Know Your Status
Free and Anonymous HIV and Hep C testing and Counseling
RAPID HIV AND HEP C TESTING
GET YOUR RESULTS IN 20 MINUTES
Call for appointment 556-1139
-
Archives
-
Meta
Grievance System in Montana Prisons Broken
If the grievance system has ever worked, since its infancy within the Montana prison system, it has not done so in the last 20 years that I’ve been around.
Unfortunately I’ve had many opportunities to participate in the Grievance Procedures set forth by the systems Inmate Grievance Program. “They” say that their purpose is: “to provide an internal grievance mechanism to resolve inmate complaints, reduce the need for litigation and afford staff the opportunity to improve facility operations.” (DCCF 3, 3, 3,) First of all by “Resolve”, the powers that be, determine that to mean “Settle”. And they do that! But hardly ever in a fair manner. Let me interject a specific problematic scenario here to provide you with a recurring problem that is always being grieved.
According to contract amendment # 08-052- DIR made between Montana Dept. of Corrections and Dawson County Contractor (DCCF) as of 4/7/09 you (the tax payer) are paying a standard rate of per diem (by the day) for general population offenders, the amount of $63.43 one of the things that is paid for from that amount is our food. In section 20 of this contract it says: Sec. 20-a-1. Provide the same daily menu for staff and inmates” (though this directive is usually followed it is not always followed. Many times the food served to officers is better prepared or may often include things such as a dessert that is not even served to the Inmate population.) Serve all regular menus based on the Recommended Dietary Allowances (RDA) for males aged 25-50 years as provided by the National Research Council food and Nutrition Board. The RDA is not followed per contract especially concerning the amount of fruit we are to be given. Under the contract Sec. 20,B it says we are to be provided 63 grams of protein and 2,900 calories in a 24 hour period. The USDA stipulates in the DGA (Dietary Guidelines for Americans) that an eating plan at 2,900 calories a day should provide 5-6 servings of fruit. Though not all of the 5-6 servings of fruit need to be fresh fruit (Some of it may be nutrient- dense in form) we are still not given what we are supposed to be getting per the contract. We are lucky if we are given a whole apple twice a month. The same problems arise with the meat.
The menu may call for beef to be served, but instead, we are given a soy based supplement. Though we grieve such issues as this, they are seldom taken care of. If something is done about it, the problem may get fixed for a week or two and then it starts over again.
What you the tax payer should be concerned about, is where your money is actually going to. I can tell you….Into bonuses paid to staff for cutting corners. This assertion will most emphatically be denied, by the powers that be, but I assure you that there are many abuses such as this that occur within this system on a daily basis.
Reducing litigation has already happened by the “Ham-stringing” of our access to the courts. Besides which, unless we are physically harmed, the courts do not care. (This can be seen by reading almost any court decision concerning such matters.) And last, to afford staff the opportunity to improve facility operations. That sounds good, but let me assure you once again, there has been no improvement the last couple of decades, things have only gotten worse which can be ascertained by taking a census (of the conditions) of long-term inmates. We’ve seen it and suffered from it!
Instead of prison administrators being able to make their own policies and procedures, the legislature should make the laws which should include: rules, regulations, procedures, and policies that govern the treatment of inmates as well as implementing a grievance procedure which will not be a farce.
Don Gringras/DCCF
More Prison Visits = Less Recidivism
Dear Friends,
I am really excited about a significant new study of impact of visitation on recidivism. The study confirms the basic premise on which Prison Fellowship was founded: that visiting prisoners can significant improve their reintroduction to the community after their release.
Some of the significant findings of the study are:
Offenders who were visited in prison were significantly less likely to recidivate. The reductions in recidivism were:
13 percent of a felony reconviction,
25 percent for re-incarceration for a technical violation.
Any visit from a mentor reduced the risk of reconviction by 29 percent, while a visit by a clergy lowered it by 24 percent. Visits from certain family members and relatives also had an impact. The risk of reconviction was reduced by 21percent for at least on in-law visit, 10 percent for a sibling visit, and 9 percent for a visit by other relatives.
The frequency with which inmates were visited had a significant effect on recidivism.
Inmates visited more often were less likely to recidivate.
Visits closer to an offender’s release date had a greater impact on reducing recidivism.
The larger an offender’s social support system, the lower the risk for recidivism.
The total number of different individual visitors an offender had was significantly associated with less recidivism.
It is interesting to note that only one category of visitor actually correlated with increased recidivism: ex-spouses. The added stress of a failed relationship seems to be at the root of this exception to the otherwise very positive impact of visits.
The study was conducted by the Minnesota Department of Corrections among 16,420 inmates between 2003 and 2007. This is a very large sample size, and an unusually long period to track recidivism (up to five years).
One facet of this study jumped out at me as I read it-the two types of visits that had the greatest impact on reducing recidivism: clergy and mentors, which have been at heart of Prison Fellowship’s work for over 35 years. We have done this because Jesus told us to visit prisoners in Matthew 25. However, we now have research that shows our faithful volunteers are having a significant impact on the lives of the inmates and on our communities by making them safer. These findings make it clear that if states want to reduce recidivism they must look at their policies to determine whether they are conducive to visitation or if they hinder visits. This is a matter of public safety, and contradicts years of training and practice in the corrections field. I would encourage every governor to request a review of all policies relating to visits with an eye toward increasing the number of visits. Prison management often resists calls to expand visitation citing two factors: danger of contraband and increased costs. Both of these issues can be dealt with if management makes expanding visits a priority in order to reduce recidivism. This study makes clear that by maintaining policies that discourage visits, the prison system is increasing the likelihood that offenders will commit a new offense and return to prison.
Here are a few ways in which visitation could be encouraged:
Place Inmates in Institutions as Close to Where their Family Lives as Possible within their Security Level.
Data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics show that more than half of prisoners with children live more than 100 miles from where they lived before prison, and 10 percent lived more than 500 miles away. Most families cannot afford to make such long trips to see their loved ones.
While most states claim that they place inmates as close to their families as possible within their security class, this is a policy on paper only. In reality, wherever an open bed exists is usually where the inmate gets assigned. Proximity to family isn’t a factor. This study shows that by discouraging visitation, these long-distance placements are harmful to public safety.
Institutional convenience should never trump public safety.
In the long term, states should build prisons closer to the neighborhoods that most prisoners come from. Placing prisons in rural areas may help economic development, but it is destructive to families and undermines public safety.
In His service,
Pat Nolan, President, Justice Fellowship
You can read more on this at: Justice Fellowship
Dropping Out
I’m going to give my opinion on the safety for gang drop outs. I think they should use a block in Close III or over in Max. Let them have the same canteen, all the same privileges as everyone else, let them have library time, groups for those who need it, gym, yard, school and hobby. They could have some kind of building even out by the work dorm with a fence around it, or how about the old Start building. There’s so many things they could do for gang drop outs, but they don’t care about the ones that want to change and get out of there old life style and turn a new page in their next chapter of life. This hole debriefing deal and over safety should be the number 1 thing to them. Look at myself, I don’t want these things in my life anymore, both of my boys are proud of their dad for dropping out, but now that I have, I’m still being punished for my good doing. I’ve gotten a 4213 because I can’t go back to population because there is a hit out on me, so the only safe thing I can do is keep getting write ups (majors) and stay in the hole. It’s not fair and my sons want me home, now I have a major write up and no clear conduct so I can’t see the board in Feb to try to get home to my boys. It really hurts me that I’m not able to see my kids and now I have to wait even longer because of my dropping out.
JC / MSP
Thoughts on GANG / STG programming..
I started this fight in 2001-2002 and it has been a long battle. Always has been always will be. But for the people on the inside, “Wake Up”. You can’t be so blind as to not see what kind of nonsensical crap that has been going on in here. With no reasoning behind these changes! They just take! Take ! Take! From us! So ask yourself this question? WHY? Why do they keep taking from us? For those of you who can’t see it, I will tell you why. They do it because we as a whole are dumb enough to fall into their trap. They take from us because the Federal Government denied them hazard pay money, and also grant money for STG Programming. They denied them because the prisons couldn’t prove a gang problem, or a violence problem. So to get that money, and to make their pockets fuller, they have to prove a violence and gang problem, and since one hasn’t existed in many years, the next best thing is to create one.
Are you starting to see the picture now? What better way to create one than the striping all of the things that make them a person. By taking everything we have, and keeping us around people we can’t stand, they know it’s a breeding ground for violence, and with violence comes groups, and groups become gangs, with gangs comes more violence, which in turn gives them exactly what they want and need.
We’re so busy worrying about a fellow inmate, who by the way has a number just like we do, and we’re so busy fighting each other that we can’t see that everything that is happening, is for a reason. That reason is purely to benefit the same system that is screwing you. So wake up and use your brain. Think before you act. For those of you on the outside who are in this fight ask yourself, “Are you really doing all you can to help win this fight?” Let your voice be heard to anyone who will listen, because if ever there was a time to fight back that time is now! Thank you
Jerod Goodman/MSP
Family Matters
Family Matters
Visitor Concerns at MSP
To legislative committee on Law and Justice, and audit committee:
Many visitors of loved ones at MSP are increasingly concerned with the new trends being implemented at MSP. Since the departure of Warden Mahoney, while awaiting the advent of the new warden, a lot of changes have occurred that concern us. We are hearing rumors of visiting being eliminated in order to qualify for a $5 million grant. To qualify, MSP would need to become a ‘lock-down’ facility. Already we are seeing things that seem to point that way. Major Woods has banned paper plates visitors use to cook foods that come out of the vending machine frozen. Even though there are an abundance of paper plates available, which we had to pay 5 cents each for, visitors are forced to prepare frozen foods on paper napkins that disintegrate when wet. We were allowed flavored creamers for coffee and tea, @ 10 cents each, but the flavors have now been banned. A cup of tea now costs 75 cents each. We are being told that the vending machines will be removed completely soon, as the popcorn machines recently were. We were also told that the children’s toys would be soon taken away. There is every reason to believe that visitors will be banned next. One staff member recently quit because of the oppressive rule of Major Woods towards visiting. We have every reason to believe that the careful screening of the new warden was to insure complicity in current policy.
The systematic removal of everything that encourages inmates to become better prepared for life on the outside is being eliminated, the last being family support. The prison has made it so expensive now to provide support for most anyway, by using every opportunity to make money from inmate’s families, increasing the fees that the prison collects on goods the inmates buy, and phone services. On top of this, the job availability has diminished along with the hours they are able to work, and the meager pay of $.25 per hour for most low side inmates has decreased as well. This concentration-camp atmosphere the prison is creating has everything to do with ‘big-business’ – not corrections. It is our opinion that the DOC has lost its perspective for existence and has become a parasite on the indigent of our society in order to capitalize on their misery. Nothing makes this more evident that the fact that there is one employee for every 3 inmates, and many are related!
We are asking you legislators to step in and take charge of the accountability this institution of corrections has managed to evade for so long. Once this institution becomes closed to the public eye, there is no stopping the abuses that already are on the rise. We are asking also that the DOC be compelled to comply with other government institutions by randomly doing a UA on staff. Currently, visitors are being targeted as the offenders of contraband coming into the units, but we know that if the staff were being tested, the truth would be evident! The public is viewed as the enemy at this institution and this should not be. The real enemy is the lack of accountability this institution has been allowed to get away with for so long.
Thank you for considering these serious concerns and issues many, if not all, visitors discuss among each other and their loved ones.
Joy Wellington / 2011