An inmate causes another disturbance in the chow line; it's his fifth ticket in six months. Inmates pushed and shoved, but there were no major injuries. In isolation, the incident was minor and contained, but the inmate has now become a recurring problem in general population. Where should he go?

In some states, inmates like this one, and others with more serious, violent offenses, are transferred to separate facilities where they will receive targeted programming and experience a pared-down, high-security version of incarceration until they can improve their behavior.

Corrections officials who use a high-level of structure, regimentation and privilege and reward systems in these high security units say it is critical to changing behavior and keeping the peace at lower level institutions throughout their states.

“One of the biggest benefits of having a Northern type facility is the vast reduction in inmate on staff assaults and inmate on inmate assaults that we have experienced over the past 10 years.  Not only does our facility provide inmates with real life skills that they can use while incarcerated and once they return to the community, it is a definite deterrent to those who would otherwise act out violently,” said Warden Wayne Choinski of the Connecticut Department of Corrections' Northern Correctional Institution.

Northern is the home of the DOC's three close custody programs: Close Custody Gang Management, Close Custody Chronic Disciplinary and Administrative Segregation Transition Phase programs. 

These programs have been in place for the balance of 10 years in an effort to remove inmates who are violent and/or disruptive from the general population and improve their behavior so they can return to their original classification levels.

 “It has had a huge effect on the male population for the department as far as incidents. Assaults in staff and other inmates have been way down since these programs were started,” said Choinski.

The program at Northern involves several levels for each one of the programs, with inmates starting in a high-security, low privilege setting but having the opportunity to show they can follow rules and regulations, become involved in behavior changing programs and progress to less restrictive levels and, ultimately, return to general population.

The use of transitional phasing and providing the opportunity for inmates to progress has clearly made a difference those correctional systems that have put such programs in place to improve safety and security and improve the behavior of violent or disruptive inmates. But not all states follow this model.

According to a study published in 2004 by the National Institute of Corrections, Classification of High-Risk and Special Management Prisoners, several states use special management units for disruptive inmates, but not all provide a transitional program for those offenders to return to general population. In addition, there is no consensus nationwide on what makes a prisoner a candidate for a special management unit. An additional complication, and the subject of recent lawsuits in the field, is how mentally ill offenders who act out are managed.

In its research, the NIC identified some approaches, including Connecticut's, as worthy of consideration as model programs. Common among those highlighted is specific criteria for transfer, due process for those considered for transfer to these units and an effort to teach offenders how to behave appropriately in the prison setting.

Differentiating Disruptive and Violent Offenders

With three different program options for disruptive or violent inmates, the Connecticut model at Northern is able to pinpoint their specific behavioral needs.

For example, the administrative segregation program is typically a place for those inmates who have assaulted staff or other inmates or who pose threat to other inmates. The gang management program specifically focuses on those that have gang affiliations and who have acted out or pose a threat because of those connections. The close custody program looks at those who repeatedly violate the rules and focuses intently on changing their behavior.

In both the administrative segregation and gang management programs the inmates come in at phase one for a cooling down period that involves confinement in their cells for eating, programming and restrictions on showers and visits. The minimum length of time at this phase is 120 days, but inmates' classification is reviewed every week for the first two months and then every 30 days thereafter.

Phase two inmates must have completed six months in phase one and remained disciplinary report free (for certain class infractions) in return for out-of-cell programming, increased programming, an increase in non-contact visits and the ability to work. Moving to phase two also means that the inmates become part of a group or squad. This group completes the remaining phases together, recreates together and has programming together.

The philosophy behind the squads began as a way to help security threat group members re-integrate with other inmates who may have different affiliations.

“In phase one you are housed with those with a similar affiliation, a Latin King with a Latin King. In phase two and three they have to live with someone they don't get along with. You are in a squad of six or eight inmates and there are other [affiliations] in there,” said Choinski.

Phase three gives the inmates even more privileges, including telephone calls, increased spending at the commissary and recreation with larger groups of inmates.

In the close custody chronic disciplinary program, offenders receive a heavy and intense dose of programming to address repeated behavioral problems over two fast-track intervals. The first interval requires a stay of at least 30 days where the inmate is isolated much like the first phase of the administrative segregation with similar restrictions and programming. After one week in the unit, restraints can be modified or completely removed.

In the second interval, inmates move in larger groups and must participate in programming which addresses anger management, relapse prevention, problem/solving and transition planning. In a best-case scenario, an inmate could be out of the program within three months, said Choinski. If, however, they take longer than six months to complete the program, they are eligible for the longer administrative segregation phased program.

Choinski believes that the combination of high security, low privileges and the focused curriculum helps to keep return rates low.

“Northern, from the inmates' perspective, is the place no one wants to go,” he said.

Colorado State Penitentiary is anther destination that inmates try to avoid. It is there that inmates with violent or gang-related behavior go when they become too problematic for the general population.

Colorado Focuses on Thinking, Change

Colorado inmates who are violent or disruptive have a couple of options for changing their ways, and all of those options take place either at the Colorado State Penitentiary or Centennial Correctional  facility across the street. Embedded in the different programs is a cognitive behavioral modification program designed to change thinking and produce an inmate who is suited for general population.

“We looked at whether there was thought before there was a behavior. We had to deal with the way they think along with the behavior modification program. We became a little more clinical in our assessment of the inmate population,” said Warden Larry Reid of CSP and Centennial.

Much like Connecticut's administrative segregation program, the CSP's Quality of Life Incentive Program includes three, incentive-driven levels. Offenders have the opportunity to gain access to other levels of the program and additional privileges by demonstrating positive behavior.

“At each level there is more pronounced expectations that we require them to demonstrate,” Reid said.

Several years ago, two more levels were added to the program and this is where the cognitive educational programming kicked in. Reid said the facility staff created its own curriculum meeting the warden's requirements: that it is entertaining and participation should be measurable so that progression in the program could be documented.

The staff came up with an idea to use the film The Color Purple as a vehicle through which to discuss the dimensions of anger. The movie, based on a book written by Alice Walker, chronicles the life of a young black girl growing up in the early 1900's.

Built into the program are discussion questions that solicit responses from the participating inmates, at first in a general discussion, and then in personalized answers.

More recently, after the annex of Centennial (CCF) to the transitional programming – named the Progressive Reintegration Opportunity unit, a sixth level was added and the entire transitional program was moved to CCF.

“We were moving [them] into an environment that is less restrictive, so we wanted to make sure in the assessments we were as accurate as we could be and we added on more level,” said Reid. “We go from a fairly sterile environment in terms of property and privileges to at the end we are mirroring the general population.”

Reid explained that by added another level that had even fewer restrictions and observing them a little longer, corrections staff and officials monitoring the inmates could be sure that they are ready to return to general population – where they will be around more inmates with fewer staff members.

“Our philosophy is we want to be sure we are sending out a good product. Our credibility is one the line. Could you imagine if we send out people who are committing other types of crimes,” said Reid.

Staff training is an important part of making the program work, Reid said.

“We tell them they are a hybrid. They need to be a teacher and understand mental health and the staff are excited about the new professionalism of corrections [here]. It's more than just keys and locks,” he said.

Reid said he empowers the staff at both facilities to make decisions and consequences on the spot about the behavior of offenders in the programs so that unacceptable behavior and discipline are not disjointed. Staff and administrators of the programs also try to be clear with the inmates that they actually control their length of stay, there is no predetermined length of time in the program – it all depends on how they follow the program.

“We never turn the light off. The inmates can, but [they] can always turn it back on. We think that light at the end of the tunnel is important,” said Reid.

And, realizing that some inmates did not require the typical stay -- 24-28 months -- in the entire phase and transition programs, a new, abbreviated program has been created to move some qualifying inmates back into the general population sooner.

The new Diversion Program at CSP operates similarly to the PRO unit in that it is designed to take people out of the general population setting and offer a cognitive program for behavioral problems. It differs in that the program lasts 12 months without designating offenders as administrative segregation offenders.

“It gets the offender who is borderline ad seg. This would be for the offender displaying some violent, disruptive or dangerous behaviors or gang members who have avoided hearings or protection,” said Rick Wright, Program Manager for CCF and CSP.

“Ad seg has violent, dangerous and disruptive inmates. Diversion deals with dangerous and disruptive inmates; someone who may have introduced a lot of drugs into the correctional environment – that's dangerous or an inmate who has received numerous disciplinaries. They are not violent, but cumulatively they are disruptive.”

The diversion program starts at Level 4 and ends at Level 6 and, for minor infractions, staff have the ability to take certain privileges away. If behavior in the program continues to be a problem, Wright said, staff will assess that behavior on a multidisciplinary scale and consider whether the offender needs to be classified in another program.

So far, one group of 48 offenders has completed the program, but officials believe it will prove to be successful.

“We believe it is going to serve the same purpose to the department -- to offer an opportunity to move offenders who re being disruptive in their environment,” said Wright. “We think it hits the other side of the spectrum we knew we were successful with the PRO unit. It will save us some offender time spent.”

Officials in Ohio, who operate a similar high security multi-phase program at the Ohio State Penitentiary, also have found success with this model. Much of this success can be attributed to the attention paid to classification.

Classifying Offenders in Secure Units

Inmates who come to OSP must meet certain criteria or have exhibited a certain behavior to be moved in to the facility. Those behaviors include assault on a staff member or fellow inmate, possession or conspiracy to smuggle drugs, attempt to escape or designation as a security threat group leader.

The classification policy for inmates includes five levels with classification Level Four and Five each have two privilege levels, A and B.

Levels Four and Five exist at OSP while another level four unit is located at Ohio's Lucasville facility.

To get to these high-security levels, an inmate who – say stabs another inmate – would go before a rules infractions board and have the opportunity to appeal that board's decision.  That infractions board could recommend that the inmate be classified higher, but the ultimate decision of which level that is rest with yet another committee.

According to Assistant Director of the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction Terry Collins, an inmate can present evidence and other information to that second board to show that he should not be transferred up.

Finally, the inmate has the opportunity to appeal to the facility warden and the Bureau of Classification has the final say on which level the inmate is re-classified to.

“It's a process to ensure that those individuals who represent the most risk are placed into the highest level of security. Sometimes [the boards] say [behavior] does not rise to a Level Five but does to a Level Four. Every time an inmate is considered for placement they have the opportunity for a hearing and e have people looking at [that decision],” said Collins.

With Levels Four and Five, inmates, as in other high security units, have very limited movement, privileges and visits. With this is mind, OSP staff take special care to ensure that each inmate is classified to these levels correctly and monitors their progress for the restoration of privileges.

“You go in at Level B. It is the highest we have, then, once you are placed there, we have the unit staff review your status. [They look at] Did you have your due process while at Level B. We also do a privilege review and we start looking at how you integrated and why you have been classified at this level and how long you are there,” said Collins.

Once assigned to the facility, treatment plans are created for each offender and are updated and reviewed based on staff assessments at six-month intervals.

According to Collins, one of the big questions staff face is moving inmates from Level Five to Level Four within the facility. Because of the restrictive nature of the facility, inmates are less likely in level five to obtain disciplinary reports or tickets, so staff have to be doubly sure the inmates are ready for more privileges.

”How long do you keep them there when they severely assaulted another inmate or a CO? There isn't the chance to act out, so then it becomes a matter of if you are taking advantage of the programming and how much time have you spent at Level Five,” he said.

Included in this assessment, Collins said is a review of the inmate's history of behavior, whether this person has had chances before to improve their behavior and whether they are repeating their actions. That said, the inmates classified at Level Five usually take about a year to complete Levels B and A, Collins said.

While much time is spent to ensure that only those inmate who pose the most risk to the safety of other inmates and staff, Collins and others who operate similar systems agree that it is worth it to produce the best outcome.

“I think it is an effective inmate management tool to ensure staff and inmates are kept safe and individuals who act out inside a prison know what the rules are and the consequences are,” said Collins. “Certainly it makes for a safer system. It makes staff and inmates able to do their daily tasks better.”