing large amounts of paperwork, including Use of Force
reports and personnel evaluations. Sometimes these personnel evaluations
were being done on staff that these supervisors did not know because they were
not available to observe the staff’s work. This appears to be goal distortion in
that the paperwork has become more important than the proper supervision of
the worker.
In an effort to beef up documentation, meant as an aid to risk managers, the
department has taken supervisors away from their supervisory tasks; obviously
this defeats the primary purpose of a supervisor, which is to prevent problems on
the floor. While we understand and support the need to document jail issues, we
are emphatic that there are simply too few supervisors to adequately perform
their duties, no matter how hard they work. It is important to get back to the
basic supervisory concept – what is not inspected by supervisors is not
expected by staff.
While the CSCJC team repeatedly observed that the quality of OCSD staff is
very high, we also noticed that staff take shortcuts to get the job (task) done.
Their heavy workload results in staff having to make decisions on what task has
the most immediate priority. What might seem logical to a staff member may not
be the best decision for the organization. Only by having an adequate number of
trained sergeants immediately available can jail management ensure that jail
policies and procedures are appropriately carried out.
Inadequate Shift Relief Factor – From the outset of the OCJAP, it was clear
that the shift relief factor (SRF), authorized calculation used to staff the jail
facilities, had not been developed. Having been involved in a number of other jail
staffing analyses, CSCJC evaluators have discovered that one of the leading
factors associated with inadequate staffing is that the local agency has either not
developed a SRF or that the SRF is too low.
Ideally, a SRF should be provided for each job classification. Experience has
shown that these factors will vary greatly between job classifications due to the
tenure of staff holding these positions, their ability to accumulate leave time, their
propensity to take various leaves and other related factors

53

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

In addition, SRFs should be calculated for each job classification at least every
two years, if not more frequently. This would allow the SRF’s to take such things
as new mandatory leave provided to the employees (such as the Family Leave
Act) and changes in the tenure of the staff (more new staff following a hiring
freeze) taken into account. Good data can only be obtained through the frequent
analysis of actual leave practices.
Furthermore, it is important to determine whether each post is a relieved position
(meaning it is always staffed) or a non-relieved position (these positions are also
called fixed post positions), in order to decide the number of personnel needed to
staff and maintain a post position during a typical shift. For non-relieved
positions, the SRF developed for the job classification will provide sufficient
personnel to ensure the position is appropriately staffed. However, a “relieved
position” must have an SRF that is approximately 4% higher than a non-relieved
position. This is because, in addition to the leave patterns that are used to
develop an SRF for a given job classification, all time that personnel will be away
from their post positions (e.g., for training, etc.) must also be calculated. If this
factor is not taken into consideration, a facility with a high number of relieved post
positions will be chronically understaffed and will leave those fixed post positions
vacant or will rely on overtime to ensure that all relieved positions are staffed at
all times.
This is a critical issue in all the facilities we evaluated. We observed many
instances of undue stress on personnel filling relieved post positions. For
example, it is a common occurrence that staff assigned to relieved post positions
either do not take their meal breaks or bring their food to their posts to eat.
When asked why they do not take their breaks, most staff replied they did not
want to leave their fellow staff shorthanded. Staff working relieved posts where
bathroom facilities were not immediately available on occasion had difficulty
finding other staff to stand in their post while they were away a short time. SRF’s
must take into account both the requirement to continuously fill post positions
and the importance of affording staff assigned to these positions time to take
their breaks; there must be a higher SRF for these post positions.
In order to determine the correct SRF, CSCJC and personnel assigned to the
Sheriff’s Financial and Training Division’s were able to capture data from FY 0708 in order to calculate a realistic SRF, which were used in establishing staffing
levels that are contained in this assessment.

54

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

The Development of a Shift Relief Factor (SRF) and Why it is Important
The development of an accurate SRF is essential in determining the actual
staffing needs for any jail. This SRF must be specifically calculated for each
employee class and for each staffing situation. It must also use actual employee
leave data for at least a one year period of time, as well as the number (N=) of
employees being measured. Both components of this basic piece of data
gathering are a necessary first step in developing a staffing plan.
As we have previously mentioned, many government jobs are quite easy to
calculate a schedule for without going through the laborious and time consuming
process of gathering leave data. These jobs are the ones where only one
employee is needed to fill the job position and one in which, if the employee
takes sick time, vacation or holiday time off, then no one else is needed to fill the
position. In this case we would describe the SRF as 1.0. That is to say that it will
only take 1.0 employee to fill this position. The Sheriff's Department has a
number of administrative and support positions where it is quite simple to
schedule their work. For example, the facility manager (a Captain) fills a 1.0 SRF
staff position that does not have a built in relief factor. In this particular case, if
the facility manager takes a vacation or uses sick leave, then another
management level staff person will cover for the captain as a part of their normal
duties.
Many line staff positions in the jail are quite different and require a shift relief
factor in order to properly staff a post in the jail; these positions are identified as
fixed post positions and hold the requirement to always have staff present at
the position without fail. As an example, if a staff member who is scheduled to
be at the fixed post calls in sick, is on vacation, or other leave time then there
absolutely must be another person available to staff the post position.
Post positions occupy critical functions in the jail; their uncovered absence could
result in a very serious incident that may involve injury or death if the position is
left vacant for even the shortest amount of time. As an example, a housing
control room must be constantly staffed or else security doors could not be
operated and staff could not enter and exit the various areas of the jail. The
deputy occupying that post position must be relieved by another deputy before
they can leave their post to take meal break, attend training, or any other leave
type.
Consequently, this post position has a much higher SRF than a general service
employee whose absence would not seriously impact the delivery of services.
Based upon the need to have post positions always occupied, we have
calculated that the SRF for a Deputy I occupying a post assignment is 5.28 for
per day. This means that it takes 5.28 Deputy I staff to occupy this post position
24 hours a day and 7 days a week.
In a fictional world, if staff arrived to work at their fixed post in the jail each day
and never took a day off for any reason, never took time to eat or attend to
human comforts, then issues involving overtime or the need to hire more staff
would never be a problem.

55

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

As we have mentioned, jails do not have the luxury of leaving post positions
vacant, as inmates must be constantly supervised and provided a myriad of
"services" such as transporting to court, booking, meals, medical assessments
and appointments, recreation, clothing exchange, inmate discipline and
showering just to name a few. Of course the most basic and important function
at a fixed post is to make sure that the inmates do not assault staff, each other or
commit suicide.
If there is not enough personnel assigned to the facility to accomplish these
activities, other personnel must be brought in on overtime to meet the needs of
the jail, or staff must be pulled from other assignments to fill the vacant position,
diminishing the ability to meet the requirements contained in minimum jail
standards. Very simply, we know through our decades of experience that bad
things happen when a jail is understaffed; these include inmate on inmate
assaults, inmate on staff assaults, suicides and escapes. Facilities that are
understaffed are faced with two choices; to operate the facility and leave fixed
posts vacant, a dangerous option, or burn overtime to meet the custody mission
and regulatory requirements.
Having established the necessity of keeping fixed post positions continually
staffed, an explanation of how jail schedules are developed is by calculating the
SRF is presented.
At the beginning of the jail assessment we discovered that a shift relief factor had
not been previously established to develop staffing levels in the Orange County
jail. Leave data did not readily exist to calculate the SRF, so CSCJC consultants
and Sheriff’s Financial Division staff initiated the following steps 16:
1. First, it was imperative to determine the actual leave usages for each custody
staff assigned to one of the five jails for Fiscal Year 2007/2008. This was
relatively easy as our assessment team was provided with a computer
generated table itemizing all of the leave types and usages by staff for the
time period requested.
2. The next step involved determining the exact number of custody personnel
who took the various leave time, by job classification. In this case the
Sheriff’s Financial Services Division created a report that itemized each
employee by position number and job classification that were assigned to the
jails. The Financial Division then researched and itemized the actual number
of months that the position numbers were filled.
Over the period of time that was examined some of the positions were filled
by two, three of four people for short periods of time; others were filled by one
person for the entire time period. CSCJC took this report and determined the
fraction of a year that each position number was filled. For example, if a
position was filled for 9 months, they represented .75 of a position. These

16
Crout & Sida utilize a staffing SRF process based on a model developed by the National Institute of Corrections (NIC)
and California Corrections Standards Authority (CSA). Additionally, Crout & Sida have a good deal of experience
conducting many staffing studies as a part of their private sector consulting business, on behalf of the NIC and while
employed at the CSA.

56

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

numbers were then added to give that actual number of personnel who took
the leave types identified in the first step.
3. Taking the average leave hours by type, we began our calculation to
determine actual non-productive hours by staff type. We accomplished this
by added holiday hours that are guaranteed to each county employee, as well
as the "normal days off" that are afforded employees based upon their shift
schedule.
4. Once the number of non-productive hours was calculated then a
determination was made for each shift pattern's base hours (the number of
hours that each post must be staffed per year). We subtracted the nonproductive hours from the base hours to give us the actual number of
productive hours per person.
5. The next step was to divide the number of base hours by the number of
productive hours. This calculation tells us how many personnel are needed to
staff one post position for the number of base hours. As an example, we
found that it takes 2.53 Deputy I positions to staff a post that is "open" for
twelve hours a day and seven days a week. If that same post needed to be
staffed for 24 hours a day and seven days a week, 5.06 Deputy I positions
would be needed.
6. If a post assignment needs meal breaks built in to the relief factor, we
determined the number of days to be worked by each person based on their
availability (or productive hours) divide it by the hours worked and multiply it
by the amount of time that is to be taken on the break (we used one-half
hour). This calculated time is then subtracted from the number of available
hours and divided into the base hours. For example, if the post position
described in Step 5 needed to be continuously staffed, then there must be
2.73 Deputy I positions for a 14 hour post and 5.46 for a 24 hour post.
It should be noted that because each employee class uses a different number
leave hours, their corresponding SRF will be different. For example, Sergeants
and Deputy II staff who have more time on the job receive more hours of leave
(based on their seniority), and therefore take a greater number of corresponding
hours off.
As a side note, an issue that confounds the Sheriff’s Department’s ability to
control overtime – we were advised that the Theo Lacy P, Q and R housing
modules were opened after construction short of 40 custody staff to operate
those positions. Consequently, we can only presume that any staff that
previously provided a shift relief factor in other parts of the facility were pulled
from their assignments or staffed with overtime in order to operate the newly
constructed housing modules.
Recent media interest and reports on the use of overtime in the Orange County
jail were quick to describe the use of overtime as excessive. This is a curious
viewpoint as we estimated, based upon our comprehensive assessment of the
57

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

jail, that a credible argument could be made that perhaps not enough overtime
was being used. This observation is not meant to be flippant, but rather it is
based on our observation that low staffing levels in the jail preclude deputies
from properly performing the jail functions as directed in Title 15, CCR.
It also needs to be said that county leaders are fully justified and prudent in
attempting to identify why so much overtime is being used in the jail. Our only
concern in this regard is that without a more in depth study on the staffing of the
jail, particularly the need to develop a rational SRF, those leaders may be making
a premature assessment of the problem. Without taking a closer look at the
issues that impact overtime it may hinder the opportunity to develop long term
solutions and may drive decisions that might go in an undesirable direction.

58

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Summary of Shift Relief Factors
Orange County Sheriff's Department
FY 2007/2008
Classification

Post Description

Deputy I and II, CST,
SSO, Sergeant,
Lieutenant, Captain

Post is five days per week, eight hours per
day (40 hours). There is no relief needed
for days off, vacation, sick time or other
leave usages.

Deputy I
12 Hour - No Breaks

Post is 12 days per day 7 days per week.
Post does not need to be relieved for staff
to take meal breaks.

2.53 (12 Hour)

Deputy II
12 Hour - No Breaks

Post is 12 days per day 7 days per week.
Post does not need to be relieved for staff
to take meal breaks.

2.62 (12 hour)

Sergeant
12 Hour - No Breaks

Post is 12 days per day 7 days per week.
Post does not need to be relieved for staff
to take meal breaks.

2.65 (12 Hour)

Lieutenant
12 Hour - No Breaks

Post is 12 days per day 7 days per week.
Post does not need to be relieved for staff
to take meal breaks.

2.68 (12 Hour)

Sheriff's Special
Officer (SSO)
12 Hour - No Breaks

Post is 12 days per day 7 days per week.
Post does not need to be relieved for staff
to take meal breaks.

2.48 (12 Hour)

Deputy I
12 Hour - w/ Breaks

Post is 12 days per day 7 days per week.
Post must be constantly filled. Coverage
must be provided when employee is taking
meal break (1/2 hour per shift).

Deputy II
12 Hour - w/ Breaks

Post is 12 days per day 7 days per week.
Post must be constantly filled. Coverage
must be provided when employee is taking
meal break (1/2 hour per shift).

Sheriff's Special
Officer (SSO)
12 Hour - w/ Breaks

Post is 12 days per day 7 days per week.
Post must be constantly filled. Coverage
must be provided when employee is taking
meal break (1/2 hour per shift).

59

Shift Relief Factor

1.0

5.06 (24 Hour)

5.24 (24 Hour)

5.30 (24 Hour)

5.36 (24 Hour)

4.96 (24 Hour)

2.64 (12 hour)
5.28 (24 Hour)

2.73 (12 Hour)
5.46 (24 Hour)

2.59 (12 Hour)
5.18 (24 Hour)

November 18, 2008

Classification

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Post Description

Shift Relief Factor

Deputy I
8 Hour - No Breaks

Post is 8 hours per day 7 days per week.
Post does not need to be relieved for staff
to take meal breaks.

1.69 (8 Hour)

Correctional Services
Technician (CST)
10 Hour - No Breaks

Post is 10 days per day 7 days per week.
Post does not need to be relieved for staff
to take meal breaks.

2.18 (10 Hour)

Deputy I
10 Hour - No Breaks

Post is 10 hours per day 7 days per week.
Post does not need to be relieved for staff
to take meal breaks.

2.11 (10 Hour)

Deputy I
10 Hour - No Breaks
8 Hour - No Breaks

Post is 40 hours per week. Post does not
need to be relieved for staff to take meal
breaks.

1.21

Sheriff's Special
Officer (SSO)
10 Hour - No Breaks
8 Hour - No Breaks

Post is 40 Hours per week. Post does not
need to be relieved for staff to take meal
breaks.

1.18

Correctional Services
Technician (CST)
10 Hour - No Breaks
8 Hour - No Breaks

Post is 40 Hours per week. Post does not
need to be relieved for staff to take meal
breaks.

1.24

60

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Staffing Recommendations – Total and by Facility
After a thorough review of all data and on-site assessments, the following tables
summarize the staffing recommendations made in this report.
Table A describes, by job classification and by facility, the personnel necessary
to staff the five jails in the Orange County Jail System filling only the existing post
positions.
Table B describes the number of personnel that currently are approved to staff
the existing post positions by job classification and by facility.
Table C describes the difference by job classification the number of approved
positions and the actual number of personnel it takes to fill the post positions
As the reader can see, there are far fewer personnel available to staff the post
positions than are needed. The difference in this number is made up by having
existing staff work overtime to fill these post positions. In addition, some posts
may not be filled as needed and staff are very frequently not taking their meal
breaks, or taking their meals as they work.
Table D describes the recommended additional post positions that CSCJC
recommends to bring the facilities to a safe minimal number of staff. As we have
stated many times in this report, we have been conservative in recommending
additional posts and only make the recommendations where we see the most
egregious staffing shortages.
Table E summarizes all of the above tables and gives a final tally of the gross
number of additional personnel by job classification to operate the current jail
facilities in a safe and secure manner. Again, these numbers represent the
minimum and not the optimum number of staff needed.

Table A - Total staffing of existing post positions with shift relief factor
Capt

LT.

SGT.

DEP II

DEP I

SSO

CST

SR.
CST

Totals

IRC

0

7.36

19.55

81.14

147.26

32.58

0

0

287.89

MCJ

0

1

14.25

31.52

121.4

29.62

0

0

197.79

WCJ

0

1

6.3

16.38

34.65

5.18

1.24

0

64.75

CJX

1

0

0

0

0

0

133.28

6.54

140.82

LACY

1

8.36

27.2

120.92

230.75

43.75

78.48

1

510.46

MUSICK

1

6.36

11.6

6.24

81.69

28.74

33

1

169.63

Totals

3

24.08

78.9

256.2

615.75

139.87

246

8.54

1372.34

61

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

November 18, 2008

Table B - Current staffing (approved positions)
Capt

LT.

SGT.

DEP II

DEP I

SSO

CST

SR.
CST

Totals

IRC

0

7

15

78

87

29

0

0

216

MCJ

0

1

13

24

92

12

0

0

142

WCJ

0

1

5

15

25

5

0

0

51

CJX

1

0

0

0

0

0

83

6

90

LACY

1

7

25

93

211

38

75

1

451

MUSICK

1

4

10

5

48

29

19

1

117

Totals

3

20

68

215

463

113

177

8

1067

Table C- Difference between current and existing staffing with SRFs
applied
Capt

LT.

SGT.

DEP II

DEP I

SSO

CST

SR.
CST

Current

3

20

68

215

463

113

177

8

w/SRF

3

24.08

78.9

256.2

615.75

139.87

246

8.54

Difference

0

-4.08

-10.9

-41.2

-152.75

-26.87

-69

-0.54

Total difference between current staffing and current posts with SRF
factored in is 304.34 staff.
Table D - Recommended Additional Staffing
Captain

Lt.

Sgt.

Dep II

Dep I

SSO

CST

Sr.
CST

IRC

0

0

0

0

22.77

0

0

0

MCJ

0

0

5.3

0

22.77

0

0

0

WCJ

0

0

0

0

10.12

0

0

0

CJX

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

LACY

0

0

5.3

5.24

40.7

0

0

0

MUSICK

0

0

2

7.24

28.87

0

0

0

Totals

0

0

12.6

12.48

125.23

0

0

0

Total additional staffing recommended (in addition to Table C) is 150.31
staff.

62

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

November 18, 2008

Table E - Grand Total of Staffing (includes current staffing, current staffing
adjusted with SRF, and recommended additional staffing)

Captain

Lt.

Sgt.

Dep II

Dep I

SSO

CST

Sr.
CST

Current

3

20

68

215

463

113

177

8

Current w/SRF

3

24.08

78.9

256.2

615.75

139.87

246

8.54

Recommended
Additional

0

0

12.6

12.48

125.23

0

0

0

Difference

0

-4.08

-23.5

-53.6

-277.98

-26.87

-69

-0.54

It is our finding that 454.65 additional custody personnel are necessary to
supplement the current staffing in the Orange County jail system in order ensures
the safety and security of the county jail system. A total of 304.34 are additional
staff needed based upon application of the SRF. The remaining 150.31
personnel are staff necessary to fill recommended additional post positions. The
addition of personnel will enable the Custody Operations Command to
successfully accomplish all of the required activities contained in Title 15, CCR.
The staffing plan presented in this report will significantly lower use of overtime in
the jail. Current authorized staffing in the Orange County jail facilities is 1067.
The inclusion of a revised staffing plan with a rational shift relief factor will
increase staffing system-wide to 1521.65 custody and support staff.

63

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

CJX - Current Staffing Summary by Positions
Shift
Relief
Factor
(SRF)

Captain

1.0

1

Sergeant

Deputy II

Deputy I

Sheriff's
Services
Officer

Correctional
Services
Technician

2.53
2.62
2.65
2.68
2.46
2.64
2.73
2.56
60 CST
3 Sr. CST

2.18
2.11
1.21
1.18
1.24
Total
w/SRF

2 CST
6.54 Sr. CST
133.28 CST

1 Captain

64

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

IRC - Current Staffing Summary by Positions
Shift
Relief
Factor
(SRF)

Lieutenant

Sergeant

Deputy
II

1.0

2

1

1

2.53

Sheriff's
Services
Officer

Correctional
Services
Technician

52

2.62

16

2.65
2.68

Deputy
I

7
2

2.48

6

2.64
2.73

14

2.59
2.18
2.11

4

1.21

6

1.18

15

1.24
1.69
Total
w/SRF

7.36

19.55

81.14

65

147.26

32.58

0

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Men’s Central Jail - Current Staffing Summary by Positions
Shift
Relief
Factor
(SRF)

Lieutenant

Sergeant

1.0

1

1

Deputy
II

2.53

Deputy
I

Sheriff's
Services
Officer

Correctional
Services
Technician

15

2.62
2.65

5

2.68
2.48
2.64

16

2.73

10

2.59

10

2.18
2.11

2

1.21

4
17

1.18
1.24

3

0.61

20

1.69
Total
w/SRF

1.0

14.25

31.52

66

121.4

29.62

0

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Women’s Central Jail - Current Staffing Summary by Positions
Shift
Relief
Factor
(SRF)

Lieutenant

Sergeant

1.0

1

1

Deputy
II

2.53

Deputy
I

Sheriff's
Services
Officer

Correctional
Services
Technician

6

2.62
2.65

2

2.68
2.48
2.64

6

2.73

6

2.59

2

2.18
2.11
1.21

3

1.18
1.24

1

1.69
Total
w/SRF

1.0

6.3

16.38

67

34.65

5.18

1.24

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Theo Lacy Facility - Current Staffing Summary by Positions
Shift
Relief
Factor
(SRF)

Lieutenant

Sergeant

Deputy II

1.0

3

6

3

2.53

Sheriff's
Services
Officer

Correctional
Services
Technician
1 Sr. CST

14

2.62

20

2.65
2.68

Deputy I

8
2

2.48

16

2.64

62

2.73

24

2.59
2.18

36

2.11
1.21

8

1.18

3

1.24
1.69
Total
w/SRF

13

8.36

27.2

120.92

68

230.75

43.22

1 Sr. CST
78.48 CST

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

James Musick Facility - Current Staffing Summary by Positions
Shift
Relief
Factor
(SRF)

Lieutenant

Sergeant

Deputy II

1.0

1

1

1

2.53

Sheriff's
Services
Officer

Correctional
Services
Technician
1 + 1 Sr. CST

32

2.62

2

2.65
2.68

Deputy I

4
2

2.48
2.64
2.73
2.59

10

2.18

14

2.11
1.21
1.18
1.24
.73 3/5

1

.71 3/5

4

.74 3/5
Total
w/SRF

2
6.36

11.6

6.24

69

81.69

28.74

1 Sr. CST
33 CST

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Human Resources Implementation Planning
Selection – Recruitment – Training
Of all of the recommendations provided in this report, the addition of custody staff
is the most crucial and immediately effective way to provide a greater degree of
safety and security in the custody environment. A significant number of staff will
need to be recruited, selected and trained as soon as this can be accomplished.
Considerations for Staffing Implementation – There are several issues that
we suggest the county consider as it works toward addressing staffing priorities
and developing specific action plans. These include the following:
Recruitment, Selection and Training Timelines: CSCJC recommends that the
following information related to selection, hiring and training be taken into
account as action plans are developed in these areas:
•

Given the stringent physical, psychological and background requirements for
custody staff, the average processing time between selecting a candidate
and having him/her ready for hire is approximately 6 months.

•

Because of statutory and regulatory requirements, the basic training required
to be completed (including field training) before a deputy sheriff or other
custody staff is qualified to work independently on the job is long and
arduous. The basic Sheriff’s Academy (for deputies) is 26 weeks; custody
assistants receive basic academy training of 8 weeks. We recommend that
the OCSD consider augmenting the training function with additional staff and
resources to enable the increase in staffing recommended by the OCJAP.

•

It takes approximately 12 months from the time a deputy sheriff applicant
takes the selection examination to graduation from the basic academy.
Additionally, the time that it takes for other custody to progress from the
selection examination to graduation from the Core Academy is approximately
8 months.

70

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Shift Pattern Evaluation
Administrators and managers of government institutions have for many years,
searched for the ideal shift pattern to operate the institutions for which they are
responsible. The notion of developing an ideal shift pattern would strike a perfect
balance of providing the appropriate number of staff to meet the workload, while
as best they can serve the needs of their employees.
Most government entities are open during the standard business week based
upon an eight to five, Monday through Friday workweek. Establishing a shift
schedule in this instance is a simple task. That is to say, that all employees have
a set schedule that usually consists of five eight-hour days with an hour off for
lunch. If an employee calls in sick, or takes a vacation, their positions are usually
left vacant and the work load is either shared by others or in many cases left
undone until the employee returns.
Other government entities such as public safety agencies and specifically the jail
are faced with a more complex scheduling task in order to provide service 24hours a day, seven-days a week. As an example the Sheriff’s Department's
street patrol function has more complex staffing issues, but nonetheless, can be
met with more innovative approaches in meeting staffing needs than the jail.
Hybrid schedules such as 12-hour days or 10-hour days allow the agency to
meet their workload needs while providing flexibility in order to accomplish their
respective mission and also to accommodate their employees.
Public safety agencies must ensure that there is minimum staffing to meet its
workload demands and meet the basic mission of providing an appropriate level
of service to the community. In practical terms, this means that when someone
calls in sick, or goes on vacation, that employee may or may not be replaced by
staff working overtime based on established minimum staffing levels. In the case
of the street law enforcement function when a deputy is off for any number of
legitimate reasons the patrol watch commander will re-deploy the patrol force
from say, 10 patrol cars to 9 patrol units. In this case, within certain parameters,
the patrol watch commander can re-direct calls for service that place a low
priority on non-emergency calls, while leaving the patrol force to be available for
emergency responses. Also, in this example those low priority calls can sit for
many hours until the work flow allows those calls to be handled. With regard to
the patrol function, work load patterns vary based upon the time of day, day of
the week and indeed seasonal changes.
Finally, there are those agencies, such as Sheriff’s Departments that operate
local detention facilities (jails) that have fixed posts which must be continually
staffed in order to ensure there is always a minimum number of staff working at a
fixed post on any given period of time. These posts must never go vacant;
because to do so would jeopardize the safety and security of the facility, place
the agency out of compliance with state regulations and expose the agency and
county to litigation should an incident occur when staffing is not sufficient.
Most functions in the jail are very prescriptive with regard to how the tasks are
accomplished based on legal statutes, State regulations and court decisions. In
this regard, as we have previously explained, the indicators associating with
71

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

identifying staffing levels is dependent on the simple question. Is there enough
staff to meet the regulatory requirements described in Title 15, CCR?
In the case of the jail, the guiding regulation that describes minimum staffing
requirements for local detention facilities (jails) is specified in Section 1027, Title
15, California Code of Regulations. Minimum staffing for an adult detention
facility takes a number of factors into consideration. These factors include: the
type of facility (Type I, II III or IV); the population of inmates detained in these
facilities; the physical design or the jail; and the ability of staff to “carry out its
programs and to provide for safety and security of inmates and staff, and meet
established standards and regulations.” What this means is that the most
important aspect in staffing levels is the ability to provide a safe and secure
environment and meet all of the minimum jail standards. In other words, a whole
host of variables drive the staffing of a jail facility.
As we compare the legal obligations attendant in the operation of the jail, it
becomes clear that there is very little leeway in staffing when it comes to fixed
post positions, they simply must be staffed at all times. Unlike the 8-hour, five
day week operation involved with most government departments and even unlike
the street enforcement operation in which the work can be fundamentally reordered, jail posts must be fully staffed.
Given these staffing perimeters, this study will examine an alternate staffing
method that can be specifically applied to the Orange County Sheriff's
Department jail system. It will describe the method, provide its strengths and
ultimately make a recommendation on the most efficient method to staff these
facilities.
Twelve-Hour (80) Shift Schedule
The current staffing method used for most of the staff of the Orange County Jail
System is a 12 hour / eighty hour per week shift pattern. This shift pattern has
employees working 44 hours one week (three twelve hour and one eight hour
day) and 36 hours (three twelve hour shifts) the next week.
In our view, this shift pattern has proven to be somewhat problematic for the
supervisors and managers of the jails. While this pattern essentially provides for
the same number of hours as the traditional 8/5 schedule (eight hours a day/5
days a week), it creates a situation where employees have differing shifts, such
as the 8 hour day is required to meet an 80 hour bi-weekly pay period. One of
the problems with this shift pattern is that it drives an uneven work flow and
forces a number of functional workaround’s in order to accomplish the jail
mission. By not working the same post for periods of time, the employee is
always in the position of not being familiar with the post orders, the inmates
housed in the assigned housing unit, or their co-workers working that same post
on a week to week basis.
Another problem with this scheduling pattern is the tendency of some staff to
take their leave time during their eight our “flop” day. This becomes problematic
as the replacement of staff is not possible without resorting to overtime to cover
the fixed posts.

72

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

CSCJC were advised that staff all too often feel that their eight hour day, being
the last day before their days off, was decompression day where they may not be
as inclined to hustle as they would on another day. For others, it was an
opportunity to work four hours of overtime if it was available. One could point to a
supervisory deficiency in this regard; however, we think that this is just a shift
pattern issue that is not particularly effective in meeting the correctional mission.
We need to be clear, that drawing on our experience as jail management
practitioners that we approve of the 12-hour work shifts in the jail. Beyond our
approval of this practice, the 12-hour shift is common throughout California jails.
Unlike the street patrol environment, the difference in correctional duties is that
they are not particularly impacted by a fatigue factor that might be attendant with
a long shift on patrol.
There are some valid reasons for its popularity among jail staff as many
employees cannot afford to live in Orange County as a result of the very high
housing prices. In an effort to provide a high quality life for their families, which
includes affordable home ownership, many staff live in neighboring counties. As
a humorous example, staff often reported to us that they lived in “River-Zona”, a
tongue in cheek reference to living in the eastern most portions of Riverside
County near the Arizona border.
Because of the unwieldy nature of the current 12-hour shift pattern we feel the
current shift patterns adds far too much complexity to the jail operation and
therefore, we recommend that it be replaced with another shift pattern, which
entails a twelve-hour, 84-hour per week shift schedule. We are of the opinion that
this shift pattern will serve the needs of the employees, while at the same time
enhance the efficiency of the jail operation.
This twelve-hour shift pattern is one where employees work four, 12-hour shifts
one week, take three days off, then work three, 12-hour days the next and take
four days off. This shift pattern differs from the 12 hour (80) shift pattern, in that,
this pattern requires staff to work all twelve hour shifts (with no flop day) and are
compensated for four hours of overtime every two weeks. Another popular
strategy is for the staff to be compensated for 84 hours of “straight time” for each
two-week period, which is allowable under current Fair Labor Standards Act
(FLSA) requirements.
This shift strategy has become a very popular staffing pattern for many jails in the
State; in fact, most of the surrounding counties to Orange County use this shift
pattern. The reason this shift is preferred is that the activity level and work
assignments in jails tends to be much more constant, even during early morning
hours, and therefore there are more post positions that need to be continuously
filled 24 hours per day, rather than "normal" waking hours 17. This allows a twelve
hour shift schedule to be employed without having surplus staff during "sleeping"
hours.

17

Early morning shifts are tasked with a number of activities in order to prepare to pull inmates for court
appearance. This process begins at about 3:00 A.M.

73

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

The benefits of this shift pattern are as follows:
•

The county does not need to pay for the benefit package for the four hours
every two weeks that each employee works. For example, if 400 Deputy I
staff are on this shift pattern, the county would not need to pay benefits on
41,600 hours of work, or the equivalent of 24.1 Deputy I staff.

•

Because the work week would be longer for staff, the "Shift Relief Factor"
would be lower which means that the county would not need to have as many
personnel to perform the same hours of work. For example, if the
hypothetical 400 deputies are required to staff all post positions under the 12
hour (84) shift pattern, rather than a 40 hour a week plan (8/5, 4/10 or 12
(80)), 5% fewer deputies would be needed to staff the same post positions.

•

This shift patterns allows administrators to "platoon" deputies and assign
permanent supervisors to each platoon thereby improving the continuity and
quality of supervision in the jail, which we view as critical. As we have
previously mentioned, many supervisors who have intermittent contact with
employees cannot properly evaluate employee performance in order to
assertively provide direction and training to staff, which after all, is the primary
function of a shift supervisor.

•

This shift pattern, as an employee incentive can facilitate the hiring and
retention of qualified individuals who live long distances or drive times from
Orange County.

•

This shift pattern greatly simplifies the scheduling of staff.

We believe that of all the alternative shift patterns that will work for Orange
County, the 12-hour shift pattern presented here would be the best. In every
case, when we broached this conversation with the many employees that we
spoke with during our on-site assessments, they stated unequivocally that they
would prefer the 84-hour shift. It is important to note this shift pattern may
require a modification where some employees are on the 12-hour shift pattern
and others remain on the eight/five to cover post positions that are not needed 24
hours a day.
Lastly, the 12-hour shift does not negate the need for OCSD management and
staff to control schedules and provide the appropriate guidance to ensure that
abuse does not occur with this staffing pattern that results in an inordinate use of
overtime.

74

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Implementation Planning
Construction Needs Assessment
It was clear from the OCJAP that a portion of the James Musick Facility in the
Orange County Jail system are nearing, or are at the end of, its useful life. Jail
crowding and increasing numbers of volatile, violent, mentally ill and ganginvolved inmates have exacerbated the shortcomings of these facilities and have
undermined their ability to provide the safety and security required in a jail
system.
Understanding the need to take corrective action, the county has embarked on a
construction plan to expand custody facilities at the James Musick near Irvine.
However, for these projects to proceed, and/or for any other jail construction or
renovation to be undertaken, California statute and regulations require Orange
County to conduct a number of Title 24, CCR, requirements.

75

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

OCJAP System View – Conclusions
Based upon our assessment of the Custody Operations Command including the
Court Holding Facilities, all of the CSCJC assessment team shared unanimous
conclusion that the Orange County jail system is professionally managed and in
many cases meet the minimum standards contained in Title 15, CCR.
Additionally, we noted a number of correctional best practices being conducted in
the jails.
We observed and talked to several hundred staff at every level in the
organization and who are assigned in the jail, court services and ancillary support
functions such as the Inmate Programs Division. We found staff to be fully
engaged in the performance of their duties and demonstrated professionalism at
every turn. Additionally, we found staff eager to accept the challenge of change
and the opportunity to stay out of the glaring light of public scrutiny.
Despite our praise for the good jobs that members of the Sheriff’s Department
are doing, operating a major corrections facility in this particular day and age is
no simple task. Most community members have no idea as to the complexity of
maintaining a custody facility that must meet the legal, medical, health, safety
and general logistics attendant with meeting the needs of over 6,300 men and
women each day. Furthermore, these activities must be accomplished in a cost
effective manner and within Constitutional minima as established by statutes,
regulations and the Federal Courts.
Orange County, like virtually every other jail in California, faces enormous
challenges and therefore no person or governmental entity can stand to rest on
their laurels with regard to the operation of their local jail facility. The following
represents our conclusions related to the Orange County jail based upon our
assessment.
The major issues affecting the jails, including Changes in the Inmate
Population (discussed at pages 2-4 and 11-17), problems related to Existing
Facility Design (discussed at pages 2-4, 20-22), issues arising from
Correctional Employee Classification and Staffing Levels (discussed at
pages (4 - 5, 23-73) have been documented in detail in this final report as well as
in the Interim Reports (presented to OCSD management) and Facility
Summaries that follow.
The OCJAP's major conclusions are:
•

The inmate population is in poorer health, more drug addicted, more
mentally ill, more gang-involved and more prone to violence than were
inmates of a decade or more ago. This changed and changing inmate
profile contributes directly and inexorably to the difficulty of managing the
offender population and is a key factor in the escalating patterns of
violence experienced in the Orange County jails.

•

The Orange County Jail system is overstocked with dormitory beds in a
minimum security setting that do not safely accommodate today’s more
serious offender inmate population.
76

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

•

Several of the housing units at the James Musick Facility are well beyond
their useful lives and will need to be replaced in the very near future.
There is an immediate need for jail construction planning and funding for
the replacement of this jail facility.

•

Jail capacity is limited and crowding continues to plague the jail system.
The system's crowding has caused some low risk offenders to be
released into out of custody programs. If this trend continues the jail
system will lose the primary workforce that provides cleaning and food
services in the jail.

•

Staffing shortages significantly impact the ability of the OCSD to safely
operate and manage the Orange County Jail system. These shortages
include a significant lack of supervisory staff (sergeants) to train and
oversee custody staff. An additional 454.65 custody staff, and support
personnel (SSO/CST), are needed to properly staff the entire Orange
County jail system.

•

The Custody Operations Command should bring all facilities into
alignment with regard to safety checks. Some facilities, by policy are
directed to conduct general safety checks once every 30 minutes. Others
are in alignment with the Title 15, CCR requirement to conduct the safety
check once ever hour. During our assessment we found that staff was
unable to conduct proper safety checks at the 30 and 60 minute interval.
We recommend that a policy across facilities comport with the safety
check ever hour as the jail standard. Certainly, more frequent searches
are desirable; however in any case the checks must be done in
accordance with Title 15, CCR Guidelines.

•

There is a significant problem with the lack of confidentiality provided to
inmates at the medical screening area in IRC. Currently, confidential
communication is not only nil, but broadcast via a speaker system. When
inmates are reluctant to talk about medical issues due to confidentiality
issues then there is a strong likelihood that they will not reveal serious
illness or contagious disease. This is a high liability issues that should be
addressed quickly.

•

The CSCJC assessment team is of the opinion that the current strip
search policy is too restrictive. Furthermore we found that there was a
great deal of confusion by staff over the proper application of a strip
search. There is a legitimate penology interest in conducting strip
searches in the jail. We recommend that the Custody Operations
Command work with risk managers and the training division to arrive at a
more effective use of this security practice.

•

The inmate classification system, while adequate, needs at a minimum to
be validated in order to insure that too much subjectivity is not introduced
into this critical process.

•

The current practice of maintaining a weekender program should be
thoroughly discussed with the judiciary, District Attorney and Public
Defender to assess its effectiveness. Many jails in California have
discontinued housing weekenders. To the extent that this practice
77

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

continues we recommend that weekenders are not housed with the
general population. Additionally, there is no need to medically screen
every inmate as they report for their weekend incarceration beyond the
first screening. A short question by the booking deputy to inquire if there
has been any change in the inmates health status since they were last
booked should suffice.
•

Service of two hot meals a day should be modified to serve two-cold
meals and 1 hot meal. This is in keeping with standard operating
practices in other jurisdictions and will enhance security by reducing the
mass movement of inmates to the chow hall each day.

•

Investment in a new or upgraded training management data system. A
good system will allow the management of required training to be done
more efficiently and provide an opportunity to reduce costs and assist the
department recoup subvention funding from the Standards and Training
for Corrections Program.

•

Improved inmate record and court data systems are needed to improve
the flow and handling of inmates incarcerated in the jails. The county
should purchase and implement technologies currently available to
facilitate inmate record and court data management.

•

Other important technologies that will improve the safety and security of
the jails should similarly be explored, purchased and implemented.
These include digital video systems throughout all the jails, video visiting
video arraignments and the use of RFID for inmate tracking.

78

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Final Thoughts Concerning the OCJAP
Jails are rarely a popular subject and especially not when they are brought up in
the context of competing requests for precious tax dollars. Nonetheless,
operating safe and secure jails is an essential government function and must be
accorded the full measure of attention and funding to be carried out
appropriately.
Furthermore, the experience with the long-standing intervention of the Federal
Court in the operation of the Orange County jails is a sobering reminder of the
necessity to attend to jail issues. One needs only to look at the current crisis in
the California prison system to understand the unfavorable financial, control and
public policy consequences of failing to proactively manage the correctional
infrastructure.
Our hope is that Orange County leaders chart an assertive course to mitigate the
serious problems encountered daily in the county's jails. We have presented our
observations and recommendations in an attempt to make a good department
even better. Doing so will ultimately benefit all the people of Orange County
because it will ensure that the jail system can and will operate in ways that
protect both the public and people incarcerated in jail.

79

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Summary of Findings – Central Jail Complex (CJX)
Physical Plant - IRC
CJX – At a Glance

The IRC is the newest facility
of the Central Jail complex
(CJX). This facility was first
opened in 1988, and serves as
the main receiving area where
inmates are booked upon their
acceptance into the facility.
The booking process includes
developing an inmate record,
medical/mental health
screening, photographs,
fingerprinting, classification,
property/clothing inventory and
collection, service to bonding
companies and the release of
inmates.
In addition to booking, this
facility accommodates inmate
housing for both male and
females. This facility also has
a medical unit, not only for
medical screening for newly
arrived arrestee’s, but also as
a medical/mental health clinic
for inmates housed at the IRC.

There is insufficient staff to safely operate the
jail facilities that make up the CJX complex,
which creates an unacceptable risk to staff and
inmates. We recommend the addition of staff in
the 3 facilities that make up the CJX as follows:
CJX – We recommend 50.82 staff as a
permanent SRF to supplement existing staff in
order to meet T-15 requirements. A total
compliment of 140.82 custody staff is
recommended.
IRC – We recommend 71.89 staff as a
permanent SRF and 22.77 staff to supplement
existing staff in order to meet T-15
requirements. A total compliment of 310.66
custody staff is recommended.
MCJ – We recommend 55.79 staff as a
permanent SRF and 28.07 staff to supplement
existing staff in order to meet T-15
requirements. A total compliment of 225.86
custody staff is recommended.
WCJ – We recommend 13.75 staff as a
permanent SRF and 10.12 staff to supplement
existing staff in order to meet T-15
requirements. A total compliment of 74.87
custody staff is recommended.
Some issues involving lack of privacy in the
booking area as it relates to medical screening
and HIPPA requirements was noted. CSCJC
recommends that the medical screening area be
modified in order to maintain confidentiality
during the medical screening process.

The IRC also serves as the
central staging area for the
court transfer and
transportation system where
Currently two-hot meals and one-cold meal are
arrestee’s are delivered to the
served to inmates each day at the CJX. We
various courts throughout
recommend changing the feeding protocol to
Orange County and California.
two-cold meals and one hot-meal. This change
According to Corrections
will significantly enhance the utilization of staff
and provide greater security at the CJX.
Standards Authority (CSA)
inspection reports the Bed
Rated Capacity of the IRC at
389 beds; the facility is equipped with 753 beds. The facility complies with
applicable physical plant standards except that there are 364 single-occupancy
cells equipped with two beds/bunks.
The IRC is in good condition, clean and well maintained. Some issues involving
lack of privacy in the booking area as it relates to medical screening and HIPPA
requirements was noted.

80

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

There is an objective classification system that is used to classify individuals who
are booked into the jail. While the current system meets minimum standards, the
evaluation team believes that while there is a need for override capability in order
to take subjective criteria into
consideration that the system
is use involves too much
subjectivity. Re-evaluation of
a more standardized objective
classification system is
recommended. The present
system is in need of greater
diversity in sub-classifications
as well as wrist band
identification.
Again, the present system
functions adequately but
allows considerable subjective
discretion at the line level that could represent potential liability. Additionally, it is
our recommendation that they dispatch a team to NIC/Jails Division training, or
seek NIC technical assistance for a thorough review of the current system in
order to validate the current system.
Men’s Central Jail – The jail was evaluated as a Type II Facility under 1963
standards that were in effect at the time of original construction. The Men’s jail is
an older linier design which despite its age was relatively well designed,
inasmuch, as facility staff had an unobstructed view into the inmate housing
areas. Unfortunately, this generation of jail facility is staff intensive and does not
offer the ability to control the inmate population as securely as a new generation
popular design.
Planned installation of a CCTV system such as that that has been installed in
some housing areas at the Theo Lacy Facility is recommended. While the use of
audio or video technology should never be a substitute for custody staff’s
vigorous supervision of the activities in the housing unit, the upgraded digital
CCTV system can be extremely valuable in sorting out allegations of
mistreatment and for use as evidence when inmate on inmate violence occurs.
The facility has a Board Rated Capacity (BRC) of 1,219 and is equipped with
1,283 beds. The facility complies with applicable physical plant standards with
the following exceptions. The facility’s dorms are rated for 56 and are equipped
with 64 beds. The BRC appears to have been established using minimum
plumbing fixtures to inmate ratios, which are exceeded at the current level.
Despite the age of the facility, staff does a commendable job of maintaining the
facility in a clean and sanitary manner. Although this is a linear design the
security stations and surrounding areas used for observations is remarkably
good.
Women’s Central Jail – The jail was evaluated as a Type II Facility under 1963
standards that were in effect at the time of original construction. The facility has a
Board Rated Capacity (BRC) of 275 and is equipped with 358 beds.
81

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

The facility complies with applicable physical plant standards with the following
exceptions. The facility’s dorms (1-8) are equipped with more beds than their
rated capacities. As a result, the minimum plumbing fixtures to inmate ratios are
exceeded.
The installation of digital CCTV equipment is recommended to supplement the
supervision of inmates and to provide a high quality recording of activities that
occur in this facility.
As with the Men’s Jail, considering the age of the facility, staff does a
commendable job of maintaining the facility in a clean and sanitary manner.
Although this is a linear design the security stations and surrounding areas used
for observations is remarkably good.
Contraband
The potential for the introduction of contraband is a concern; especially since
contraband undermines staff and inmate safety and increases escape risk and
health hazards; this problem is largely the result of staff shortages.
Security
This diverse nature of correctional activities at the CJX is accompanied with a
commensurate number of challenges not the least of which are: the reception
and classification of all fresh arrestees into the county system, the housing and
treatment of all mentally ill inmates in custody, the initial diagnosis and treatment
of all inmate medical needs, the food preparation and delivery for this diverse
population and the maintenance of tired and dated facilities.
It has been our experience that “front end” facilities of this type which are part of
a larger jail system are usually in need of considerable remediation due to their
age and operational workload demands. From our observations during our
inspection through a safety and security prism, we did not find this to be the case
at the Central Jail Complex. Certainly there are corrections and suggestions we
recommend but overall, staff shortages aside, the CJX was clean, functions well
and is operated in a professional manner.
Facility Maintenance
As mentioned with the Men’s and Women’s Jails, the team of CSCJC evaluators
regarded the maintenance effort at the complex as remarkably good and issues
that impact the overall security of the facility are generally attended to in a timely
manner. Overall, the facility is clean and free of foul odors often associated with
other jail facilities in the state.

82

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Quality of Staff
Despite the issues that we have identified in this assessment, we are very
pleased to report that there is a high level of professionalism at the IRC, Men’s
Central and Women’s Jail. There was some frustration expressed about the long
period of time that staff is assigned to the jail facilities awaiting field assignments.
For those individuals who have chosen to work in the jail as a career path there
was also frustration expressed about the inability to promote without having
street enforcement experience.
Management, supervisory, line and support personnel assigned to the Central
Jail Complex were open and supportive of the efforts of the OCJAP team. We
were pleased to observe good management practices that mitigate many of
problem issues. There was consensus among the CSCJC team that the IRC is
generally well managed and efficiently operated.
Key Observations and Recommendations
The substantive observations that where improvement can be achieved are as
follows:
Staffing Assessment – There is insufficient staff to safely operate the jail
facilities that make up the CJX complex, which creates an unacceptable risk to
staff and inmates. We recommend the addition of staff in the 3 facilities that
make up the CJX as follows:
CJX – We recommend 50.82 staff as a permanent SRF to supplement existing
staff in order to meet T-15 requirements. A total compliment of 140.82 custody
staff is recommended.
IRC – We recommend 71.89 staff as a permanent SRF and 22.77 staff to
supplement existing staff in order to meet T-15 requirements. A total compliment
of 310.66 custody staff is recommended.
MCJ – We recommend 55.79 staff as a permanent SRF and 28.07 staff to
supplement existing staff in order to meet T-15 requirements. A total compliment
of 225.86 custody staff is recommended.
MCJ – We recommend 13.75 staff as a permanent SRF and 10.12 staff to
supplement existing staff in order to meet T-15 requirements. A total compliment
of 74.87 custody staff is recommended.
Medical Screening – Currently medical staff who conduct medical screening at
the IRC are separated from close contact with inmates by way of a glass barrier
between them and the inmate. Consequently, this arrangement does not allow
for confidentiality and inmates who are awaiting medical screening or even near
the medical screening area are privy to the discussion of medical information.

83

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

On its face, this situation clearly is a violation of the inmate’s right of
confidentiality with regard to medical information. As a matter of good jail
practices, medical privacy can have a significant impact on the safety and
security of inmates in the jail.
As an example, an individual
may withhold information
about a disease that may be
communicable in an effort to
keep other inmates from
knowing their medical
conditions.
CSCJC recommends that the
medical screening area be
physically modified in such a
manner that will insure
confidential communication of
medical information between
inmates and medical personnel.
Meal Service – Currently the CJX serves two hot and one cold meal(s) per day
to the inmate population. While this does not pose a security issue in the newer
generation housing areas in the IRC, inmates housed in the Men’s and Women’s
jail are escorted out of their housing areas and to a centralized dining hall two
times per day.
Most other jail facilities in California only serve one hot meal per day to the
inmate population. The service of two cold meals and one hot meal do not violate
minimum jail standards as long as the daily nutritional requirements are met. This
meal service plan is not out of alignment with community standards as many
people eat only one hot meal per day.
Movement of inmates for feeding requires the diversion of numerous custody
staff from the various areas of the CJX in order to maintain security and to
prevent inmate violence. Additionally, any time large numbers of inmates are out
of their cells in transit to other areas of the jail the potential for very serious
incidents can occur.
While there may or may not be cost avoidance in the service of two cold meals,
the real issue here involves risk avoidance. The service of two cold meals per
day would significantly reduce the amount of time that inmates are moved in
mass throughout the jail facilities.
CSCJC recommends that the facility adopt the two-cold and one-hot meal
protocol at the CJX.

84

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Summary of Findings – Theo Lacy Facility
Theo Lacy– Physical Plant
The Theo Lacy jail facility is
located is located in the
incorporated City of Orange and
is the largest jail facility in the
county.

Theo Lacy – At a Glance
There is insufficient staff to safely operate the
Theo Lacy Facility, which creates an
unacceptable risk to staff and inmates. We
recommend 59.46 staff as a permanent SRF and
51.24 staff to supplement existing staff in order
to meet T-15 requirements. A total compliment
of 561.7 custody staff is recommended.

While the facility falls under one
command, this sprawling jail has
Weekender booking procedures should be
grown over the years beginning
reviewed and a determination should be made
with minimum security barracks
to find alternative housing for these individuals
that was opened in 1960. Since
to reduce the incidence of smuggling
that time, jail construction on this
contraband into the jail.
site has expanded the facility
Currently two-hot meals and one-cold meal are
footprint from 4 to 11 acres and
served to inmates each day at the Theo Lacy
now consists of nine new
Facility. We recommend changing the feeding
generation double bunked
protocol to two-cold meals and one hot-meal.
modules (1,728 beds), one
This change will significantly enhance the
utilization of staff and provide greater security
medical module (124 beds),
at the Lacy Facility.
seven dormitory style barracks
(1,284 beds), and 32 disciplinary
isolation beds - for a total of
3,168 beds. The latest
construction was completed in 2005.
Some of the specialized functions in the jail include the following:

Phoenix House – This in custody program dedicated to the “New Start” drug and
alcohol treatment, which occupies 64 beds and is, located in one of the facility
modules.
Juvenile Housing – Orange County is one of the few jail systems in the state to
house a substantial number of juvenile offenders. Originally, the housing of
juveniles with very serious offenses was established in the jail until more secure
facilities in the juvenile hall could be constructed. This temporary condition was
allowed by the CSA as an alternate means of compliance, however the housing
of juveniles continues today even after the construction of the new juvenile
facility.
The housing of juveniles in adult facilities adds an additional layer of complexity
to the operation of the jail facility inasmuch as juveniles must be shielded from
sight and sound from the adult population in accordance with Federal and State
regulations. Juveniles housed at the Theo Lacy facility are housed in Module J
and supervised by Orange County Probation staff.
There appears to be very good cooperation between the OCSD and OCPD staff
and sufficient attention is paid to meeting the juvenile confinement requirements,
including safely keeping juveniles away from adult staff. The use of this facility to
85

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

hold juvenile wards is not particularly problematic other than some adjustments
that need to occur during movement or transportation of the juvenile wards. The
compromise in the use of the facility most likely serves a legitimate county need;
however it does remove a portion of a module that cannot be used for adult
housing, which is increasingly important as adult inmate classification becomes
more complex and fractured.
The Theo Lacy facility is in good condition, clean and well maintained. Despite
the age of some of the older buildings, staff does a commendable job of
maintaining the facility in a
clean and sanitary manner.
Given the design of the
varying facilities the security
stations and surrounding
areas used for observations
is good. Most recently an
upgraded video monitoring
system has been deployed
in the dormitory (barracks).
Staff report that this system
is superior to the old system
and it has particular value in
risk management and the
investigation of assaults in the housing areas. It is important to note that audio
and video systems are not to be relied upon to provide security but rather to
supplement the supervision of inmates. Staff is required by regulation to
physically inspect the housing areas once every hour (once every 30 minutes by
Theo Lacy policy).
Staffing Assessment –There is a high degree of consensus by the three
assessment teams that staffing in the Theo Lacy Facility is insufficient of staff to
accomplish all of the regulatory/policy requirements in the daily operation of the
facility in a safe and secure manner without the expenditure of much higher than
normal overtime hours. Even with the use of overtime, many required tasks are
not accomplished in a manner consistent with minimum jail standards or best
correctional practices, e.g. security checks, searches, etc.
During our assessment of the facility, facility records and staffing profiles, CSCJC
noted that the current complement of custody staff was very experienced as a
result of a backlog of deputies waiting to be transferred to street law enforcement
assignments. We are advised that many deputies spend upward to 7-years in
the jail waiting for their transfer to a patrol assignment. This long wait time
creates a level of frustration among some custody staff and in many cases, by
the time staff is eligible for transfer to street enforcement assignments, staff is
opting to remain in the jail where hours are more regular and overtime is
abundant.
Based upon our conversations with custody staff, many expressed that when
they were first recruited, their life situations were much different than after the
passage of so many years of jail duty. Some of those changes involved marriage
and family life. Additionally, the variety of shift schedules, including the 12-hour
shifts are popular, inasmuch as staff is better able to afford housing in adjacent
86

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

counties where the cost of living is lower than in Orange County. Despite the
issues related to staying in the jail for many years, we found these individuals to
be interested, alert and willing to apply facets required of their position of custody
deputy.
Contraband
The potential for the introduction of contraband is a concern, since contraband
undermines staff and inmate safety and exacerbates escape risk and health
hazards.
Facility Maintenance
The teams of CSCJC evaluators regarded the maintenance effort at the complex
as remarkably good and issue that impact the overall security of the facility are
generally attended to in a timely manner. Overall, the facility is clean and free of
foul odors often associated with other jail facilities.
Quality of Staff
Despite the issues that we have identified in this assessment, we are very
pleased to report that there is a high level of professionalism at the Theo Lacy
facility. There was some frustration expressed about the long period of time that
staff is assigned to the jail facilities awaiting field assignments. For those
individuals who have chosen to work in the jail as a career path, there was also
frustration expressed about the inability to promote without having street
enforcement experience.
Management, supervisory, line and support personnel assigned to the Theo Lacy
Facility were open and supportive of the efforts of the OCJAP team. We were
pleased to observe good management practices that mitigate many of problem
issues. There was consensus among the CSCJC team that the Theo Lacy
facility is professionally managed and efficiently operated.
Key Observations and Recommendations
The substantive observations where improvement can be achieved are:
Staffing Assessment – There is insufficient staff to safely operate the Theo
Lacy Facility, which creates an unacceptable risk to staff and inmates. We
recommend 59.46 staff as a permanent SRF and 51.24 staff to supplement
existing staff in order to meet T-15 requirements. A total compliment of 561.7
custody staff is recommended.
Meal Service – Currently the Theo Lacy Facility serves two hot and one cold
meal per day for the inmate population. While this does not pose a security issue
in the newer generation housing areas at the Theo Lacy Facility, inmates housed
in the barracks are escorted out of their housing areas and to a centralized dining
hall three times per day.
Movement of inmates for feeding requires the diversion of numerous custody
staff from the various areas of the facility in order to maintain security and to
prevent inmate violence. Additionally, any time large numbers of inmates are out
87

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

of their cells in transit to other areas of the jail the potential for very serious
incidents can occur.
Most other jail facilities in
California only serve one hot
meal per day to the inmate
population. The service of two
cold meals and one hot meal do
not violate minimum jail
standards as long as the daily
nutritional requirements are met.
This meal service plan is not out
of alignment with community
standards as many people eat
only one hot meal per day.
While there may or may not be cost avoidance in the service of two cold meals,
the real issue here involves risk avoidance. The service of two cold meals per
day would significantly reduce the amount of time that inmates are moved in
mass throughout the jail facilities.
CSCJC recommends that the facility adopt the two-cold and one-hot meal
protocol at the Theo Lacy Facility.
Weekender Housing – During the assessment the CSCJC team noted that
weekenders 18 are admitted to the facility and integrated into the general
population according to their classification.
CSCJC is recommending that Custody Operations consider a change in protocol,
whereby jail space apart from the general inmate population is secured
exclusively for weekenders during that time that these individuals are in custody.
Housing Weekenders with the general population is a security problem because
of the probability of contraband being brought in. If sufficient space is not
available at the Theo Lacy Facility, the department may consider using the
James A. Musick Facility for weekender housing.
Additionally, the assessment team noted that medical staff is screening these
individuals each and every time that they return to custody. The CSCJC
assessment team are of the opinion that once an individual is medically screened
upon checking in for their first weekend that continued medical screening not be
conducted by medical staff. Rather, we believe that custody staff, upon the
inmate’s re-entry, would need only to inquire if there has been a change in health
or medical condition since the last time the individual was incarcerated. In the
event that an individual responds in the affirmative then medical staff would be
called for a more detailed screening.
Orange County is one of the few local agencies that still operate a weekender
program, due to the fact that since the convicted individual is out of custody for
the majority of the week that another intermediate sanction such as electronic
18

Individuals sentenced to the county jail on the weekends and are generally admitted on Friday and released
on Monday.

88

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

monitoring. This is because the infusion of weekenders into the jail stresses the
ability of staff to conduct the normal day to day functions in the jail. Generally,
the workload increase is not matched by a corresponding increase in staffing.
Therefore, oftentimes required activities are delayed or not accomplished as a
result of the increase in time consuming activities of receiving, housing and
releasing.

89

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Summary of Findings – James Musick Facility
Physical Plant
The James A. Musick facility is located in an unincorporated area near the City’s
of Irvine and Lake Forrest and serves the county as a minimum detention facility.
The Musick facility is commonly referred to as the “farm” due to its historical use
of inmates to grow food crops on
the facility grounds.
James Musick Facility– At a Glance

While this activity continues to take
place, the inmate classification of
individuals housed at this facility
has been changing over the years
and like many minimum security
facilities is housing a higher
classification than ever before.
This is a phenomenon that we call
“classification creep” in which the
ever expanding inmate population
incarcerated in the jail are felons
and therefore, as a matter of
prioritization and consideration of
public safety, those inmates who
were classified as minimum
security have been shoved out of
the system and into out of custody
alternative work programs.

There is insufficient staff to safely operate the
Musick Facility, which creates an unacceptable
risk to staff and inmates. We recommend 52.63
staff as a permanent SRF and 38.11 staff to
supplement existing staff in order to meet T-15
requirements. A total compliment of 207.74
custody staff is recommended.
The tents and wooden barracks currently used
to house inmates is inadequate and therefore
attention should be directed toward the removal
of this so called temporary housing.
The inmate housing at the James Musick
Facility is in need of replacement in order to
better manage the inmate population and
increase overall security at the facility.
Security practices involving access to the
facility by visitors should be a priority. We
recommend the installation of a video visiting
pilot program.

The safety and security of any
given detention facility is dependent on two basic factors, the design of the facility
and the number of staff assigned to the facility to supervise the activities of the
inmates. A better facility design economizes on the number of staff needed to
supervise inmates; even a poorly designed facility, given the inmate
classification, can be safely operated provided that there is a corresponding
staffing level to properly supervise the inmates that are in custody. The task at
hand for any correctional entity is to maintain a balance between facility design,
classification of inmates and staffing levels.
.
All too often, with respect to “classification creep”, the agency operating the
detention facility continues to staff the facility at the same level when a lower
classification of inmate was housed in the facility. What should occur, but often
doesn’t is that custody staff should be increased, commensurate with the
classification of the inmate.
Upon evaluating the Musick facility, CSCJC concludes that despite “classification
creep” at the facility, the staffing level remains the same as when the facility truly
housed minimum security inmates. In our view, while not at a critical stage, it
bears evaluating the changing inmate population in relation to staffing levels.
Once again, balance must be maintained in order to diminish the extent and
severity of inmate-on-inmate or inmate-on-staff violence.
90

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

It is worth noting that shifts in inmate classification (classification creep) are
oftentimes quite insidious because it happens slowly over time. While there is a
level of awareness of the change, balance is not maintained until after some
unhappy event or hopefully after a third party assessment, such as this project
draws attention to a problem. The housing units and support buildings located at
the Musick facility vary in age and design is described as:
The Musick facility is an adult detention facility occupied by sentenced and
unsentenced males and females. The facility sits on approximately 100 acres
located in an unincorporated area near the Cities of Irvine and Lake Forest, in an
urban environment very close to light industrial and residential. This facility was
first opened in 1964 and the facility was designed (capacity of 200) for the
detention of males sentenced for misdemeanor crimes in a minimum security
environment.
Over time, additional low security housing units were added on the facility
grounds and in 1986, as a temporary measure to ease crowded jail conditions,
four 90-bed tents were added to the facility. The inclusion of these very soft
housing units were approved
as an alternative means of
compliance to ease
crowded conditions,
however are not counted as
part of the Corrections
Standards Authority bed
rated capacity.
There is a common
observation that in the
bureaucratic parlance to
describe something as
temporary, it is sure to
become the most permanent
word in the government dictionary; and, so it is with the tent structures at the
Musick facility that were supposed to be removed upon additional jail space
being constructed at the Theo Lacy site. Unfortunately, due to the ever
increasing incarceration rate in Orange County the tents continue to be occupied.
The current the CSA rated inmate housing capacity at the Musick Facility is 713
beds and 360 non-rated beds (tents). Combined the total available beds at the
Musick Facility is 1073. During the 2007 calendar year the Musick Facility held
and ADP of 1027 inmates. The facility also supports two-kitchens, as well as
providing medical/mental and dental services.
Beyond the housing of male and female inmates, the Musick facility is host to a
variety of vocational-industrial activities such as an institutional laundry, wood
shop, welding shop and paint shop. The facility also supports a farming
operation that includes the production of truck crops and a poultry operation that
supplies fresh eggs to the jail and juvenile hall facilities.
Because of the assignment of lower security inmates at the facility, a substantial
number of educational, vocational and lifestyle programs are offered to
91

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

individuals sentenced to the Musick facility. As mentioned in other facility
summary reports, the Orange County Sheriff’s Department is committed to
providing both in custody and post custody programs aimed at providing a range
of services designed to reduce recidivism. It was noted that like many of the
activities at the Musick facility, the changing (higher security) classification of
inmates being housed there is impacting the number and type of programs
offered.
Staffing Assessment – There is insufficient staff to safely operate the James
Musick Facility, which creates an unacceptable risk to staff and inmates. We
recommend 52.63 staff as a permanent SRF and 38.11 staff to supplement
existing staff in order to meet T-15 requirements. A total compliment of 207.74
custody staff is recommended.
During our inspection of the facilities, facility records and staffing profiles, CSCJC
noted that the current complement of custody staff was very experienced as a
result of a backlog of deputies waiting to be transferred to street law enforcement
assignments and individuals transferring back to the facility from street
assignments. We are advised that many deputies spend upward to 7-years in
the jail waiting for their transfer to a patrol assignment. This long wait time
creates a level of frustration among some custody staff and in many cases, by
the time staff is eligible for transfer to street enforcement assignments, staff is
opting to remain in the jail where hours are more regular and overtime is
abundant.
Based upon our conversations with custody staff, many expressed that when
they were first recruited, their life situations were much different than after the
passage of so many years of jail duty. Some of those changes involved marriage
and family life. Additionally, the variety of shift schedules, including the 12-hour
shifts are popular, inasmuch as staff is better able to afford housing in adjacent
counties where the cost of living is lower than in Orange County. Despite the
issues related to staying in the jail for many years, we found these individuals to
be interested, alert and willing to apply facets required of their position of custody
deputy.
Contraband
There is a very high potential for the introduction of contraband which is a
concern, especially as contraband relates to staff and inmate safety, escape risk
and health hazards. This concern is a result of the low security setting in which
inmates have a great deal of access to contraband.
Security
The changing nature of the inmate profile at the Musick facility is of concern to
the CSCJC evaluators due to what we identify as “classification creep”. Although
the Orange County Sheriff’s Department is doing a good job of classifying
individuals who are most amenable to low security housing, inmate
demographics are changing in Orange County and California. The California Jail
Profile Survey decidedly shows an increase in more serious offenders being held
in the jail. There is a corresponding decrease of lower security inmates housed
in the jail.
92

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Another weak point involves the public access inside the secure areas of the
facility unescorted. Two major areas are noted in this regard–of greatest concern
is the practice of contact visiting. This practice is a holdover from the days in
which a much lower security inmate was being housed at the Musick facility.
Also of great concern was the ability of the public to drive into the secure areas of
the facility to conduct business such as leaving money on the books for inmates.
Construction of More Secure Inmate Housing – The bucolic atmosphere of
the Musick facility lends itself to a very relaxed atmosphere. While the staff does
a good job of maintaining security, the design and operational protocols currently
in place lend themselves to major security and safety problems in the event of a
widespread inmate disturbance. Low staffing, along with the soft nature of
inmate housing areas, should serve as a red flag. The CSCJC team concludes
that some changes in operation can elongate the use of the facility in its current
configuration, plans to replace or supplement much of the current inmate housing
should continue unimpeded and should be considered a spending priority.
Facility Maintenance
Maintenance of the facility is generally quite good given the age and type of
housing used for the custody of inmates. It should be clear that the cost to
maintain these old structures will increase over time.

93

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Summary of Findings – Court Holding Facilities
On September 9 and 10, 2008, Crout and Sida Criminal Justice Consultants
(CSCJC) represented by a team of two consultants (William Crout and James
Sida) conducted an assessment of
the five Orange County Court Holding
Court Holding Facilities – At a Glance
Facilities that currently hold inmates
during court proceedings. The design
Courthouses are notoriously risky with regard
to security. All court personnel should be
for a sixth facility was also reviewed
cognizant of the potential for hazard and how
for efficiency and Title 24, California
they can assist in courthouse security.
Code of Regulations (CCR)
standards. The court holding
Inmate holding areas in many of the Orange
assessment included a review of
County courthouses are in need of renovation
to insure that staff can properly monitor and
staffing levels, physical plant
supervise inmates.
conditions and a security/safety
review.
Court areas where inmates move in around the
courtrooms should have an upgraded CCTV
system to aid custody staff in the supervision
Prior to the on-site assessment of the
of inmates.
five facilities, CSCJC reviewed the
document entitled, Security
Caged areas installed in the court rooms
Assessment Services for the Superior
represent a good effort at security in the
Court of California – County of
courtroom.
Orange. The Court Consulting
Services from Denver, Colorado, on
behalf of the National Center for State Courts, published this document in May
2007. This document contained the comprehensive assessment of nine
courthouses that were in operation by a five person team. This assessment
addressed all areas of the courthouses for security, policies and procedures and
staffing. The assessment conducted by CSCJC was more limited in nature.

After beginning the comprehensive Orange County Jail Assessment, CSCJC was
asked to include the court holding facilities with their review. We limited our
review of the court holding facilities to areas that fall with our expertise including:
policy and procedures; staffing and security of areas accessed by the inmates.
We based our review on minimum jail standards contained in Titles 15 and 24,
CCR.
From a safety and security perspective the transportation to and from the various
courts as well as inmate movement in the courthouse poses a unique security
challenge for the Sheriff’s Department.
It is instructive to think of prisoner movement along the lines of a color coded
system (green, yellow and red) to identify the risk inherent in inmate
management and transportation and housing at the courthouse.
•

Green (Green Zone) represents the safest status of prisoners. That is to
say that when inmates are safely locked in their cells and housing units
then the public and custody staff are afforded the highest level of
protection.

94

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

•

Yellow (Yellow Zone) is a cautionary status that is in effect when inmates
are taken out of their cells and are able move within the jail facility and
transportation staging areas. Custody staff must be on their guard to
quickly respond to disturbances that may involve risk to inmates, custody
and support staff in the jail.

•

Red (Red Zone) represents the highest security risk and is present
whenever inmates are loaded on a bus or other transportation vehicles
and removed from the safe confines of the jail. Security problems in this
condition can have very serious consequences to the public at large,
custody staff and inmates.
This level of risk is significant due to the fact that moving inmates outside
of the confines of the jail opens up a nearly infinite number of
opportunities to escape, or possessing contraband, or to have individuals
on the outside involved with abetting an escape. Once an individual is in
the courthouse they are moved in mass. In the case of the Central
Courthouse, it is a very old building with poor security inherent in its
design. Additionally, this brings the inmates closer with individuals outside
of the custody cocoon, which may offer the inmate with the opportunity to
obtain contraband or to assault court personnel. Because of legal
necessities, the courtroom is designed to provide a trial free of bias;
inmates are in most cases not restrained in any way.
Based on the color code metaphor the courthouse setting is in a constant
state of Red, or the highest security risk.

In the interest of assessing the security conditions in the Orange County
courthouses, on September 9, 2008, we initially met with Captain Brian Cossairt
and his staff of lieutenants and sergeants responsible for operating the court
holding facilities under his command. We were informed that there are currently
five facilities that contain court-holding facilities. These include:






Central Justice Center
Harbor Justice Center
North Justice Center
Lamoreaux Justice Center
West Justice Center

In addition to these facilities, the old South County Courthouse has closed and is
in the design process to construct a new facility.
Captain Cossairt provided CSCJC with an overview of the court holding facilities
and systemic issues; he also related that over the last three years, there have
been an additional 74 positions added to the court’s staffing levels. This addition
in staff has helped mitigate many glaring problems in properly staffing these
facilities, but proper staffing challenges remain.
Each lieutenant and sergeant representing the six facilities provided an overview
of their facility. After this briefing, CSCJC consultants scheduled on-site
evaluations to the facilities, which are described as follows:

95

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Central Justice Center
The Central Justice Center is a 1968 vintage courthouse that is the busiest in the
system. Up to 400 inmates are processed through this facility per day. The most
significant safety and security issues with this facility relate to physical plant
issues include:


An insufficient number of holding cell space to hold all of the inmates
processed through this facility.



A labyrinth design that severely limits the ability of deputies to control the
movement of inmates.



A critical void in the number of holding cells available for individual
inmates and/or inmates needing to be separated from the general
population.



Extremely poor sightlines into the available holding cells to monitor
activities of the inmates.



CCTV available to staff is of poor quality



Many enclosures (Juvenile cells, D-5 control room) have been added
using “expanded metal walls” that is painted white causing poor sightlines
and access problems. We recommend a dark color to improve visual
observation inside the holding areas.



An antiquated security electronic system (electronic door controls) with
limited or no availability of repair parts (indicator lights rarely work).



Security electronics are located on a wall behind the deputy who must
constantly turn to work the controls (ergonomic issues).



Very limited space for staff causing many spaces to be inappropriately
used for multiple purposes (sergeant’s office, break room, equipment
room).



An antiquated audio monitoring system into the cells to respond to calls
from inmates – no parts are available to repair this system.



A new booking room that was added to process “court remands” shares a
hallway with judges and court staff.

In addition to the physical plant problems, we noted the operational problems
included:


Safety checks (as required by Section 1027 - via direct visual
observation) are only completed relying on antiquated CCTVs (in violation
of the regulations).



The inmate’s classification system is seriously compromised by the
inability to separate the various classes of inmates.

96

November 18, 2008



Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Juveniles are not sufficiently separated from adult inmates due to lack of
cells.

Facility staff advised CSCJC consultants that there had been additional holding
space on the second floor of the courthouse, but that a few years ago this space
had been “appropriated” by the judges and turned into an executive conference
room.
Harbor Justice Center
Since the South Justice Center closed on July 7, 2008, the number of inmates
processed through this court holding facility has significantly increased daily.
The maximum capacity of this facility is 141 inmates. This was the cleanest
facility that CSCJC has visited in quite some time. It is generally well designed in
terms of the visibility into each holding cell. Some of the challenges that staff
face in operating this facility include:


An insufficient number of small holding cells to hold inmates that need to
be separated from the general population.



A general lack of holding capacity to handle the large volume of inmates
processed through this facility.



Lack of adequate spaces to provide secure professional visits between
inmates and their attorneys.



A front desk that lacks a physical separation (glass clad polycarbonate
barrier) between staff and the general public.



CCTVs need to be upgraded to color and digital recording systems.



Cell door mechanisms are constantly breaking down with no available
repair parts due to their age (parts must be fabricated by maintenance
staff).



Disabled inmates must be moved through court administrative areas
because of access barriers.

Operationally, the classification system – though challenged, safety checks
appear to meet regulations. It also appears that a third sergeant’s position needs
to be added to the staffing level.
North Justice Court
The North Justice Court is another 1968 era courthouse that has many of the
problems being experienced throughout the system. These included:


An insufficient number of small holding cells to hold inmates that need to
be separated from the general population.



A general lack of holding capacity to handle the large volume of inmates
processed through this facility.



Lack of adequate spaces to provide secure professional visits between
inmates and their attorneys.
97

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project



Control rooms contain security electronics that are antiquated, frequently
broken and lack ergonomics – staff has no way of knowing whether gates
are opened or closed.



Lack of adequate restroom space for inmates on the various levels of the
court house resulting in inmates needing to be escorted to the basement
to use the facilities.



Stairwells and other areas have no CCTV coverage.

While video arraignment has helped reduce the pressure on moving inmates
through the courthouse system, the inmate population continues to rise and
impact these facilities. It also appears that an administrative deputy needs to be
added to this facility. Staff works diligently to make safety checks of inmates and
to the extent possible, separate inmates according to their classification status.
Lamoreaux Justice Center
Lamoreaux Justice Center is the newest courthouse in the system. This facility is
located near the Theo Lacy Detention Facility and directly adjacent to the Orange
County Juvenile Hall. Although a majority of the individuals supervised by
Sheriff’s staff are juveniles, there are always a number of adults as well. This
creates a situation where efforts must be made to endure that adult inmate’s and
juveniles remain separated at all times.
Juveniles waiting to be escorted to the courts are kept under the supervision of
probation officers in a separate holding area. Adults are held in the holding
spaces supervised by Sheriff’s staff. Although this is a newer facility, there are
still physical plant issues that cause concern. These include:


The briefing room is actually a wide part of the hallway adjacent to the
rear door which inmates are escorted past.



There are no CCTVs in holding cell areas in the holding facility.



There is no elevator to the seventh floor – inmates and juvenile must ride
the elevator to the sixth floor and be escorted up a stairwell to the
seventh.



Inmates frequently need to be escorted through the court administrative
areas, especially when the one of two elevators break down as they do
about every two weeks.



The security electronics in the control room frequently break down and
parts are difficult to obtain.



The monitors and controls in the control room are not logically or
ergonomically organized.

West Justice Center
The West Justice Center also has many of the problems that are issues in other
court holding facilities. Sheriff’s staff told us that the control room is about to be
renovated within the next year that should solve, or mitigate, many of the issues
98

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

that currently exist. This court processes about 110 to 120 inmates per day. In
addition to these inmates, however, the Sheriff’s staff (as in the other facilities)
must address a number of security issues outside of the holding area. The
problem areas include:


An insufficient number of small holding cells to hold inmates that need to
be separated from the general population.



A general lack of holding capacity to handle the large volume of inmates
processed through this facility.



An insufficient number of cameras that record digitally and older nonrecorded cameras.



No intercom for the pedestrian gate out of the vehicle sally port.



The adjacent parking lot that contains the vehicle sally port (a relatively
new addition, is not secured.



The secure hallways and stairways to each court from the court holding
area need CCTV coverage.



The stairways, some two stories long, are very steep – most inmates are
not escorted to their courtrooms, but are rather “sent” to each courtroom.



A front desk that lacks a physical separation (glass clad polycarbonate
barrier) between staff and the general public.

Operationally, the classification system though challenged, and safety checks,
appear to meet regulations.
South Justice Center
Although the South Justice Center court holding facility is currently closed, there
are plans to construct a new facility. CSCJC consultants were provided with a
schematic design of the court holding area for this planned facility. Given the
frequent complaint that there are never enough small holding cells to provide
separation between the various classifications of inmates, this facility design
could use some additional small cells. Realistically, it does appear that an effort
was made to maximize the number of these small cells within the available
footprint of the building and continue to maintain good sightlines. Consequently,
we agree that this is an appropriate design for this facility.
System –Wide Issues
CSCJC consultants also observed a number of “system-wide issues” that are
shared by all of the court holding facilities. These include:


Unnecessary reliance on 1950s technology in handling court commitment
papers and other documents. The court’s computer system and that of
the Sheriff’s Department are not integrated to allow a seamless
processing of court documents. Many of these documents must be hand
written and information entered several times in different systems. This is
not only inefficient, but the possibility of human errors increases greatly.
99

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project



There are potential projects by the courts to correct some of the issues
noted above, but it is unclear on when these projects will begin and how
extensive these projects will be.



There seems to be continued confusion as to which governmental
organization funds what part of the court operations. This is a gray area
that must be clarified with agreements between the courts and the county.

The courts and county should be congratulated for the excellent job done on
installing secure holding (caged) areas in many of the courtrooms that we
observed. This well thought out design will provide for much safer courtrooms for
inmates, court and custody staff and the public.
As previously mentioned, CSCJC consultants reviewed the document entitled,
Security Assessment Services for the Superior Court of California – County of
Orange. CSCJC generally agree with the recommendations found in this
document and believe that it is an excellent resource document for the courts
and the county.

100

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Summary of Findings – Inmate Programs
Jail programs provided throughout the Orange County jail system are expertly managed.
Clearly, there is a high value placed on the provision of inmate programs in Orange
County. Despite the high level of professionalism that we observed with regard to the
operation of this division, the following
observations are presented:
Inmate Programs– At a Glance

All areas contained in Title 15, CCR,
concerning jail programs are, in most
cases, being met satisfactorily with only
a few areas of improvement noted in
other sections of this report. Those
items include:
•

Visiting.

•

Correspondence.

•

Library service.

•

Exercise and recreation.

•

Books, newspapers and

The Inmate Programs Division is expertly
managed and by the very nature of their
funding stream, demonstrates that public
entities can effectively utilize modern private
sector business practices.
Inmate meals should be changed to 1 hot meal
and 2 cold meals as opposed to the current
practice of 2 hot meals and 1 cold meal.
We applaud the Inmate Programs Division’s use
of the Inmate Welfare Fund for post
incarceration programs. Ultimately, the hope is
to engage in rehabilitation that will reduce the
amount of recidivism.
The department may wish to evaluate the use of
a private vendor to provide inmate commissary
services.

periodicals.
•

Access to telephones.

•

Access to courts and counsel.

•

Inmate orientation.

•

Individual and family service programs.

•

Voting.

•

Religious observances.

•

Inmate grievance procedure.

Specific items noted during the evaluation of jail programs are:
Commissary
The commissary operation is run as efficiently as any private sector operation
that we have observed in other California jails. Orange County is one of the few
jails that do not contract commissary services to a private provider. While
CSCJC is not particularly supportive of jail privatization, the commissary is one
area of the jail that is clearly appropriate for public-private partnerships.
Generally, public entities cannot compete with private companies with respect to
operating costs related to commissary services. In this regard, quite often private
vendors can guarantee a greater return to the inmate welfare fund than the public
service provider. Most of this cost savings is a result of lower wages and
benefits paid in the open market. While a study concerning the efficiency of the
101

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

commissary function has been done by the Inmate Services Division. An RFI to
determine the viability and IWF return has not been pursued. To the extent that
the department is interested in privatization of the commissary function a formal
RFI to private vendors should be issued to determine the feasibility of shifting this
responsibility to the private sector.
Ultimately, the decision regarding the use of a private sector provider of
commissary services revolves around two central issues:
1. The tolerance of the public entity toward the internal effort to select, hire and
train commissary employees. Since the cost of the salaries and benefits are
offset by profits derived from the sale of commissary items, the costs
associated with this employee group involve indirect costs such as the effort
to select and train, supervise and manage.
In the case of the Orange County commissary, the management of the
operation and general efficiency of commissary staff does not seem to
pose any indication that commissary employees are a burden. Nor did
we find any indication that there was any level of dissatisfaction toward
the use of in-house commissary employees, no doubt because of the
efficiency in which the commissary is operated.
2. The other issues regarding any decision to opt for a private vendor to take
over the commissary function involves the amount of money that can be
generated for the Inmate Welfare Fund. In other words, can the public entity
successfully compete with a private sector vendor in the amount of profit that
can be gleaned for the IFW?
In most circumstances public sector operations cannot compete in this
regard. The other part of the equation is simply this – Does the public
entity earn, to their satisfaction, enough profit to meet the inmate welfare
and programming needs?
In the case of Orange County the current level of inmate programs
funding seems to be satisfactory and in fact supports a high level of
service related to inmate programs. One reason that this is so, involves a
longstanding policy of the Sheriff’s Department to be very circumspect
about the use of inmate welfare funds for purposes other than the actual
provision of services to inmates.
Penal Code Section 4025 authorizes the Sheriff to use a portion of the
inmate welfare fund for maintenance of the jail facilities. As we
understand the operation of the department, the maintenance budget is
funded completely by the county general fund and not the IWF. While it
may be tempting to use IWF monies for the general operation of the jail,
engaging in this funding practice is a slippery slope that has often
resulted in litigation by prisoner rights advocates. As a matter of best
correctional practices we do not recommend using the IWF for purposes
other than the welfare and education of inmates.
Ultimately, this is one of those, “if it isn’t broken, don’t fix it” issues. Given the
effective management and supervision of the commissary we conclude that this
function is clearly not broken.
102

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Re-Entry Programs
A recent change in Penal Code Section 4025 (pertaining to the inmate welfare
fund) contains language allowing certain agencies to use inmate welfare funds
for inmate re-entry purposes. This pilot program allows those counties,
specifically identified by law to
use the IWF monies to
support after release
programs.
The mission of the Orange
County Re-entry Partnership
(OCREP) is to serve as a
critical link between community
resource providers and the
formerly incarcerated striving
to re-establish healthy,
productive and rewarding lives.
Some of the programs offered
include:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Affordable housing.
AIDS/HIV support services.
Alcohol and drug abuse services (AA, NA, etc.).
Clothing.
Counseling services.
Domestic violence.
Education services.
Expecting mothers.
Food.
Health care services.
Job placement/employment services.
Legal aid.
Medical assistance.
Residential services for mentally Ill.
Residential treatment.
Shelters and transitional living.
Single parent services.
Sober living homes.
Social services.
Veterans program.

Although this program is relatively new, similar programs throughout the United
States have demonstrated success in reducing the likelihood of recidivism
though the ongoing provision of services to inmates after release. It is imperative
that sufficient resources be devoted to focus on groups and individuals most
amenable to this type of program. It is important to realistically address the fact
that not every inmate is appropriate for enrollment or referral to this program.
In addition to inmate programs, the Inmate Programs Division is also responsible
for the food service in the Orange County jail system. As we have previously
discussed in this report, inmates are served one cold and two hot meals each
103

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

day. This means moving, in mass, inmates to a central chow hall for each hot
meal; while this feeding process was appropriate in days gone by when most
inmates were truly minimum or low medium security. In our view, with the higher
classification of inmate being housed in a lower security environment, being
moved out of the secure environment of their housing unit is too risky and at
some point is likely to erupt into a large scale uprising that could result in
significant injury or death. One of the policy changes that could reduce this risk
is to feed two cold meals and one hot meal per day. Feeding two cold meals to
inmates is a common practice in California jails and in accordance with minimum
jail standards.
Initially, CSCJC evaluators believed that the Programs Division was averse to
cutting to one hot meal per day. Upon further discussion we were advised that
there is no issue with feeding the two cold meals, however the only sticking point
was determining which meal should be served hot. This concern involves
nutritional requirements identified in Title 15, CCR, and not over any particular
desire to continue the service of hot meals. We recommend that this change in
feeding inmates be pursued and resolve issues that would inhibit this change.
Ultimately, it is the safety and security of inmates and staff that should drive this
decision.

104

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Considerations for Further Studies
During the course of the OCJAP, the CSCJC team was charged with identifying
issues related to security and staffing and correctional best practices. However,
because the assessments were so comprehensive, the team also encountered
many issues that, while not directly associated with security and staffing, might
prove useful for additional studies. The following items have a direct and
important relation to safety and security in the jail system:
Inmate Tracking - In a system as large as the Orange County Jail,
administrative delays in one area can have enormous impact on other facilities
and their operations. We recommend that two areas of technology be considered
for further study. Both would be of great value in keeping track of inmates, as
well as in the overall efficiency of the jail facilities:
•

Criminal Justice Information System – Development of a standardized
data system available to the entire Orange County criminal justice
community, including the courts, should be considered a priority. Criminal
justice information systems that connect all the parts of the criminal justice
community are neither unique nor are they new. Aside from cost, the
greatest inhibitor to the effective development of a comprehensive system is
the absence of team play. We recommend all of the members of the criminal
justice system become involved in the development of a comprehensive data
system as they all play key roles in, and have some level of responsibility for,
the smooth operation of the jail.

•

Inmate Tracking Systems – Another system wide technology that is worthy
of consideration is Radio Frequency IDentification (RFID) to track inmate
location and movement throughout the jail system. Radio-frequency
Identification (RFID) is an automatic identification method, relying on storing
and remotely retrieving data using devices called RFID tags or transponders.
An RFID tag is an object that can be stuck on or incorporated into a product,
or person for the purpose of identification using radio waves. Some tags can
be read from several meters away and beyond the line of sight of the reader.
Most RFID tags contain at least two parts. One is an integrated circuit for
storing and processing information, modulating and demodulating a (RF)
signal and perhaps other specialized functions. The second is an antenna for
receiving and transmitting the signal. A technology called chip less RFID
allows for discrete identification of tags without an integrated circuit, thereby
allowing tags to be printed directly onto assets at lower cost than traditional
tags.
Today, a significant thrust in RFID use is in enterprise supply chain
management, improving the efficiency of inventory tracking and
management. CSCJC believes there is an excellent opportunity to
incorporate this technology into the inmate tracking system. This tracking
technology will substantially reduce the risk of certain inmate classifications
from inadvertently being mixed with other inmates, thereby reducing inmateon-inmate assaults.

105

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Additional technologies and/or issues worthy of study and adoption by the OCSD
for the County's jails include but are not limited to the following:
•

Video Visiting – Visiting at each of the OCSD jail facilities is a major
workload that impacts everything from staffing to jail security. Visitors
entering the jail facility to visit represent one of the most significant threats to
the outside security of the facility. To help mitigate this threat, management
is encouraged to consider video visiting technologies employed by other
correctional facilities throughout the nation.
Technologies associated with video visiting would be a major improvement to
the security of each facility. Video visiting would negate the necessity to
bring visitors past the outer perimeter and onto the jail facility. The benefits of
visiting would also be apparent to families who must travel long distances to
visit family members incarcerated in the Orange County jail.
We strongly recommend that the OCSD investigate and employ remote video
visiting. It is anticipated that video visiting would significantly reduce security
manpower requirements, incidents of inmate-on-inmate assault and inmate-onstaff assault and the passing of contraband. Remote video visiting will also
reduce inmates’ propensity to manipulate the jail system to facilitate a transfer to
housing which is more convenient to their family and other visitors.
We further recommend that a pilot system be employed at the James Musick
Facility, where contact visiting poses a significant security risk. Additionally, this
facility construction type would be relatively easy to run the necessary fiber optics
and equipment.

•

Video Surveillance – The Communications Division within the OCSD has
done a spectacular job of planning and executing the installation of a new
and improved CCTV system at specific areas within the Theo Lacy facility.
We strongly encourage that this equipment be purchased and installed in all
jail facilities and security areas.

•

Personnel Administration – The CSCJC team recommends that personnel
in administrative and managerial ranks in the OCSD remain in their jail
assignments for an extended period of time. Currently, management staff is
transferred in and out of detention assignments every couple years or less.
This practice is not uncommon throughout the state; however, in the opinion
of CSCJC evaluators, an extended tour of duty (not less than three years) in
the jail for managers and administrators would bring greater consistency of
operation and would go a long way to sustaining the Custody Operations
Command knowledge base.

•

Mobile Search Teams – Consideration should be given to the development
of a mobile search team who would provide system wide support in
comprehensive and random searches of inmates, housing areas, support
areas etc. A roving search team would significantly disrupt efforts by inmates
to learn behaviors of custody staff due to the random nature of the searches.

106

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Appendix A – Project Methodologies
The OCJAP is divided into three major phases. The process began with the
awarding of the contract on July 15, 2008, for the Orange County Jail
Assessment Project (OCJAP). During this period we assembled an assessment
team of highly experienced correctional professionals who have served in the
development of jail standards, as well as command-level practitioners, in
California jail facilities (Appendix B).
Phase One, The Mobilization Phase – As a part of the Mobilization Phase,
assessment instruments specifically designed for this project were developed. Those
instruments encompassed the three major areas of study, which included:
Policy Assessment – A checklist (Appendix C) was developed to evaluate
selected sections of the Department’s Manual of Policy and Procedures (MPP),
emergency plans/duty statements, unit orders and other documents to ensure
that they comply with Title 15, California Code of Regulations (Title 15, CCR).
This evaluation instrument was used to identify operational areas of the Sheriff’s
Custody Operations Divisions to determine if policies, procedures and unit orders
properly reflect the requirements contained in the minimum jail standards.
Additionally, an evaluation of the department written directives is an effective way
to measure whether current staffing levels enable the execution of policy,
procedures and unit orders. Ultimately the checklist will assist to objectively
identify procedural, training or staffing issues that affect the safety and security of
the OCSD jail facilities.
Security Assessment – A security evaluation instrument and anchor scale
(Appendix D/D1) was developed to examine and document the adequacy of
current policies, procedures, unit orders and staff performance as they relate to
facility safety and security. The security evaluation instrument was used to
identify security holes at each of the OCSD jail facilities that might warrant an
operational course correction. As with all other aspects of this assessment,
minimum jail standards served as the objective baseline in which the evaluation
will be conducted.
Staffing Assessment – A staffing table (Appendix E) was developed in order to
evaluate the existing staffing at each of the OCSD jail facilities on all shifts
throughout the workweek. The table also includes a staffing relief factor and
comments section that will be used in order to identify issues that impact staffing
such as facility design, inmate classification, inmate movement and other factors.
The table used to evaluate facility staffing was used, along with the policy and
security instruments to develop a rational staffing model and make
recommendations for a staffing plan that will enable the department to meet all of
the requirements contained in the California Minimum Jail Standards with special
emphasis on jail safety and security.
Security Drills – Various emergency scenarios were developed for each jail
facility and a drill based on those scenarios was conducted in order to evaluate
the impact of unusual occurrence management on security with special emphasis
on their impact on facility staffing.
107

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Executive Briefing – As a part of the Mobilization Phase CSCJC conducted an
Executive Briefing on July 25, 2008, that included the Sheriff, Undersheriff,
Custody Operations Assistant Sheriff, along with senior and mid-level managers
who were assigned to the various custody facilities and support functions. The
purpose of the briefing was to describe the OCJAP project scope, planned
methodologies, project schedules and to introduce CSCJC associate team
members who would be working on the project. This meeting also provided a
forum for the OCSD custody managers to express issues that are impacting the
operation of the Custody Operations Command as they relate to the OCJAP
project.
In addition to the issues discussed at the project briefing, the CSCJC team also
presented an Inmate Population and Trend Analysis (Appendix F). This analysis
statistically describes the inmate population in the Orange County jails based on
data derived from the California Standards Authority - Jail Profile Survey.
Literature Review – The OCJAP activities performed throughout the OCSD jail
facilities and support function also included a comprehensive review of literature
and agency documents, regulations, jail diagrams and other custody related
forms. (A complete listing is included in Appendix G.)
Phase Two, The Operational Phase – The Second Phase, or Operational Phase,
involved an on-site assessment at each of the OCSD jail facilities, including the court
holding facilities, which took place between September 2008, and concluded in
November 2008.
Typically, the first day of each assessment included an entry briefing that was
presented to the facility captain, other facility management, supervisory and support
staff. The entry briefing provided CSCJC with the opportunity to preview the
schedule of activities for the week and allowed for a mutual discussion of unique
issues involving each facility that was scheduled for the assessment process. The
briefings also included the logistics attendant with the performance of the OCJAP. At
the conclusion of the entry briefing, CSCJC were taken on a comprehensive tour of
each facility.
On the first, second, and third days of the assessment, CSCJC staff split up into three
work-groups and conducted the on-site review of policies, procedures and unit
orders, a security review and the staffing evaluation. CSCJC on-site evaluations took
place during significant portions of all shifts that included the day, evening and early
morning hours of operation. During the course of the Operational Phase CSCJC
team visited virtually every post in each facility that was evaluated. These posts/units
included, but were not limited to: facility administrative and support offices, main
control, inmate housing areas, infirmary, kitchen and kitchen dock, inmate service
program areas and recreation areas, front counter and outer perimeter.
CSCJC staff met frequently during the Operational Phase in order to discuss their
findings and observations. This comparison of notes was critical to the assessment,
inasmuch as all three areas are closely interrelated. The CSCJC teams concluded
that recommendations in one area can strongly influence any or all three of the other
study areas. Additionally, a scenario and drill along with an evaluation checklist was
developed specifically for each facility in order to evaluate readiness and response to
108

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

an emergency in order to test facility staff in the area of unusual occurrence
management and determine its impact on security and staffing levels (Appendix H).
Phase Three, The Report Phase – The Third Phase, or Report Phase, that involved
the evaluation of each facility was the closeout of the evaluation, which included an
exit briefing with each facility captain and staff. Each briefing was held at the
conclusion of onsite activities at each facility that was assessed. The exit briefing
provided management staff with preliminary observations identified by the CSCJC
assessment team and provided an opportunity for information sharing along with the
opportunity to clarify issues and recommendations and as a step off point in which
executive briefings and Interim Reports were formulated by CSCJC off-site.
Interim Reports and Strategic Planning – During the course of the OCJAP it was
determined that individual facility reports would serve as an Interim Reports, as this
study would be extended to the entire Orange County Jail system. Each facility is
interrelated to other facilities in the system, therefore implementation plans with
exacting specificity and detail would be premature until all of the facilities and
divisions have been studied and evaluated.
It should be noted that many recommendations contained in the Interim Reports were
addressed administratively at the department level. In many cases OCSD managers
resolved issues identified in the Interim Reports.
The results of the assessments including the Interim Reports that were conducted by
CSCJC have provided documentation, including implementation planning tools, with
an overriding goal of assisting the department’s effort to improve the overall
operations of the county jail system with regard to policies, staffing, security and best
correctional practices. Additionally, information gathered through the review of
documents and onsite observations of current practices relating to the jail safety and
security may serve as a starting point for the expansion and/or construction of future
jails.
Implementation Strategies for the OCSD – The implementation strategies
presented in this report are broken down into three categories, near-term, midterm and long-term action planning, with each strategy described as follows:
Near-Term Planning/Implementation – These items have been identified as
problem areas that can immediately be impacted by the local facility command
and supervisory staff. Generally, the resolution of the identified areas needing
improvement does not require a level of funding or policy decision beyond that
which can be provided by the facility management. This is not to say that
overriding issues involving longer-term solutions, e.g. staffing, does not impact
many of these issues. Rather an attempt should be made at the local facility level
to mitigate these issues to the fullest extent possible.
Engaging in action planning at the local facility level offers up a number of
advantages even if some of the larger issues take longer to resolve. The first
advantage is that timely action can improve the security of the facility and
therefore has the immediate impact of risk reduction. Quickly addressing problem
areas can demonstrate to the court, elected leaders, corrections advocates and
news media that the OCSD is fully engaged in problem solving. Lastly, local
(facility specific) efforts will generate useful data related to issues that involve
mid-term and long-term planning. The quality and quantity of information
109

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

gathered on specific problem areas will enable planners to make better economic
and policy decisions.
Mid-Term Planning/Implementation – These items are of such a nature that
they may require funding decisions that extend beyond the local command level.
Some of these problem areas may have been previously identified and work is
ongoing to provide the support required to address each particular issue. Midterm planning and implementation often require additional technical analysis
and/or coordination with other local leaders and the Board of Supervisors. Issues
identified as requiring mid-term planning and implementation may extend beyond
one particular facility and may span the entire correctional system.
Long-Term Planning/Implementation – These items generally require a high
degree of planning and may span multiple years, e.g. facility
construction/renovation. Additionally, these items may require a high degree of
cooperative involvement of other county leaders and likely have a high cost
attached to the proposed resolution. Some long-term items may require
subcontracting with companies who provide technical expertise (architects,
construction firms or technology vendors). Issues identified as requiring longterm planning and implementation may extend beyond one particular facility and
may span the entire correctional system.
Review the Recommendations in the Report - The first step in this process is
for the OCSD management and assigned staff to thoroughly review the sections
of the Interim report to cull recommendations. Many of those recommendations
are listed under the heading “Conclusion and Recommendations”. We would like
to point out that additional recommendations may be gleaned from the
evaluation, which were not specifically identified in the Conclusions and
Recommendations section of the report. It may be valuable to identify other
areas of concern to management or to capture items that may have been
inadvertently omitted from the Conclusions and Recommendations sections.
Prioritize the list of recommendations into near, mid and long term planning
items. Many of these items will be readily recognized in terms of priority. To the
extent there is a need for some facilitation to prioritize the issues, then we would
suggest that staff take a look at some of the planning tools included in this report
to assist in that effort.
Action Planning for Near, Mid and Long Term Action Items – We recommend
the following processes for the development of action plans based upon the
items presented in the individual Interim Reports:
Establishment of a Custody Operations Command task group consisting of
various individuals identified by the various facility captains who will be charged
with the review of recommendations, prioritize those recommendations,
determine the ways and means necessary to effect change and develop an
action plan and make recommendations on the implementation of changes
recommended in the assessment.
The group should be large enough to be representative of the needs of the
facility while at the same time keeping numbers to a manageable and effective
level. We recommend at least 8, not to exceed 12 staff members; additional subgroups can be identified as subject matter experts (SME’s) to address specific
110

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

issues. It may be advantageous to employ a trained and knowledgeable
facilitator from either inside or outside the organization to assist with this strategic
planning process.
Once the group is selected, a 2-4 day work-group meeting should be set aside in
order to provide a background of the task and to allow for several group
processes to be conducted. Other resources may be considered in terms of the
roles and responsibilities of each group member, e.g. a recorder and keeper of
information concerning the recommendations of the group. Additionally, this
individual, or another individual (preferably with good writing skills), can be
assigned to complete the final action plan for implementation. The Custody
Operations Command Assistant Sheriff and other management staff may wish to
make an initial determination of the proposed action items and serve to filter out
items that may require action outside of the work-group.
Prior to the initial work-group meeting, each member of the work-group should be
presented with the list of items or recommendations. Each member should be
asked in advance of the meeting to consider each item and conduct a WOTS
analysis (See WOTS Planning Tool). A WOTS analysis involves describing both
internally and externally potential Weakness – Opportunities – Threats – and
Strengths of each recommendation. By applying some critical thinking through
the WOTS exercise, task group members will be better prepared to engage in
problem solving.
Either before the first work-group meeting, or as a part of the meeting, workgroup members should be challenged with prioritizing the recommendations in
the order of those items deemed to impact security most to the least impact.
This will provide the basis for the assignment of tasks in order of priority. A
modified Delphi system can be used in advance of the meeting and distributed
via email where each item is listed. Work-group members are asked to rate each
item on a scale from 1 to 5, with 1 representing least important and 5 being most
important. The range of numbers between 1 and 5 can be used to weigh the
degree of importance for each item.
Upon completion of the weighted rating, each member will return their list and a
collective weighted rating will be formulated for each item by the record keeper or
lead staff member. This weighted rating will be used in the action-planning
phase of the process.
Another method of prioritizing the items would be to conduct a process known as
a Nominal Group Technique (NGT). This process is very good at reaching group
consensus on the priority of issues or action items. We recommend that a
knowledgeable facilitator be recruited (inside or outside of the organization) to
assist with the NGT process.
Reach consensus on the action(s) needed in order to implement each
recommendation. This sub-report should contain the following information:
•

What needs to be done?

•

How will it be done?

•

Who will be responsible (actor)?
111

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

•

When does it need to be done (time frame)?

•

What resources are required to effect the change?

•

How is success measured?

•

What is the remedial plan if change is not occurring?

Commitment Planning – This involves the actors involved in the implementation
and will identify each actor and attempt to determine if those actors will block
change, let change happen, help change happen, or make change happen. This
is a valuable assessment inasmuch as it can be used to identify what resources
or activities are required to move the organization (training, supervision,
discipline, etc.).
Strategic Assumption Mapping – This exercise involves the identification of
stakeholders and makes certain assumptions about where stakeholders stand
relative to making change. This will enable individuals charged with making
change happen, identify key individuals and groups in order to make decisions
about what resources are applied and where they are most efficiently applied in
order to obtain desirable results.
Responsibility Chart – This is the final activity taken by the work-group for
planning purposes. As its name implies the Responsibility Chart assigns
individuals or groups to accomplish each mission identified by the work-group.
The Responsibility Chart lists the decisions reached by the work-group or facility
managers and also lists the actors involved in making change happen. In a
matrix format, the decision is matched against the actor and a designation
representing the requisite action is identified as:
R=
A=
S=
I=
*=

Responsible person or group (not necessarily authority)
Approval (right to veto)
Support (put resources toward)
Inform (to be consulted)
Irrelevant to this item

Staff Assignments – The Custody Operations Command Assistant Sheriff or his
designee makes staff assignments based on the strategic plan developed by the
work-group and individual(s) are charged with implementing the action plan.
Follow-up assessment of action plans and implementation are made via formal
inspections of progress on each item. Some items may need to be re-visited and
adjustments made based upon the results of the inspection process.
Additional staff or personnel with specific areas of expertise (finance and
accounting, personnel, technical experts) should be involved in the long-term
planning effort should involve leadership at the highest ranks and across facilities
and divisions due to the wide-ranging implications to the OCSD jail system.

Strategy for Ongoing Quality Control in the Jails
While the OCJAP may serve to bring correctional practices in alignment with
statutes, regulations, policies in the jail along with the introduction of correctional
best practices. A higher calling and challenge is to establish a systematic
112

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

method of maintaining competent and high quality services over time. The
process described in this section presumes that the Custody Operations
Command will engage in a formalized system of operational review and
maintenance of quality service in the jail system. An ongoing jail system
assessment is defined as an analytical process that systematically examines
system wide and jail specific needs both short and long-term. More simply stated
it is a process to insure a culture of continuous improvement.
Focus of the Formal Ongoing Assessment of Jail Operations
An assessment can focus on:
a.)

system wide jail needs

b.)

a set of a particular jail related issues on the Custody Operations
Command focus

c.)

the individual needs of one of the jail facilities, formalizing a jail
assessment the OCSD will be able to:

Identify conditions that that may suggest a needed course correction or identify
excellent practices that should be replicated system wide. Serve as a forum for
identifying solutions to meet the goals and objectives of Custody Operation
Command, identify the need for a new or revised policies and procedures,
administrative needs and funding issues, evaluation of service providers,
changes in laws and regulations, etc.
Outcome of a Jail Assessment Can Suggest Multi-Year Planning
When an agency conducts a jail assessment and concludes that changes in the
operation of the jail are needed, it may be determined that the department does
not have all of the resources to do all of the changes desirable in a single year.
In this case, the Sheriff’s Department must set multi-year priorities about the
conditions most important to address within the fiscal year, which ones can be
addressed the next year and which ones will have to wait for following years.
Thus, agencies often make multi-year decisions about the outcome of a jail
assessment. Therefore, it is important to continually re-visit the “old” list of needs
and consider it in the light of new needs that may have emerged since it was
developed, perhaps two or three years earlier. This is anything but a static
approach but rather acknowledges the need for fluidity with regard to
prioritization and planning.
The Jail Assessment Can Contribute to the Strategic Direction of Jail
Policies.
The requirement inherent in the management and the delivery of jail services has
the task of securing needed resources for current efforts and for meeting the
long-term goals of the OCSD in the delivery of those services. The task includes
developing strategies that meet and support the OCSD organizational needs,
security and safety and of course the needs of the public at large.

113

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

The ongoing jail assessment will drive an examination of the issues facing the
Custody Operations Command, vis-à-vis the development and execution of a
formal inspection process. The examination must focus the issues as they relate
to current, planned activities and future needs. It may often be a multi-year effort
and include all jail facilities and other divisions in the department.
The relationship between the jail assessment and the organization’s needs must
be clear. The development of a long term formal jail assessment process must
include a futures look that recognizes change and is viewed as a planned
intervention. In the end, for Custody Operations Command’s efforts to be
effective, it has to be anchored in goals set by the organization and partners in
the effective operation of the jail system.
The Jail Assessment and its Relationship to Effective Jail Management
The procedures and formats described here are predicated on a rational decision
making process by the Custody Operations Command, focusing on careful
judgments about assessing needs and where to aim the resources (time, staff,
and funds) for the maximum benefit of jail system, the department and the
community.
When resources involving jail needs are scarce, conducting needs assessment,
however formal or informal, is essential to make decisions about where to aim
the interventions and the expenditure of funds. Sometimes these assessments
are a system wide effort and yet other times it can focused on a definable need
or specific range of needs. The following are several examples of different
approaches to conducting a jail assessment:
Approaches to Conducting a Jail Assessment
Performance Analysis
Performance analysis attempts to discover discrepancies between expected
levels of performance and actual levels of performance. This analysis focuses
on the question; are practices in the jail meeting the mission of the Custody
Operations Command and the OCSD, is policies, procedures and the execution
of those policies in alignment with statutes, regulations and court orders?
One-to-One Interviews
Carefully planned interviews, held with the promise of confidentiality can produce
valuable information about how people are thinking about the operation of the
jail, thereby providing clues about which issues or conditions might be targeted.
Group Approaches
Questionnaires are used to solicit information from groups of people and are
valid assessment tools if they ask the right questions. Questionnaires that query
people about “What’s going on here that might lend itself to better jail
operations?” produce more enlightened information about where to aim the
program resources.

114

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Staff Debriefing
Debriefing of staff periodically, especially after an emergency operation or
incident, can produce clues about the performance in the jail and can identify
gaps that may be addressed by jail managers.
Findings during Inspections
The OCSD jail facilities and programs are subject to a variety of administrative
inspections (Command Staff, Corrections Standards Authority, Grand Jury,
correctional advocates). The preferred method of conducting annual inspections
is an iterative process that identifies ongoing issues in the operation of the jail
system. It is an ongoing program that focuses more on creating an atmosphere
of stewardship concerning jail operations.
The formal iterative process described here examines each jail and their linkage
to current legal statutes, regulations and court orders and best correctional
practices. The iterative process evaluates each required activity for current
relevance, validity and cost-benefit of implementation. This formal assessment
process involves jail administrators, managers, staff and compliance inspectors
and promotes creativity and critical thinking in the ongoing provision of required
jail functions.

1
Pre Assessment

v'.yI'6.'"".'

8~~

Polld",'"O
Po';<1",'"o
p,oooo",\
P'oooo",\

••port
.,port

7

I To

Custody

O~ralions

\

\
\ ,

Dev.'op
oe",o.
Plans

Flnariclals
Flnancials

)

~~

C'
G' "'AIL AS-:'ft:;.
AS~<t;;

"'''''L

Plans
Recomme'n~atlons
Recomme~n~atlons

port
6 ••
.,.ort

Record
Re<!ord

Keeping

PROCESS

~

~

conduct
conou"

OnSlght
Onsight
Inspection
Inte'iVie'WS
IntervieWS
Surveys

5
115

3

Review
R.vi~w of

ANNUAL
INSPECTION

C&mmand
cclmmand

2

Review of

Monitor

A

••v'.wof
.'.',wof
Goals'and

Goals'and
Bencllmarks

~

~

4

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

The Process involves an ongoing inspection of each jail facility as a part of the
larger process of managing the jail. Therefore, jail managers, program managers
and staff can identify issues involving the jail on a continuous basis and apply
additional resources or determine if a realignment of service delivery as a part of
the more formal inspection process is warranted. It can and should confirm when
things are going as planned. The concept here is that the jail is a dynamic
environment that needs the constant attention of the Custody Operations
Command. Establishing this concept of continual inspection gets to the heart of
a basic management and supervision principal that is quite simply stated, “That,
which is inspected, is equal to that which can be expected.”
The next part of the jail assessment process is an 8-point annual inspection
conducted by JCATT or other task group charged with quality control. It is
suggested that this process be executed in the following order:
Pre-Assessment Briefing – The pre-assessment briefing should begin
with a meeting of all of the facility managers, key program staff and
services providers. The pre-assessment briefing will signal the
management team and stakeholders that the inspection of individual or
entire jail system is about to begin. The individual(s) conducting the
assessment will need to advise key personnel of the areas that they will
be inspecting so that the appropriate materials will be brought up to date
and made available to the assessment team. This pre-assessment
briefing gives jail managers the opportunity to engage in the process. The
goal here is not to surprise but rather encourage stewardship of the jail
system.
Policy Review – A review of all the jail policies and procedures is
necessary to ensure that those policies are up to date and accurately
reflect the requirements and activities related to jail operation. We
strongly recommend using Title 15, California Code of Regulations and
guidelines as the baseline for measuring effectiveness of jail operations.
Any discrepancies or updating that needs to be accomplished should be
documented and delivered to the responsible jail management team and
the Assistant Sheriff in charge of the Custody Operations Command.
Record Review - A review of the records kept that support jail activities
and financials should be reviewed to insure that contractual benchmarks
are being met and that any discrepancies are documented and reported
as a part of the assessment report. The CSA Jail Profile Survey and
internal statistical data can provide insight on the jail both in a detailed
fashion and from the 30,000 foot view.
Benchmark Review - A review of the goals and benchmarks should be
discussed with jail managers, program managers and other key providers
of programs. This will provide an opportunity to identify any areas that
might require a course correction, additional resources or reflect
successful performance that at a minimum should be acknowledged and
often replicated.
Onsite Inspections - The assessment team should conduct on-site
inspections of all jail facilities in order to determine if the activities in the
jail are in alignment with what is documented and to note any
116

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

discrepancies that should be reported as a part of the jail assessment or
alert managers to exceptional efforts on the part jail management and
staff. The on-site inspection should also include a checklist as a part of
the inspection process. We recommend that the Title 15, CCR. Policy
and Security Check Lists, contained in the Appendix of this report, be
used in order to provide consistency, validity and reliability. It is important
that the jail assessments be viewed as a credible measurement
instrument as many issues identified in the jail assessment may require
significant funding. Additionally, internal recommendations, for a variety
of reasons are viewed as less credible by policy makers; therefore a
defensible methodology will go a long way in providing information that
engenders a high degree of trust.
Develop an Action Plan - After the fact finding described in steps 1-5
have been accomplished, notes, records, recommendations should be
analyzed and an action plan should be developed to initiate a course
correction. Documenting successful areas is important to determine if
they can be replicated in other areas.
Reporting - A report is presented to the Assistant Sheriff in charge of the
Custody Operations Command describing the results of the inspection
and identifies action plans necessary to ensure continuous improvement
in the application and management of the jail system. Completed staff
work is necessary in this report to identify costs, policy revisions and any
other administrative requirements that may be necessary.
Monitor Progress - Once the Assistant Sheriff approves the jail
assessment then follow-up is required to insure that approved
recommendations are being instituted by the responsible program
providers.
The iterative process is then repeated from year to year so that the
evaluation and assessment of the jails are kept in check and
appropriately attended to. The process is ongoing in a circular fashion
with a goal of continual improvement of the custody operation.
Less Formal Approaches
Lastly, many less formal approaches to learning about issues related to operation
of the jail are encouraged for jail and program managers. These informal
approaches are linked to the ongoing inspection indicated in the formal iterative
process. We would not want to diminish, in any way, the effective informal
approaches that involve observations of daily jail activities accomplished by
walking around, and informal conversations. Any method of learning either what
is in need of improvement, or a successful operation, where there might be
missed opportunities, or where there are gaps in an organization are valid
assessment tools which can frequently suggest appropriate places to aim effort
and program resources.

117

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Appendix B – OCJAP Personnel
William J. Crout - Retired Deputy Director California Board of Corrections.
Former Captain, San Luis Obispo County Sheriff's Department. 40-Years Law
Enforcement and Corrections Experience.

James C. Sida - Retired Deputy Director California Board of Corrections.
Former Commander, Kern County Sheriff's Department. 33-Years Law
Enforcement and Corrections Experience.

Kenneth Kipp - Retired Chief Deputy, Ventura County Sheriff's Department
with Administrative Responsibility of the Ventura County Jail System. 34-Years
Law Enforcement and Corrections Experience.

Norman L. "Norm" Hurst - Retired Chief Deputy, San Bernardino County
Sheriff's Department with Administrative Responsibility of the San Bernardino
County Jail System. 34-Years Law Enforcement and Corrections Experience.

John E. Vander Horck - Retired Commander, Orange County Sheriff's
Department with Administrative Responsibility in the Orange County Jail
System. 36-Years Law Enforcement and Corrections Experience.

Bob Dotts – Retired Assistant Sheriff, Riverside County Sheriff’s Department
with Administrative Responsibility of the Riverside County Jail System. 34-Years
Law Enforcement and Corrections Experience.

118

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Appendix C – Policy Assessment Checklist
Facility Name:

Date

Persons Interviewed

Associate(s)

19

Title 15, CCR., Section 1020 - CORRECTIONS OFFICER CORE COURSE
In addition to provisions of Penal Code Section 831.5, all custodial personnel have
completed the “Corrections Officer Core Course” as described in Section 179 of Title 15,
CCR. Custodial personnel may substitute 832.3 PC training and the “Corrections Officer
Basic Academy Supplemental Core Course” as described in Section 180, Title 15, CCR
as an alternative.
 Yes
 No
Recommendations:
Title 15, CCR. Section 1021 - JAIL SUPERVISORY TRAINING
All supervisory custodial personnel have attended the 80 hour STC or POST supervisory
training.
In addition, they have completed the “Corrections Officer Core Course” identified in
Section 1020 or the “Jail Management Supplemental Training” identified in Section 1023
of these regulations.
In addition, they have completed the “Corrections Officer Core Course” identified in
Section 1020 or the “Jail Management Supplemental Training” identified in Section 1023
of these regulations.
 Yes
 No
Recommendations:
Title 15, CCR., Section 1023 - JAIL MANAGEMENT TRAINING
All jail management personnel have completed either the POST or the STC management
course specified in Section 182, Title 15, CCR.
 Yes

 No

Recommendations:

Title 15, CCR., Section 1025 - CONTINUING PROFESSIONAL TRAINING
With the exception of any year that a core training module is completed, all facility/system
administrators, managers, supervisors and custody personnel complete the annual
required training specified in Section 184, Title 15, CCR.
 Yes

 No

Recommendations:

19

For STC participating agencies, the STC Division annually assesses consistency with training sections 1020,
1021, 1023 & 1025. Unless otherwise indicated, the regulatory intent is for training to occur within one year
from the date of assignment.

119

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Title 15, CCR., Section 1027 - NUMBER OF PERSONNEL
There are sufficient personnel on duty at all times (whenever there is an inmate in
custody) to ensure the implementation and operation of all programs and activities
required by these regulations.
There is a written plan that includes the documentation of hourly safety checks.
There is at least one employee on duty at all times with the ability to respond to any
inmate in the event of an emergency (male and/or female; PC § 4021).
A staffing plan is available which indicates personnel assigned and their duties.
Inadequacies in the staffing plan are reported, in writing, with recommendations to the
local jurisdiction having fiscal responsibility.
 Yes

 No

Recommendations:
20

Title 15, CCR., Section 1029 - POLICY AND PROCEDURES MANUAL
There is a published manual of policies and procedures for the facility that addresses
applicable regulations and includes:
Table of organization, including channels of communications.
Inspections and operations reviews by the facility administrator/manager.
Use of force.
Use of restraint equipment.
Screening newly received inmates for release per Penal Code Sections 849(b)(2) and
853.6, and any other such processes as the administrator is empowered to use for release.
Security and control, including:
Physical counts of inmates.
Searches of the facility and inmates.
Contraband control and key control.
At least annually the facility administrator reviews, evaluates, and documents internal and
external security measures.
Emergency procedures, including:
Fire suppression pre-plan as required by Section 1032 of these regulations.
Escape, disturbances, and the taking of hostages.
Civil disturbance.
Natural disasters.
Periodic testing of emergency equipment.
Storage, issue and use of weapons, ammunition, chemical agents, and security devices.
Suicide prevention; and,
Segregation of inmates.
The manual is available to all employees.
The manual is updated annually.
 Yes

 No

Recommendations:

20

Procedures related to security and emergency response may be in a separate manual to ensure
confidentiality by limiting general access.

120

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Title 15, CCR., Section 1032 - FIRE SUPPRESSION PREPLANNING
Pursuant to Penal Code Section 6031.1, there is a fire suppression pre-plan that has been
developed in consultation with the responsible fire authority and includes:
Monthly fire and life safety inspections by facility staff with a two-year retention of the
inspection record.
Fire prevention inspections as required by Health and Safety Code Section 13146.1(a) and
(b).
An evacuation plan.
• A plan for the emergency housing of inmates in the event of a fire.
 Yes

 No

Recommendations:

Title 15, CCR., Section 1040 - POPULATION ACCOUNTING
The facility maintains an inmate demographics accounting system, which reflects the
monthly average daily population of sentenced and unsentenced inmates by categories
of male, female, and juvenile.
The Jail Profile Survey information is provided to the CSA.
 Yes
 No
Recommendations:
Title 15, CCR., Section 1041 - INMATE RECORDS
There are written policies and procedures for the maintenance of appropriate individual
inmate records which include intake information, personal property receipts, commitment
papers, court orders, reports of disciplinary action taken, medical orders issued by the
responsible physician and staff response, when appropriate, and non-medical information
regarding disabilities and other limitations.
 Yes
 No
Recommendations:
Title 15, CCR., Section 1044 - INCIDENT REPORTS
There are written policies and procedures for the maintenance of written records of all
incidents that result in physical harm, or serious threat of physical harm, to an employee,
inmate or other person. Such records include names of persons involved, a description
of the incident, actions taken, and date and time of the occurrence.
Written record is prepared by appropriate staff and submitted within 24 hours of the
incident.
 Yes

 No

Recommendations:

Title 15, CCR., Section 1045 - PUBLIC INFORMATION PLAN
The facility has suitable written policies and procedures for the dissemination of
information to the public, government agencies and news media.
Title 15, CCR, Minimum Standards for Local Detention Facilities is available for review by
the public and inmates.
Facility rules and procedures affecting inmates as specified in this section are available to
the public and inmates.
 Yes

 No

Recommendations:

121

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Title 15, CCR., Section 1046 - DEATH IN-CUSTODY
Written policy and procedures assure that there is a review of each in-custody death. The
review team includes the facility administrator and/or manager; the health administrator; the
responsible physician; and other health care and supervision staff who are relevant to the
incident.
When a minor dies in a facility, the administrator of the facility provides the Corrections
Standards Authority with a copy of the death in-custody report that is submitted to the
Attorney General under Government Code Section 12525, within 10 days of the death.
 Yes

 No

Recommendations:

Title 15, CCR., Section 1050 - CLASSIFICATION PLAN
The facility has a written classification plan designed to properly assign inmates to
housing units and activities.
Includes receiving screening performed at intake by trained personnel.
Includes maintenance of a record of each inmate's classification level, housing
restrictions and housing assignments.
The facility has an actively functioning classification system and/or classification
committee as specified.
 Yes

 No

Recommendations:

Title 15, CCR., Section 1051 - COMMUNICABLE DISEASES
All inmates with suspected communicable diseases are segregated until a medical
evaluation can be completed.
In absence of medically trained personnel at the time of intake into the facility, an inquiry
is made to determine if the inmate has or has had any communicable diseases, or has
observable symptoms of communicable diseases, including but not limited to tuberculosis
or other airborne diseases, or other special medical problems identified by the health
authority.
Inmate's response is noted on booking form and/or screening device.
 Yes

 No

Recommendations:

Title 15, CCR., Section 1052 - MENTALLY DISORDERED INMATES
There are written policies and procedures for the identification and evaluation of all
mentally disordered inmates. An evaluation by health care staff occurs within 24 hours of
identification or at the next daily sick call, whichever is earliest. Segregation is used only
to protect the safety of the inmate or others.
There are provisions for transfer of such inmates to a medical facility for diagnosis,
treatment, and evaluation of such suspected mental disorder, pursuant to Section 1209,
Title 15, CCR.
 Yes

 No

Recommendations:

122

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Title 15, CCR., Section 1053 - ADMINISTRATIVE SEGREGATION
There are written policies and procedures that provide for administrative segregation of
inmates who are determined to be prone to: escape; assault staff or other inmates;
disrupt operations of the jail; or, are likely to need protection from other inmates.
The administrative segregation consists of separate and secure housing with no
deprivation of privileges other than those necessary to obtain the objective of protecting
inmates and staff.
 Yes

 No

Recommendations:

Title 15, CCR., Section 1055 - USE OF SAFETY CELL
A safety cell, specified in Title 24, Section 2-470A.2.5, is used only to hold inmates who
display behavior that results in the destruction of property or reveals an intent to cause
physical harm to self or others.
There are written policies and procedures, written by the facility administrator in
cooperation with the responsible physician, governing safety cell use.
Safety cells are not used for punishment or as a substitute for treatment.
Placement requires the approval of the facility manager or Watch Commander, or a
physician delegated by the facility manager.
There are written procedures that assure necessary nutrition and fluids are administered.
Inmates are allowed to retain sufficient clothing, or are provided with a “safety garment”
to provide for personal privacy unless risks to the inmate's safety or facility security is
documented.
Direct visual observation is conducted at least twice every 30 minutes and is
documented.
Continued retention of inmate is reviewed a minimum of every eight hours.
A medical assessment is secured within 12 hours of placement in this cell or at the next
daily sick call, whichever is earliest, and medical clearance for continued retention is
secured every 24 hours thereafter.
A mental health opinion on placement and retention is secured within 24 hours of
placement.
 Yes

 No

Recommendations:

123

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Title 15, CCR., Section 1056 - USE OF SOBERING CELL
A sobering cell, specified in Title 24, Section 2-470A.2.4, is used only for holding inmates
who are a threat to their own safety or the safety of others due to their state of
intoxication. There are written policies and procedures for managing the sobering cell,
including handling both males and females.
Intermittent direct visual observation of inmates in sobering cells conducted no less than
every half hour.
An evaluation by a medical staff person or by custody staff, pursuant to written medical
procedures in accordance with Section 1213 of these regulations, occurs whenever any
inmate is retained in a sobering cell for more than six hours.
Such inmates are removed from the sobering cell when they are able to continue with
processing.
 Yes

 No

Recommendations:

Title 15, CCR., Section 1057 - DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED INMATES
There are written procedures for identification and evaluation of all developmentally
disabled inmates. Any special housing is initiated when it is determined to be necessary
pursuant to Section 1050, CCR.
A contact to the regional center occurs within 24 hours when an inmate is suspected or
confirmed to be developmentally disabled.
 Yes

 No

Recommendations:

Title 15, CCR., Section 1058 - USE OF RESTRAINT DEVICES
Restraints are used only to hold inmates who display behavior that results in the
destruction of property or reveals intent to cause physical harm to self or others.
Restraints are not used as discipline or as a substitute for treatment.
There are written policies and procedures for the use of restraint devices including
acceptable restraint devices; signs or symptoms which should result in immediate
medical/mental health referral; availability of CPR equipment; protective housing of
restrained persons; provisions for hydration and sanitation needs; and exercising of
extremities.
Inmates are placed in restraints only with approval of the facility manager, Watch
Commander, or if delegated, a physician.
All inmates in restraints are housed alone or in a specified area for restrained inmates.
Direct visual observation is conducted and logged at least twice every 30 minutes.
Continued retention in such restraints is reviewed every two hours.
A medical opinion on placement and retention shall be secured as soon as possible but
no later than four hours from the time of placement.
Medical review for continued retention in restraint devices occurs at a minimum of every
six hours.
A mental health consultation is secured as soon as possible, but no later than eight hours
from the time of placement.
124

November 18, 2008

 Yes

 No

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Recommendations:

Title 15, CCR., Section 1059 - USE OF REASONABLE FORCE TO COLLECT DNA
SPECIMENS, SAMPLES, IMPRESSIONS
Pursuant to Penal Code Section 296, policy and procedures describe the use of reasonable
force to collect blood specimens, saliva samples, or thumb/palm print impressions from
individuals who are required to provide them, but refuse written or oral requests to do so.
The use of reasonable force is preceded by documented efforts to secure voluntary
compliance, including advisement of the legal obligation to provide the specimen, sample
or impression, and the consequences of failing to do so.
Supervisory authorization is obtained prior to use of reasonable force.
If the use of reasonable force includes cell extraction, the extraction is audio and
videotaped and retained by the department, as required by statute.
The facility administrator reports any use of reasonable force to the Corrections
Standards Authority within 10 days of the incident, in the format prescribed by the
Authority.
 Yes

 No

Recommendations:

Title 15, CCR., Section 1061 - INMATE EDUCATION PROGRAM
Facility administrator has planned and requested an inmate education program from
appropriate public officials.
Voluntary academic and/or vocational education is available to sentenced and pretrial
inmates.
 Yes

 No

Recommendations:

Title 15, CCR., Section 1062 - VISITING
Facility administrator has developed and implemented policies and procedures for inmate
visiting.
(TYPE II ONLY)
All inmates in Type II facilities are allowed at least two visits totaling at least one hour per
week.
(TYPE III ONLY)
Inmates in Type III facilities are allowed at least one visit totaling at least one hour per
week.
Visitation procedures include provisions for visitation by minor children of the inmate.
 Yes

 No

Recommendations:

125

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Title 15, CCR., Section 1063 - CORRESPONDENCE
The facility administrator has developed written policies and procedures for inmate
correspondence. The policy and procedures provide that:
There is no limitation placed on the volume of mail an inmate may send or receive.
Mail may be read where there is a valid security reason and the facility manager
approves.
Confidential correspondence with officials, the Corrections Standards Authority, the
facility administrator and/or manager is permitted. Confidential mail searches for
contraband, cash, checks, or money orders are conducted in the presence of the inmate.
Inmates without funds are permitted at least two postage-paid letters each week to family
and friends, and unlimited postage-paid correspondence with his/her attorney and the
courts.
 Yes

 No

Recommendations:

Title 15, CCR., Section 1064 - LIBRARY SERVICES
The facility has developed and implemented written policies and procedures for inmate
library service which include access to legal reference materials, current information on
community services and resources, religious, educational and recreational reading
material.
 Yes

 No

Recommendations:

Title 15, CCR., Section 1065 - EXERCISE AND RECREATION
There are written policies and procedures regarding exercise and recreation.
An exercise and recreation program is available to inmates in an area designed for
recreation.
The program allows a minimum of three hours of exercise distributed over a period of
seven days.
 Yes

 No

Recommendations:

Title 15, CCR., Section 1066 - BOOKS, NEWSPAPERS, AND PERIODICALS
There are written policies and procedures which permit inmates to purchase, receive and
read any book, newspaper, or periodical accepted by the United States Post Office
except for specified types of publications.
 Yes

 No

Recommendations:

Title 15, CCR., Section 1067 - ACCESS TO TELEPHONE
There are written policies and procedures that allow reasonable access to a telephone
beyond those telephone calls required by Section 851.5 PC.
 Yes

 No

Recommendations:

126

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Title 15, CCR., Section 1068 - ACCESS TO THE COURTS AND COUNSEL
The facility administrator shall develop written policies and procedures to ensure inmates
have access to the court and to legal counsel. Such access shall consist of:
unlimited mail as provided in Section 1063 of these regulations, and,
confidential consultation with attorneys.
 Yes

 No

Recommendations:

Title 15, CCR., Section 1069 - INMATE ORIENTATION
There are written policies and procedures for the implementation of a program
reasonably understandable to inmates designed to orient a newly received inmate at the
time of placement in a living area, covering areas specified in this section of the
regulations.
 Yes

 No

Recommendations:

Title 15, CCR., Section 1070 - INDIVIDUAL/FAMILY SERVICE PROGRAMS
The facility has written policies and procedures to facilitate cooperation with appropriate
public or private agencies for individual and/or family social service programs for inmates.
Such a program utilizes available community services and resources either by
establishing a resource guide or actual service delivery.
 Yes

 No

Recommendations:

Title 15, CCR., Section 1071- VOTING
Facility has written policies and procedures whereby the county registrar allows qualified
voters to vote in local, state, and federal elections pursuant to the elections code.
 Yes

 No

Recommendations:

Title 15, CCR., Section 1072 - RELIGIOUS OBSERVANCES
Facility has written policies and procedures to provide opportunities for inmates to
participate in religious services and counseling on a voluntary basis.
 Yes

 No

Recommendations:

Title 15, CCR., Section 1073 - INMATE GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE
Any inmate may appeal and resolve grievances relating to any condition of confinement.
Provision is made for resolving questions of jurisdiction within the facility. There are
written policies and procedures that address the following:
There is a grievance form or instructions for registering a grievance.
Grievances are resolved at lowest appropriate staff level.
There is provision for appeal to next level of review. Policy requires written reasons for
denial at each level of review. Provision is made for response in a reasonable time limit.
 Yes

 No

Recommendations:

127

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Title 15, CCR., Section 1080 - RULES AND DISCIPLINARY PENALTIES
Facility has established rules and disciplinary penalties to guide inmate conduct.
Rules are written and posted in housing units and booking area or issued to each inmate.
Verbal instructions are provided for inmates with disabilities that limit their ability to read,
illiterate inmates and others unable to read English, or material is provided in an
understandable form.
 Yes

 No

Recommendations:

Title 15, CCR., Section 1081 - PLAN FOR INMATE DISCIPLINE
The facility administrator has developed and implemented written policies and
procedures for inmate discipline, which address the following:
A designated subordinate, not involved in the charges, acts on all formal charges.
Minor acts of non-conformance or minor violations are handled informally by staff.
When there is loss of privileges, there is written documentation and a policy of review and
appeal to the supervisor.
Major violations and repetitive minor violations being handled as major violations are
referred to the disciplinary officer in writing by the staff member observing the act(s).
Inmate is informed of charges in writing.
A disciplinary hearing is held no sooner than 24 hours after the report has been
submitted to the disciplinary officer and the inmate served with a copy of charges. The
inmate may waive the 24-hour limitation.
Violation(s) acted on no later than 72 hours from the time the inmate is informed of the
charge(s) in writing unless waived by the inmate or for good cause.
The inmate is permitted to appear on his/her behalf at the time of the disciplinary
proceedings.
The facility manager or designee reviews all disciplinary actions taken.
The inmate is advised in writing of the action taken in the disciplinary proceedings.
Pending the disciplinary proceedings, the inmate may be removed from the general
population or program for specified reasons.
 Yes

 No

Recommendations:

Title 15, CCR., Section 1082 - FORMS OF DISCIPLINE
The degree of punitive actions taken by the disciplinary officer is directly related to the
severity of the rule infractions as specified in this section.
 Yes

 No

Recommendations:

128

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Title 15, CCR., Section 1083 - LIMITATIONS ON DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS
No inmate is continued on disciplinary isolation status beyond 30 consecutive days
without review by facility manager. Part of this review includes consultation with health
care staff. Such reviews continue at least every fifteen days thereafter until isolation
status has ended.
Disciplinary isolation cells have the minimum furnishings and space specified in Title 24,
Section 2-470A.2. Inmates are issued clothing and bedding as specified in Articles 12
and 13 of these regulations.
Disciplinary cell occupants who destroy bedding and/or clothing may be deprived of such
articles. The decision to deprive inmates of such articles is reviewed by the facility
manager or designee every 24 hours.
No inmates exercise the right of punishment over other inmates per Section 4019.5 PC.
A safety cell, as specified in Section 1055 of these regulations, or any restraint device is
not used for disciplinary purposes.
No inmate is deprived of implements necessary to maintain an acceptable level of
hygiene as specified in Section 1265.
Food is not withheld as a disciplinary measure.
Disciplinary isolation diet described in Section 1247 of these regulations is only utilized
for major violations of institution rules.
The facility manager approves the initial placement on the disciplinary isolation diet and
ensures that medical staff is notified.
In consultation with medical staff, the facility manager approves any continuation of the
diet every 72 hours after the initial placement.
Correspondence privileges are not withheld except where correspondence regulations
have been violated. Decision to withhold correspondence privilege is reviewed every 72
hours.
Access to courts and legal counsel is not suspended as a disciplinary measure.
 Yes

 No

Recommendations:

Title 15, CCR., Section - 1084 DISCIPLINARY RECORDS
A record of all disciplinary infractions and punishment administered per Section 4019.5
PC is maintained.
 Yes

 No

Recommendations:

129

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Appendix D – Security Assessment Checklist
Facility Name:

Date

Persons Interviewed

Associate(s)

1. Armory/Arsenal
 Outstanding

 Good

 Improvement
Needed

 Unsatisfactory

 Improvement
Needed

 Unsatisfactory

 Improvement
Needed

 Unsatisfactory

 Improvement
Needed

 Unsatisfactory

 Improvement
Needed

 Unsatisfactory

Comments/Recommendations:
2. Communications:
 Outstanding

 Good

Comments/Recommendations:
3. Contraband/Evidence Management
 Outstanding

 Good

Comments/Recommendations:
4. Inmate Counts – Safety Checks
 Outstanding

 Good

Comments/Recommendations:
5. Control Center Operations
 Outstanding

 Good

Comments/Recommendations:

130

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

6. Movement of Inmates
 Outstanding

 Good

 Improvement
Needed

 Unsatisfactory

 Improvement
Needed

 Unsatisfactory

 Improvement
Needed

 Unsatisfactory

 Improvement
Needed

 Unsatisfactory

Comments/Recommendations:
7. Fire Safety
 Outstanding

 Good

Comments/Recommendations:
8. Food Services Security/Safety
 Outstanding

 Good

Comments/Recommendations:
9. Hazardous Materials Management
 Outstanding

 Good

Comments/Recommendations:
10. Health/Medical Services Safety and Security
 Outstanding

 Good

 Improvement
Needed

 Unsatisfactory

 Improvement
Needed

 Unsatisfactory

 Improvement
Needed

 Unsatisfactory

 Improvement
Needed

 Unsatisfactory

Comments/Recommendations:
11. Inmate Classification #
 Outstanding

 Good

Comments/Recommendations:
12. Inmate Mail #
 Outstanding

 Good

Comments/Recommendations:
13. Inmate Housing
 Outstanding

 Good

Comments/Recommendations:
131

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

14. Inmate Visiting #
 Outstanding

 Good

 Improvement
Needed

 Unsatisfactory

 Improvement
Needed

 Unsatisfactory

 Improvement
Needed

 Unsatisfactory

 Improvement
Needed

 Unsatisfactory

 Improvement
Needed

 Unsatisfactory

 Improvement
Needed

 Unsatisfactory

 Improvement
Needed

 Unsatisfactory

 Improvement
Needed

 Unsatisfactory

Comments/Recommendations:
15. Sanitation - Environmental Health
 Outstanding

 Good

Comments/Recommendations:
16. Inmate Searches
 Outstanding

 Good

Comments/Recommendations:
17. Physical Plant Searches
 Outstanding

 Good

Comments/Recommendations:
18. Segregation and Special Housing
 Outstanding

 Good

Comments/Recommendations:
19. Tool Control
 Outstanding

 Good

Comments/Recommendations:
20. Inmate Worker Selection
 Outstanding

 Good

Comments/Recommendations:
21. Inmate Worker Assignments
 Outstanding

 Good

Comments/Recommendations:
132

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

22. Inmate Transportation
 Outstanding

 Good

 Improvement
Needed

 Unsatisfactory

 Improvement
Needed

 Unsatisfactory

 Improvement
Needed

 Unsatisfactory

 Improvement
Needed

 Unsatisfactory

 Improvement
Needed

 Unsatisfactory

 Improvement
Needed

 Unsatisfactory

 Improvement
Needed

 Unsatisfactory

 Improvement
Needed

 Unsatisfactory

Comments/Recommendations:
23. Key Control
 Outstanding

 Good

Comments/Recommendations:
24. Perimeter Security
 Outstanding

 Good

Comments/Recommendations:
25. Physical Plant
 Outstanding

 Good

Comments/Recommendations:
26. Post Orders
 Outstanding

 Good

Comments/Recommendations:
27. Release/Discharge
 Outstanding

 Good

Comments/Recommendations:
28. Emergency Planning
 Outstanding

 Good

Comments/Recommendations:
29. Laundry
 Outstanding

 Good

Comments/Recommendations:
133

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Appendix D1 – Security Assessment Anchor Points
Outstanding: The security item examined is well thought out and is expertly
documented. Staff at all levels is trained beyond what is required in the minimum
jail standards and can clearly articulate and successfully demonstrate the policy
and procedure or post order requirements of the item. Management and
supervisory staff are highly involved with the oversight of the item. Materials and
other resources associated with this item are complete, in stock and expertly
maintained. Facilities for this item (if applicable) are completely secure and meet
the needs of the staff in an optimal way. The overall status of security item can
be described as ideal and should be replicated in other facilities whenever
possible.
Good: The security item examined is adequately documented. Staff is trained
according to minimum standards and can almost always articulate and
demonstrate the policy and procedure or post order requirements of the item.
Management and supervisory oversight of the item is adequately accomplished
and deficiencies are aggressively pursued as a matter of continuous
improvement. Materials and other resources associated with this item are
satisfactorily maintained. Facilities for this item (if applicable) are secure and
meet security needs in a satisfactory way. The overall status of the security item
can be described as good and is above reproach.
Improvement Needed: The security item examined needs attention by
management staff and documentation needs to be improved. Training at all
levels is sporadic or ineffective and may not meet minimum jail standards. Staff
has difficulty describing the security goal and many cannot demonstrate the
policy and procedure or post order requirements of the item. Management and
supervisory oversight of the item is in need of attention. Materials associated
with this item are incomplete or missing and unevenly maintained. Facilities for
this item (if applicable) have security holes and only meet the needs of staff in
the performance of their security duties some of the time. The overall status of
the security item can be described as needing immediate attention by
management staff in order for conditions to improve.
Unsatisfactory: The security item examined needs immediate attention by
management staff and documentation needs to be improved. Training is
sporadic, ineffective or non-existent, a significant number of staff do not meet the
minimum training standards. More often than not, staff is unable to describe the
security goal and the majority of staff cannot demonstrate the policy and
procedure requirements or post order requirements of the item. Management
and supervisory oversight of the item is lax and in immediate need of attention.
Materials associated with this item are critically inadequate and are most often
incomplete or missing and rarely maintained. Facilities for this item (if applicable)
have critical security holes and most often do not meet security needs. The
overall status of security item can be described as wholly unsatisfactory needing
immediate attention and continuous improvement.

134

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Appendix E – Staffing Table
Orange County Sheriff’s Department
Staffing Assessment
Facility: ____________________________

POST

“A”
Shift

“B”
Shift

“C”
Shift

Total

135

S.R.F.

Number
of
Required
Positions

Notes

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Appendix E-1 – Annual Leave Table

Average Leave Time per Employee Class

CST
SCST

AL

AU

CT

LP

HOL

P2

WC

VT

SP

TRNG
(STC)

130.07

68.6

33.21

5.6

96

37.42

6.86

0

0

34.05

96.06

46.24

39.02

7.91

96

19.6

3.37

0

0

14.12

109.23

39.34

33.81

20.9

96

0

0.8

0

0

56.25

167.81

58

31.75

34

96

0

0

0

0

25.09

241.07

19.07

14.48

5.21

96

0

0

4.13

0.94

51.28

253.27

.46

0

30.8

96

0

0

4.04

0

62.87

N =167.76

SSO
N=88.37

DS I
N=422.09

DS II
N=194.42

SGT
N=63.86

Lt
N = 17.337

Key
AL = Annual Leave
AU = Unplanned Annual Leave
CT = Compensatory Time Off
LP = Leave with Pay
HOL= Holiday
P2 - PIP Leave
WC = Workman's Comp.
VT - Vacation Taken
SP - Sick Leave
TRNG = Training (minimum of 24 hours per person)

136

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Appendix E-2 – Shift Relief Factor Worksheets

Shift Relief Factor
Deputy Sheriff I
12 - Hour Shift Schedule - No Breaks
Leave Types per Deputy Sheriff I
A - Scheduled days off (44 X 52)

Hours
2288

B - Annual Leave

109.23

C - Unplanned Annual Leave

39.34

D - Compensatory Time Off

33.81

E - Leave with Pay

20.9

F - Holiday (12 holidays x 8 hours)

96

G - PIP Lv.

0

H - Workman's Comp.

0.8

I - Vacation

0

J - Sick Time

0

K - Training (24 hours STC annually minimum)

56.25
Total Hours Not Available

Base Hours 12 X 364

2644.33
4368

Hours Not Available

2644.33

Availability (base hours minus hours not available)

1723.67

12 Hour SRF (base hours/availability)

2.53

24 Hour SRF

5.06

N= 422.09

137

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Shift Relief Factor
Deputy Sheriff II
12 - Hour Shift Schedule - No Breaks
Leave Types per Deputy Sheriff II
A - Scheduled days off (44 X 52)

Hours
2288

B - Annual Leave

167.81

C - Unplanned Annual Leave

58

D - Compensatory Time Off

31.75

E - Leave with Pay

34

F - Holiday (12 holidays x 8 hours)

96

G - PIP Lv.

0

H - Workman's Comp.

0

I - Vacation

0

J - Sick Time

0

K - Training (24 hours STC annually minimum)

25.09
Total Hours Not Available

Base Hours 12 X 364

2700.65
4368

Hours Not Available

2700.65

Availability (base hours minus hours not available)

1667.35

12 Hour SRF (base hours/availability)

2.62

24 Hour SRF

5.24

N= 194.42

138

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Shift Relief Factor
Sergeant
12 - Hour Shift Schedule - No Breaks
Leave Types per Sergeant
A - Scheduled days off (44 X 52)

Hours
2288

B - Annual Leave

241.07

C - Unplanned Annual Leave

19.07

D - Compensatory Time Off

14.48

E - Leave with Pay

5.21

F - Holiday (12 holidays x 8 hours)

96

G - PIP Lv.

0

H - Workman's Comp.

0

I - Vacation

4.13

J - Sick Time

0.94

K - Training (24 hours STC annually minimum)

51.28
Total Hours Not Available

Base Hours 12 X 364

2720.18
4368

Hours Not Available

2720.18

Availability (base hours minus hours not available)

1647.82

12 Hour SRF (base hours/availability)

2.65

24 Hour SRF

5.30

N= 68

139

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Shift Relief Factor
Lieutenant
12 - Hour Shift Schedule - No Breaks
Leave Types per Lieutenant
A - Scheduled days off (44 X 52)

Hours
2288

B - Annual Leave

253.27

C - Unplanned Annual Leave

.46

D - Compensatory Time Off

0

E - Leave with Pay

30.8

F - Holiday (12 holidays x 8 hours)

96

G - PIP Lv.

0

H - Workman's Comp.

0

I - Vacation

4.04

J - Sick Time

0

K - Training (24 hours STC annually minimum)

62.84
Total Hours Not Available

Base Hours 12 X 364

2735.41
4368

Hours Not Available

2735.41

Availability (base hours minus hours not available)

1632.59

12 Hour SRF (base hours/availability)

2.68

24 Hour SRF

5.36

N= 17.34

140

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Shift Relief Factor
Sheriff's Special Officer
12 - Hour Shift Schedule - No Breaks
Leave Types per Sheriff's Special Officer

Hours

A - Scheduled days off (44 X 52)

2288

B - Annual Leave

96.06

C - Unplanned Annual Leave

46.24

D - Compensatory Time Off

39.02

E - Leave with Pay

7.91

F - Holiday (12 holidays x 8 hours)

96

G - PIP Lv.

19.6

H - Workman's Comp.

3.37

I - Vacation

0

J - Sick Time

0

K - Training (24 hours STC annually minimum)

14.12
Total Hours Not Available

Base Hours 12 X 364

2610.32
4368

Hours Not Available

2610.32

Availability (base hours minus hours not available)

1757.68

12 Hour SRF (base hours/availability)

2.48

24 Hour SRF

4.96

N= 88.37

141

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

November 18, 2008

Shift Relief Factor
Deputy Sheriff I
12 - Hour Shift Schedule - with Breaks
Leave Types per Deputy Sheriff I
A - Scheduled days off (44 X 52)

Hours
2288

B - Annual Leave

109.23

C - Unplanned Annual Leave

39.34

D - Compensatory Time Off

33.81

E - Leave with Pay

20.9

F - Holiday (12 holidays x 8 hours)

96

G - PIP Lv.

0

H - Workman's Comp.

0.8

I - Vacation

0

J - Sick Time

0

K - Training (24 hours STC annually minimum)

56.25
Total Hours Not Available

Base Hours 12 X 364

2644.33
4368

Hours Not Available

2644.33

Sub-Availability (base hours minus hours not available)

1723.62

Break Relief (sub-available hours / 12 hour shift X .5 hrs)
Availability

71.82
1651.85

12 Hour SRF (base hours/availability)

2.64

24 Hour SRF

5.28

N= 422.09

142

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

November 18, 2008

Shift Relief Factor
Deputy Sheriff II
12 - Hour Shift Schedule - with Breaks
Leave Types per Deputy Sheriff -II
A - Scheduled days off (44 X 52)

Hours
2288

B - Annual Leave

167.81

C - Unplanned Annual Leave

58

D - Compensatory Time Off

31.75

E - Leave with Pay

34

F - Holiday (12 holidays x 8 hours)

96

G - PIP Lv.

0

H - Workman's Comp.

0

I - Vacation

0

J - Sick Time

0

K - Training (24 hours STC annually minimum)

25.09
Total Hours Not Available

Base Hours 12 X 364

2700.65
4368

Hours Not Available

2700.65

Sub-Availability (base hours minus hours not available)

1667.35

Break Relief (sub-available hours / 12 hour shift X .5 hrs)
Availability

69.47
1597.88

12 Hour SRF (base hours/availability)

2.73

24 Hour SRF

5.46

N= 194.42

143

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

November 18, 2008

Shift Relief Factor
Sheriff's Special Officer
12 - Hour Shift Schedule - with Breaks
Leave Types per Sheriff's Special Officer

Hours

A - Scheduled days off (44 X 52)

2288

B - Annual Leave

96.06

C - Unplanned Annual Leave

46.24

D - Compensatory Time Off

39.02

E - Leave with Pay

7.91

F - Holiday (12 holidays x 8 hours)

96

G - PIP Lv.

19.6

H - Workman's Comp.

3.37

I - Vacation

0

J - Sick Time

0

K - Training (24 hours STC annually minimum)

14.12
Total Hours Not Available

Base Hours 12 X 364

2610.32
4368

Hours Not Available

2610.32

Sub-Availability (base hours minus hours not available)

1757.68

Break Relief (available hours / 12 hour shift X .5 hrs)
Availability

73.24
1684.44

12 Hour SRF (base hours/availability)

2.59

24 Hour SRF

5.18

N= 88.37

144

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

November 18, 2008

Shift Relief Factor
Deputy I
8 - Hour - 7 day Shift Schedule
Leave Types per Deputy I
A - Scheduled days off (16 X 52)

Hours
832

B - Annual Leave

109.23

C - Unplanned Annual Leave

39.34

D - Compensatory Time Off

33.81

E - Leave with Pay

20.9

F - Holiday (12 holidays x 8 hours)

96

G - PIP Lv.

0

H - Workman's Comp.

0.8

I - Vacation

0

J - Sick Time

0

K - Training (24 hours STC annually minimum)

56.25
Total Hours Not Available

1188.33

Base Hours 8 X 364

2912

Hours Not Available

1188.33

Availability

1723.67

8 Hour SRF (base hours/availability)

1.69

24 Hour SRF

5.07

N= 422.09

145

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Shift Relief Factor
Correctional Services Technician
10 - Hour (7 Day) Shift Schedule - No Breaks
Leave Types Correctional Services Technician
A - Scheduled days off (3x10x52 =)

Hours
1560

B - Annual Leave

130.07

C - Unplanned Annual Leave

68.6

D - Compensatory Time Off

33.21

E - Leave with Pay

5.6

F - Holiday (12 holidays x 8 hours)

96

G - PIP Lv.

37.42

H - Workman's Comp.

3.86

I - Vacation

0

J - Sick Time

0

K - Training (24 hours STC annually minimum)

34.05
Total Hours Not Available

Base Hours 10 X 364

1968.81
3640

Hours Not Available

1968.81

Availability (base hours minus hours not available)

1671.19

10 Hour SRF (base hours/availability)

2.18

24 Hour SRF

N/A

N= 167.76

146

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Shift Relief Factor
Deputy Sheriff I
10 - Hour (7 Day) Shift Schedule - No Breaks
Leave Types Deputy Sheriff I
A - Scheduled days off (3x10x52 =)

Hours
1560

B - Annual Leave

109.23

C - Unplanned Annual Leave

39.34

D - Compensatory Time Off

33.81

E - Leave with Pay

20.9

F - Holiday (12 holidays x 8 hours)

96

G - PIP Lv.

0

H - Workman's Comp.

0.8

I - Vacation

0

J - Sick Time

0

K - Training (24 hours STC annually minimum)

56.25
Total Hours Not Available

Base Hours 10 X 364

1916.33
3640

Hours Not Available

1916.33

Availability (base hours minus hours not available)

1723.67

10 Hour SRF (base hours/availability)

2.11

24 Hour SRF

N/A

N= 422.09

147

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Shift Relief Factor
Deputy Sheriff I
10 - Hour 4 Day Shift Schedule - No Breaks
8 - Hour 5 Day Shift Schedule - No Breaks
Leave Types Deputy Sheriff I
A - Scheduled days off

Hours
N/A

B - Annual Leave

109.23

C - Unplanned Annual Leave

39.34

D - Compensatory Time Off

33.81

E - Leave with Pay

20.9

F - Holiday (12 holidays x 8 hours)

96

G - PIP Lv.

0

H - Workman's Comp.

0.8

I - Vacation

0

J - Sick Time

0

K - Training (24 hours STC annually minimum)

56.25
Total Hours Not Available

Base Hours 52x40

356.33
2080

Hours Not Available

356.33

Availability (base hours minus hours not available)

1723.67

10 or 8 Hour SRF (base hours/availability)

1.21

24 Hour SRF

N/A

N= 422.09

148

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Shift Relief Factor
Sheriff's Special Officer
10 - Hour 4 Day Shift Schedule - No Breaks
8 - Hour 5 Day Shift Schedule - No Breaks
Leave Types Sheriff's Special Officer

Hours

A - Scheduled days off

N/A

B - Annual Leave

96.06

C - Unplanned Annual Leave

46.24

D - Compensatory Time Off

39.02

E - Leave with Pay

7.91

F - Holiday (12 holidays x 8 hours)

96

G - PIP Lv.

19.6

H - Workman's Comp.

3.37

I - Vacation

0

J - Sick Time

0

K - Training (24 hours STC annually minimum)

14.12

Total Hours Not Available

322.32

Base Hours 52x40

2080

Hours Not Available

322.32

Availability (base hours minus hours not available)

1757.68

10 or 8 Hour SRF (base hours/availability)

1.18

24 Hour SRF

N/A

N= 88.37

149

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Shift Relief Factor
Correctional Services Technician
10 - Hour 4 Day Shift Schedule - No Breaks
8 - Hour 5 Day Shift Schedule - No Breaks
Leave Types Correctional Services Technician
A - Scheduled days off

Hours
N/A

B - Annual Leave

130.07

C - Unplanned Annual Leave

68.6

D - Compensatory Time Off

33.21

E - Leave with Pay

5.6

F - Holiday (12 holidays x 8 hours)

96

G - PIP Lv.

37.42

H - Workman's Comp.

3.86

I - Vacation

0

J - Sick Time

0

K - Training (24 hours STC annually minimum)

34.05
Total Hours Not Available

Base Hours 52x40

408.81
2080

Hours Not Available

408.81

Availability (base hours minus hours not available)

1671.19

10 or 8 Hour SRF (base hours/availability)

1.24

24 Hour SRF

N/A

N= 88.37

150

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Appendix F – Jail Population/Trend Analysis

10-Year Trend in Non-sentenced Inmates,
Sentenced Inmates and Total ADP

3500
3000
2500
2000

Non-Sentenced
1500

Sentenced

1000
500
0
1997

1999

2001

2003

151

2005

2007

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

10-Year Trend in the ADP of
Felony vs. Misdemeanor Inmates

100%

Felony v. Misdemeanor
Inmate Population

73%

75%

64%

50%

36
27%
25%

0%
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 20042005
2004 2005 2006 2007

• Felony Inmate

• Misdemeanor Inmate

152

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Number of Inmates in Excess of ADP
On the Day of the Highest Inmate Count

8000
6664

7000
6000

6040
5429

5398

5188

5000

4938

4839

5130

6441

6717

5534

4000
3000
2000
1000
0
1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

153

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

10-Year Trend in the Number of
New Mental Health Cases Opened Each Month

4,000

Open Mental Health Cases
In the Orange County Jail
3,000

2,000

1,561

1,348

1,000

-

-

2002

-

I--

2003

-

I-

2004

154

-

-

2005

--

I-

2006

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

10-Year Trend in the Number of Unserved
Felony and Misdemeanor Warrants in Orange County

200000
180000

-

r---

160000

-

f--

f--

f--

f--

I--

I--

-

-

I--

I--

.,--

r-

-

I--

I--

"-"--

-

I--

I--

f--

f--

-

f
-f--

f--

f-f--

f-f--

-

f--

f--

140000
120000

-

100000 80000 60000
40000
20000

o

-

j

11

1997

-

-

i'"
r'"

] ] []
tJ

1999

2001

.....

...- -

-

-

I--

-

-

-

f--

-

f--

Felony

I'"
r-

tltI 1 II 11j
2003

155

2005

tI
2007

o Misd.

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

10-Year Trend in the Number of
Inmate Assaults on Staff per Quarter

60 - A
- r"-"-"-"------ ---------------------------,
Assaults on Staff

50 J
_1
---I .-1---------

40

-J.!----H----

30

-H---J.!--

20
10

o
1997 1998

1999 2000 2001

2002 2003

156

2004 2005 2006 2007

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

10-Year Trend in the Number of
Female Inmates in the Orange County Jail

14.00%

-r--~--

13.SOO4
13.SOO.4
13.0004
13.00".4
12.SOO4
12.SOO.4

12.00".4
12.0004
11.50%
11.SOO.4

11.00%
1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

157

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

November 18, 2008

Undocumented Aliens Housed
In the Orange County Jail

18.00-A.
18.00-.4

f-

.-

14.00%

-

12.00-A.
12.00-.4

f-

,.f--

-

f-

f--

-

f--

,....f--

f--

-

f--

~
f
--

-

l
f--

f--

-

f--

,....f--

-

-

l
f --

f
f--

-

f--

~
f
--

-

f--

2.00%
2.00-A.

-

l
f--

f-f
--

f-f
--

-

f--

-

f-f
--

0.00-.4
0.00-A.

-

'L.---

'--

'--

'--

-

'--

10.00%
8.00%

,-

Undocumented Aliens Housed In the Orange County Jail

16.00%

-

6.00%
4.00-.4
4.00-A.

1997

..-

1998

1999

2000

2001

158

2002

2003

,.r--

f-

f-

.-

2004

2005

f-

--

~

2006

-

f-

-

ff
-

-

c...,

2007

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Literature/Document Review
A
AB-900 Summary & Flow Chart
B
Budgets for Fiscal Year 2007-0228
C
California Code of Regulations, Title 15, Minimum Standards for
Local Detention Facilities
CCTV (Digital) Implementation Plan
Central Jail Complex (CJX) Public Information Plan
Central Jail Complex Recommendations for Implementation –
Post Chamberlain Incident
Central Men’s Jail Briefing Paper
Central Men’s Jail Staffing Numbers Document, not dated
Central Women’s Jail Briefing Paper
Central Women’s Jail Module Capacity, not dated
Chamberlain Case, Measures Related to the
CJX Briefing Sheet
CJX Recommendations for Immediate Implementation
Document, not dated
Commissary Layout
Commissary Sales by Source FY 07-08
Commissary Sales Graphic FY 2007-2008
Commissary Staff Schedule
Commissary Unit Averages
Correctional Officer Comparisons
Correctional Programs Inmate Orientation Brochure
Correctional Programs Listing
Correctional Programs Schedule Development
Correctional Programs Schedule, Dated 08/1/08
Correctional Programs Unit “Facts at a Glance” dated 2007
Corrections Officer Comparisons – Data Sheet
Corrections Programs Schedule Development – IRC Facility
Corrections Programs Schedule Development – Men’s Central
Jail
Corrections Programs Schedule Development – Musick Facility
Corrections Programs Schedule Development – Theo Lacy
Facility
Corrections Programs Schedule Development – Women’s jail
Facility
Corrections Standards Authority, Biennial and Physical Plant
Inspection Report – Orange County Jail Facilities - 2008
Court Operations – Central Justice Court – Yearly Jail Statistics
Court Operations – Harbor Justice Center – Cell Capacities
Court Operations – Harbor Justice Center – Factoid Sheet
Court Operations – Harbor Justice Center – Organization Chart
Court Operations – Lamoreaux Justice Center – Daily Watch List
Court Operations – Lamoreaux Justice Center – Detention
Statistics
159

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Court Operations CJC Yearly Statistics
CPR Report for OCSD Jail Operations, date 08/13/08
Cross Designation Program - ICE
Cross Designation Program (ICE)
Custody Officer – Job Description
Custody Officer Duty Statement
D
Digital CCTF Implementation Plan – Communications Division
Dyer House Layout and Floor Plan
E
Emergency Operations Procedures (EOP’s)
F
Facility Training Officer Manual
Field Training and Evaluation Program (FTEP) (for Deputy
Sheriff) School Outline
Fire Extinguisher Inspection and Maintenance Record – Central
Women’s Jail
Floor Plans – CJX – IRC, Men’s Jail, Women’s Jail
Floor Plans – James Musick Facility
Floor Plans – Theo Lacy Facility
Force, Use of Documents
G
H
Handout for Official Tours - CMJ
Handout for Official Tours - CWJ
Handout for Official Tours - IRC
Harbor Justice Center – Control Panel Replacement Proposal
Harbor Justice Center Briefing Document
Harbor Justice Center Cell Capacities
Harbor Justice Center Cell Layout
Harbor Justice Center Cell Organizational Chart
Housing Capacity by Module, dated 09/19/07, IRC and CMJ
I
Inmate Early Release Protocol
Inmate Programs Briefing Sheet
Inmate Records – Personnel Roster/Position Numbers
Inmate Records Staff Roster
Inmate Services and Reentry Briefing
Inmate Services Division - Overview
Inmate Services Division Program Matrix – Musick Facility
Inmate Services Division, Overview
Inmate Services Organization Chart
Inmate Welfare Expenditure Report to the Board of Supervisors,
02/26/08
Inmate Welfare Fund 2007 – 2008 Revenues (Pie Chart)
Inmate Welfare Fund Graphic 2007-2008 Revenues
In-Service Documents
Intake and Screening Triage Form F-272-26.1740 (revised 4/01)
Intake –Release Center Briefing Sheet
160

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Intake Release Center, Central Men’s Jail, Central Women’s Jail,
Overview
Intake Screening and Triage Form
J
Jail Commissary Order Slip – Men’s
Jail Commissary Order Slip – Women’s
Jail Commissary Order Slip (Male/Female)
Jail Operations Manual of Policy and Procedures JOM
Jail Operations Manual Pertaining to the Central Men’s Jail
Jail Operations Manual Pertaining to the Central Women’s Jail
Jail Operations Manual Pertaining to the Intake/Release Center
Jail Operations Manual Pertaining to the James Musick Facility
Jail Orgs Labor Report
Jail Orgs. Relief Factor Documents
Jail Overtime Usage FY 05-06, FY 06-07
Jail Profile Survey Data, An Analysis of The Orange County Jail
System
Jail Programs Description of Existing Classes/Programs
Jail Report 2008
Jail Safety Enhancements
Jail System Overview, Orange County Jail
Jail Use of Force Course Summary (Training)
Jail Use of Force Lesson Plan
James A. Musick Facility Orientation
James Musick Expansion Documents
JCATT Summary
K
L
Lamoreaux Justice Center Daily Watch List
Lawsuit Status Summary
Levels of Punishment for Major Rule Violations document,
undated and unsigned – Musick Facility
LPS – Correctional Mental Health Summary
M
Mental Health Services Jail Policy & Procedures Meeting
04/01/2008, Agenda
Module Control Logs, Electronic
MOU – General Unit
MOU – HCA and OCSD
MOU – SSO/Deputy Unit
MOU – Supervisory/Management Unit
Musick Division Summary
Musick Expansion Documents
N
National Institute of Corrections Assessment
O
Orange County Grand Jury Reports – 2006, 2007, 2008
Orange County Sheriff’s Department – Organization Chart - 2008
Orange County Sheriff’s Department Organization Chart
Overtime Report for 09-29-08
161

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Overview of the Orange County Jail System
P
Q
R
Reentry Partnership Info Sheet, Orange County
Research and Development Division – Proactive Assessments
S
Scott Air Pack Inspection and Maintenance Record – Central
Men’s Jail, 07/18/08
Scott Air Pack Inventory – Central Women’s Jail
Schedules – IRC, Men’s Central Jail, Women’s Jail
Schedule – James Musick Facility
Schedule – Theo Lacy Facility
Security Assessment for the Orange County Superior Court
Shake Down Log form J098.1 (Rev 04/99), Sample
Statistical Average Length of Stay (ALOS) Report for July 2008
T
Theo Lacy Facility, Overview
Theo Lacy Ariel Photograph
Theo Lacy Briefing Sheet
Theo Lacy CST Schedule
Theo Lacy Executive Summary Proposed Schedule Modification
Theo Lacy Personnel Schedule
Theo Lacy Revised 10-Sounty Watch Rotation
Theo Lacy Warehouse Requisition Form
Theo Lacy Watch List
Title 15 Safety Check Logs
Training Division Hourly/Curriculum Breakdown
Training Division Organization Chart
Training Division Staffing List
Training Records in Spreadsheet and Data Base Format
Transportation Bureau 7-Year Statistical Report
U
Use of Force – Jail Operations and Procedure Course Summary
Use of Force Training
V
Visiting Information Pamphlet for the Public – Musick Facility

W

Watch List – CJX – IRC, Men’s Central Jail, Women’s Jail
Watch List – James Musick Facility
Watch List – Theo Lacy Facility
Web Site, www.ocsd.org

X
Y
Z

162

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Appendix H – Scenario Drill/Evaluation/Instrument
Security Scenario – Drill and Evaluation Worksheet
Objective: This scenario is designed to test the policy awareness and response
capabilities of the management and staff of the jail facility. The specific
challenge involves the ability of duty staff to interface with support services
(medical) and outside regulatory agencies. Additionally, this scenario is designed
to test a multitude of activities and systems that may include but are not limited
to:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Command and control systems
Communication systems
Fire control procedures
Perimeter security
Inmate control
Operations recovery
Impact on facility staffing

Purpose: The purpose of this scenario drill is to provide general instruction to
management, supervisory and line staff regarding potential hazards in the jail,
methods of emergency communication, and protective actions that must be
carried out. Additionally, this drill is designed to engage staff and promote the
continuous improvement with the management of unusual occurrences. Live
action emergency scenarios serve to refine policies, procedures and unit orders,
as well as incorporate new ideas and lessons learned as a result of the drill.
Additional drill information will be included in the final Interim Reports.
Scenario: A complete scenario will be included as a part of each facility’s Interim
Report after the drill has been executed and evaluated
Scenario Enhancements: Additional scenario enhancements are provided to
custody managers and response evaluators to introduce at their discretion.

Evaluator Notes:

163

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Reviewers Guide
The following drill responses are presented to the Scenario Review Team for
consideration in determining the effectiveness of personnel, physical space, and
other systems challenged during the enactment of the emergency scenario.

Security Evaluation Item #1

Security Evaluation Item #2

Security Evaluation Item #3

Security Evaluation Item #4

Security Evaluation Item #5

164

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Appendix I - Acknowledgements
Despite the issues that we have identified in this assessment, we are very
pleased to report that there is a high level of Esprit de Corps among the men and
women serving in all of the jail facilities and bureaus that CSCJC assessed. We
noted that staff at every rank and discipline displays a can-do attitude no matter
what the adversity or circumstances placed before them.
During the course of the assessments we found staff to be energetic, helpful and
dedicated to their profession. We would further note that the executive and
managerial staff made it abundantly clear that they desired a straightforward
analysis of the Orange County Jail system with no punches pulled. We are
confident that the CSCJC team presented an honest evaluation that was
documented in detail in the Interim Reports and during conversations with staff at
all levels. In the final analysis the assessments developed by CSCJC have been
presented to and received by the OCSD in the spirit of continuous improvement
aimed at making a very good department operate even better.
Finally we need to acknowledge some of the OCSD staff that provided
exceptional cooperation and assistance during the OCJAP. Crout and Sida
Criminal Justice Consultants wish to thank the following individuals for their
assistance and cooperation in the development of this report.
Sheriff Sandra Hutchens
Undersheriff John Scott
Assistant Sheriff Mike James – Custody Operations Command
Assistant Sheriff J.B. Davis – Investigative Services Command
Executive Director Rick Dostal - Administrative Services Command

Director

Robert Beaver

Research & Development

Captain

Deana Bergquist

James A. Musick Facility

Captain

Timothy Board

CJX

Director of Inmate Services

Sharon Gibson Casler

Inmate Services

Captain

Brian Cossairt

Court Services

Captain

Jay La Fluer

Theo Lacy Facility

Director Financial Services

Jane Reyes

Sheriff’s Financial Services

Captain

W. David Wilson

Theo Lacy Facility

Captain

Catherine Zurn

Training

Lieutenant

Jerry Carlson

CJX

Administrative Manager

Tracy Carroll

CJX

Lieutenant

Roland Chacon

CJX

Lieutenant

Michael Colver

CJX

Lieutenant

Lloyd Downing

Theo Lacy Facility

165

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Lieutenant

Gil Garcia

Laguna Justice Center

Lieutenant

Dan Hake

Courts

Lieutenant

Michael Jansen

James A. Musick Facility

Lieutenant

Janet Lonich

James A. Musick Facility

Lieutenant

Rudy Mena

James A. Musick Facility

Lieutenant

Colin Murphy

Harbor Justice Center

Lieutenant

Lynn Nehring

Project Liaison Lieutenant

Lieutenant

Steve Szabo

James A. Musick Facility

Lieutenant

Stacey Taylor

CJX

Lieutenant

Mike Toledo

JCATT

Lieutenant

Don Torrentine

Theo Lacy Facility

Lieutenant

Drew Varela

Courts

Lieutenant

Jeff Bardik

Training

Captain

David Bautista

Orange County Fire Auth.

Sergeant

Kenna Addrade

Harbor Justice Center

Sergeant

Jim Bau

James A. Musick Facility

Sergeant

Kurt Bourne

Training Division

Sergeant

James Carroll

CJX

Sergeant

Rob Carter

Theo Lacy Facility

Sergeant

Max Chance

CJX

Sergeant

Chris Cormier

Theo Lacy Facility

Sergeant

D. Dunlap

Harbor Justice Center

Sergeant

Jack Gray

CJX

Sergeant

Alan Hanson

Central Justice Center

Sergeant

Dave Hartman

Theo Lacy Facility

Sergeant

Patrick Higa

CJX

Sergeant

Brian Irish

Theo Lacy Facility

Sergeant

R. Johnson

CJX

Sergeant

Ron Kennedy

CJX

Sergeant

Jeff McLain

Training Division

Sergeant

Mike Peters

Theo Lacy Facility

Sergeant

Wayne Rehnelt

Theo Lacy Facility

Sergeant

Robert Sima

North Justice Center

CST Supervisor

Ray Scruggs

Theo Lacy Facility

Sergeant

Curtis Wilson

Theo Lacy Facility

Sergeant

Rod Walker

Theo Lacy Facility

Sergeant

Greg Warner

CJX

166

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Sergeant

Russ Moore

James Musick Facility

Sergeant

Jeff McClain

Training

Deputy

Sean Dumas

Theo Lacy Facility

Deputy

Hadi Elali

Project Liaison Deputy

Deputy

Denise Fairchild

CJX

Deputy

Frankie Hoffman

CJX

Deputy

A.J. Patella

CJX

Deputy

Pete Ross

Theo Lacy Facility

Deputy

Sean Dumas

Theo Lacy Facility

Deputy

Tom Taylor

James Musick Facility

Deputy

Sherri Mullen

James Musick Facility

Medical/Mental Health

Sheryl Curl

CJX

Medical/Mental Health

Sandra Fair

CJX

Medical/Mental Health

Dee Dee Franks

CJX

Medical/Mental Health

Frank Miscione

Theo Lacy Facility

Medical/Mental Health

Nancy Redler

Theo Lacy Facility

Medical/Mental Health

Lupe Fowler

James Musick Facility

Medical/Mental Health

Maria Reinzo

James Musick Facility

Administrative Manager II

Greg Boston

Inmate Services

Administrative Manager I

Rod Debolt

Inmate Services

Programs Supervisor

Dominic Jejico

Inmate Services

Programs

Bridget Mack

Inmate Services

Programs

Greg Neitzel

Inmate Services

Administrative Manager II

Mary Ngayn

Inmate Services

Administrative Manager I

Tracy Zuber

Inmate Services

Vocational Instructor

James Collins

Inmate Services

Vocational Instructor

Doug Conwell

Inmate Services

Office Specialist

Debbie Irish

Theo Lacy Facility

Finance Specialist

Nicole Macias

Sheriff’s Financial Services

Executive Director

Rick Cryder

Angeles of Love

To the men and women of every rank, sworn and civilian, assigned to the Orange
County Jails, Administration and Support Services; your hard work, dedication, and
assistance to the Crout and Sida Assessment Team was greatly appreciated.
167

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Appendix J - High Performance Training
The “Role Call Training,” or “Short Interval Training,” model provides training to
staff in small chunks over time. Covering a wide range of topics selected by
management/supervisory and training staff and presented at designated roll call
briefings. Supervisory, or senior staff, serves as trainers of the 10 to 15 minute
sessions per topic. The overall training plan is published quarterly and a new
training topic is presented each day on every shift.
The topics are generally presented to staff as a scenario that would require the
specific knowledge contained in policy and procedures or unit orders. After
describing the scenario, the training leader would lead an interactive discussion
with staff concerning the critical issues involved in the scenario. Ultimately, the
instructor will make sure that all-important aspects of the topic are covered in the
critical issues segment of the presentation. A discussion follows the presentation
of critical issues and cover important aspects of the topic that may include a
question and answer session, short written test or practical performance test, e.g.
proper use of an SCBA.
This type of training intervention is particularly effective in covering “High RiskLow Frequency” problems. In other words activities that involves a potential
high-risk outcome (injury/death/liability) if the task is not performed correctly.
Furthermore, the incidents described are not frequently encountered. Other
advantages to this type of training are as follows:
•
•
•
•

•

The training provided is very pragmatic and deals with ongoing
performance issues in the facility.
Short interval training, that is repeated often, is a very effective method of
training adults (as opposed to longer training blocks).
Because supervisory staff serves as the primary trainers it forces those
supervisors to become an expert in the various topics and develops job
knowledge in order to be able to train on the topic.
Short interval training can include testing and at a minimum the
supervisor can identify areas of poor staff performance and make
adjustments to supervision as dictated by the results of the role call
training and how the training is applied on the job.
Short interval trainings are valuable in risk management, inasmuch as the
training can link regulations, policies, procedures, and unit orders with
performance by individuals working in the facility. A highly desirable
outcome of training is that the true evaluation of the effectiveness of
training occurs on the job. This establishes the nexus between training
and the desired performance. In other words, this type of training
effectively shifts the focal point of training to performance rather than
hours necessary to meet training standards. This is not meant to imply
that the hourly training benchmarks (Title 15, CCR) won’t be
accomplished, but rather the role call training may be viewed as a more
pragmatic training intervention.

168

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

After the initial time investment that occurs in the establishment of the training
plan and development of each topic the roll call training is relatively easy to
administer because the training coincides with the regular work dayshift, and
therefore negates the need to conduct elaborate scheduling and backfilling of
vacant positions. If an individual misses a topic or is off on vacation, it is not
necessary to conduct make up sessions, as the training topics are repetitive.
The roll call training also provides an opportunity for persons from outside the
division who are working on overtime in the facility to receive at least some
training on issues that relate to the particular facility. Lastly, a simple
rescheduling of training topics can easily accommodate issues that require an
immediate training intervention (new procedure created by a court order or in
response to a debriefing of a critical incident).
Roll call training is not meant to replace training that requires a more in-depth or
lengthy application of the instruction, e.g. weaponless defense, first aid/CPR, etc.
The OCSD already has time built in the shift structure for briefing; therefore no cost is
associated with presenting this training.
Additionally, it is recommended that the OCSD explore in cooperation with the
CSA, Standards and Training for Corrections Division opportunities that involve
the following:
•

Streamlined process of certifying roll call training modules, recording staff
attendance and receiving annual training credit for the presentation of
those modules.

•

Engage in a discussion about the use of STC subvention funding to offset
the cost of the shift overlap.

•

Consider the development of a pilot project for presentation to the CSA.

169

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Draft example of a monthly calendar of roll call training topics. Generally, the roll call
training schedule is published on a quarterly basis. Although only one month is
described in this example, a real world scenario would include training topics for each
day in the month of January, February and March.

Orange County Jail – Roll Call Training - March 2008
Sunday

Lock-Downs

Controlled
Responses

Fire
Procedures

Restraint
Devices
Leg Irons

Monday

Tuesday

Wednesday

Thursday

Friday

Saturday
Wristband
Searches

Cell
Searches

Inmate Count

Body Fluid
Precaution
Kits

Module
Activity
Log

MRSA
Precautions

Inmate
Complaint
Procedures

Personal
Property
Facility
Security

Emergency
Response
Paramedics

Main
Control
Orientation

Key Control

Restraint
Devices
Handcuffs

Evacuations

Earthquakes

Lock Downs

SCBA
Refresher

Armory
Orientation

Disaster
Medical
Procedures

Escape
After
Booking

Ethics
Values
Mission

Restraint
Devices
Waist
Chains

Use of
Force
Options

Verbal
Control
Options

170

Personal
Physical
Fitness

Suicide
Prevention

Inmate
Classification
System

Cell Checks
And Logs

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Draft Example of the Trainers Guide for One of the Training Topics
Normally, a trainer’s guide would contain lesson plans for each topic identified on
the calendar and over the period of one year 365 individual training interventions
could conceivably be presented. Some of the training interventions deemed
more critical can be offered up each quarter to provide repetitive training on the
topic.
Orange County Jail
March 1, 2008
Scenario: Cell Searches
Serious inmate on inmate assaults have been perpetrated in the jail that involve
prisoner made weapons that consist of a large construction nail that has been
sharpened and set into a plastic handle. Inmates in possession of these
weapons hold them in their clenched fists and cause serious puncture wounds
when the victim is punched with the closed fist of the perpetrator. The source of
the nails is unknown but it is believed that a contract worker left the nails in his
work area and inmate laborers gained access to them and passed them to other
inmates in sack lunches that are distributed to the general population.
Critical Issues:
Scenario - Large nails have been introduced into the inmate population, which
are now being used as weapons. At least two assaults have occurred in the past
month, one of which resulted in a very serious injury to the eye of one of the
victims.
Contraband that is used to produce weapons results in a serious breach of jail
security and poses a very serious threat to inmates and staff. Injuries as a result
of jail made weapons exposes the Orange County Jail to:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Civil Liability
Costs associated with medical treatment
Loss of staff due to injuries
Public scrutiny and criticism
Possible disciplinary actions
Loss of peace of mind due to a lack of safety
Inmates who defeat our security systems in turn defeat us
Sheriff’s personnel staff hate to lose

When should cell searches be conducted?
1. When information is received from informants or other credible sources
2. Frequent and random cell searches
What elements of pre-planning of cell searches should be considered?
1. Identify who will be engaged in the search and each person’s respective
roles. Make sure the shift supervisor is in the loop.
171

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

2. Discuss the plan and make sure that everyone involved clearly
understands, the, who, what and when of the search.
a. Identify a search leader.
b. Identify where inmates will be temporarily housed during the
search.
3. Collect and have ready any tools or equipment that will be needed in the
search, e.g. safety equipment, gloves, mirrors, probes, trash bags.
4. Any other issues unique to the search. Will the search be videotaped?
Identify 3 safety practices that should be employed during cell searches to
prevent injury.
1. Be methodical and work slowly enough as to avoid injury by sharp objects
that might be secreted in mattresses, blankets, bags, or in trash.
2. Never run your hands or fingers in places that you cannot see. Use
mirrors and probing devices. Always wear gloves.
3. Be mindful of sanitation and avoid contamination by biohazards and or
unclean surfaces. Report incident when personnel who are engaged in
the search are exposed to biohazards or are cut or suffer puncture
wounds immediately.
Describe actions relating to required documentation when a search is
conducted.
1. Log entry is made identifying when, where and who conducted the
search. Log when the search has concluded and any action taken as a
result of the search.
2. Write an incident report when contraband that has been fashioned as a
weapon has been discovered. Discard contraband according to policy
and procedures.
3. Notify the shift supervisor when items of contraband are discovered and
the follow-up action that was taken relative to the search.
Once the search has been conducted identify what other activities should
be accomplished while the inmate is out of the cell or housing area.
1. Discard excessive materials that pose health and fire safety risk
2. Clear away any material that prevents the custody staff’s ability to
effectively observe the housing area, e.g. covered light fixtures, materials
hanging from the bars or obstructing the view of the cell.
3. To the extent possible leave the inmates personal property allowed by jail
policy intact and undamaged.
What documents are available to you in providing guidance in the conduct
of cell searches?
• County Jail Policy Manual
• Jail Unit Orders
• Title 15, California Code of Regulations
• California Penal Code
172

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

Testing – At the conclusion of each training session the supervisor must develop
some type of testing. Testing documents demonstrate that there has been a
transfer of knowledge and focus on individuals who may need additional training,
remediation and/or close supervision. The following are some suggestions for
training activities:
•

•
•
•

•

•

•

Testing accomplish several things.
 It serves as a measurement of an individual’s knowledge of their
job.
 It meets a management objective to transfer critical knowledge
and skills to the workforce.
 It is in itself a method to enhance learning.
Tests can be either written (pen and paper) or behavioral (show me how
it’s done).
Written tests and documented behavioral tests should be retained
(preferably sent to the training unit for inclusion into the employee training
file.
Developing tests can be a challenge for individuals who do not have a
background in this type of training measurement. Persons developing
written or behavioral skills tests should seek training from a competent
individual (resources are available from the community colleges or
professional trainers).
Tests do not need to be long drawn out activities. Consider developing a
bank of test questions for each topic and then pick 3 or 4 questions at
random as the test. One of the valuable aspects of the administration of
tests is that the employee will quickly begin to understand that there is an
expectation that they will know the training material. The good news is
that your correctional staff will self regulate and will want to make sure
that they keep up with their peers.
Behavioral skills testing are quite valuable inasmuch as they can
demonstrate required activities. This is particularly valuable in high risk –
low frequency activities such as use of SCBA equipment, identifying the
location of emergency equipment, demonstrating evacuation procedures
and evacuation routes.
Passing test scores are dependent on the importance of the subject of
training. As an example, short interval training that concerns dress codes
and grooming standards might have a cut score of 70%. In this case,
knowledge of this particular area, while important does not involve life
threatening consequences. Conversely, policy and procedures on suicide
prevention may require a 100% cut score, as jail suicides are very serious
and can happen frequently if staff is not aware of suicide prevention
techniques.

Who should conduct the training? The shift supervisor should have the
primary responsibility of conducting the training. This lead role guarantee’s that
supervisor will be knowledgeable in each area of identified training. Nothing is as
effective in having a solid grasp of training issues as the positive consequence of
being the trainer.
From time to time it is valuable to delegate (not on a regular basis) to a senior
staff person or an individual who has developed special skills in certain areas.
Once again, if staff believe that they may be called upon to conduct a training
173

November 18, 2008

Orange County Jail Assessment Project

intervention it will most positively impact their view of how and what the
organization expects of them.
Finally, these short term training interventions can spur everyone involved to
analyze the effectiveness of policies and procedures. The formal short term
interval trainings are consequently also a great learning tool, in which staff at all
levels and assess the efficacy of policies and procedures.

174

 

 

The Habeas Citebook: Prosecutorial Misconduct Side
Advertise Here 4th Ad
Prison Profiteers - Side