WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR January 2005
OUTDATE OF
STANDING
REPORT ISSUE Y/N

6/15/04

9/20/04

9/20/04

10/26/04

10/26/04

10/26/04

Yes

Yes

Monitoring
Instrument

Drug Testing

Drug Testing

Yes

Drug Testing

Yes

Security and
Control
Searches

Yes

Yes

Security and
Control
Searches

Security and
Control
Searches

ITEM
NO.

NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE

CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE
ACTION TAKEN

Page 1
DATE/METHOD OF
CONFIRMATION BY
MONITOR/COMMENTS

TDOC MANAGEMENT
COMMENTS/NOTES

2i

10 inmates issued disciplinary
reports for Positive Drug Screen in
April were not retested in May.
NOTE: Letter of Breach issued
by Commissioner 11/29/04.

Warden's response dated 7/6/04: Concur: Indicates
that there was a break down in the communications in
this instance and that new tracking procedures have
Verified 12/30/04: By review of
been implemented. Warden's response to letter of
Drug Testing procedures and
Breach, dated 12/10/04, indicates a new officer has documentation.
been assigned to these duties, and is being
monitored weekly by the Warden's assistant.

2/18/05 CMC note: Breach was corrected
during the cure period, as verified. No
liquidated damages due to be assessed.

2i

Warden’s response dated 10/11/04: Whiteville
Correctional Facility acknowledges the error made in
5 inmates convicted for a positive
the drug testing department. Effective October 11,
drug screen in July were not
Verified 12/30/04: By review of
2004 an officer has been assigned the sole
retested in August. NOTE: Letter
Drug Testing procedures and
responsibility to conduct inmate drug testing. In
of Breach issued by
documentation.
addition, the Wardens’ Executive Assistant will monitor
Commissioner 11/29/04.
compliance on a weekly basis. Warden's response to
letter of Breach, dated 12/10/04, same as above.

2/18/05 CMC note: Breach was corrected
during the cure period, as verified. No
liquidated damages due to be assessed.

10 inmates paroling in August,
were not drug-tested 30 days prior
Same as above.
to their release date or 30 days
prior to their parole hearing date.

2/18/05 CMC note: Determined not to be
a non-compliance issue. Part of the
problem may be due to timeliness of
notification by BOPP of release of
inmates. Non-compliance indication to
be removed from tracking system.

NIN

3c

3d

6

Visitors and venders not frisk
searched before entering at
checkpoint.

CM Note: NCN issued for
same/similar issue 12/29/04.

Warden's response 11/29/04: The Chief of Security will
Verified 1/27/05: By review of
ensure that proper procedures are strictly enforced
shift rosters, log books and other
concerning documentation being entered into the
documentation.
logbook in the future.

Warden's response 11/29/04: Partial Concurrence The
Chief of Security along with Shift Supervisors will
The Shift Supervisor designates a
ensure all staff assigned to check point are in strict
random selected number to be
compliance with posted memo and procedures.
searched at checkpoint, this
On the day in question, searches were conducted as
number is not documented in the
Same as above
per written directives, however; the officer did fail to
checkpoint logbook to verify this.
document the searches in the logbook. Please Note:
Furthermore staff are frisk
The searches were documented on the shift roster as
searched only during shift change.
required.

11 of 36 cell search requests
entered on TOMIS were not
preformed according to TOMIS.
NOTE: Letter of Breach issued
by Commissioner 11/29/04.

Verified 1/27/05: By review of
shift
rosters, log books and other
Warden's response 11/29/04: New procedures have
documentation,
monitor
been put into place to ensure future compliance.
2/18/05 CMC note: Breach was corrected
determined that the nonWarden's response to letter of Breach, dated
during the cure period, as verified. No
compliance was appropriately
12/10/04, indicates new procedures and monitoring
liquidated damages due to be assessed.
addressed during the cure period
have resulted in correction of the problem.
by the institutions corrective
action.

Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print

1/05 monthly

WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR January 2005
OUTDATE OF
STANDING
REPORT ISSUE Y/N

10/27/04

12/7/04

12/29/04

12/29/04

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Monitoring
Instrument

Records and
Reports

Disciplinary
Procedures

Drug Testing

Drug Testing

ITEM
NO.

NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE

CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE
ACTION TAKEN

Page 2
DATE/METHOD OF
CONFIRMATION BY
MONITOR/COMMENTS

10

1. Items requested from Internal
Affairs by CM were not provided.
2. Monthly Drug Testing reports
not provided to monitor for June,
July, August and September 04.

Warden's response 12/1/04: Due to concerns
addressed to the Warden by the C M regarding Internal
Affairs Assistant truthfulness and integrity, an internal
investigation was conducted. As a result there was a
determination that this employee had violated CCA’s
Verified 1/19/05: By review of
core principles and had been less than truthful with C requested documentation and
M and Warden. Based upon these findings the
items kept in IA office.
employee will be removed from Internal Affairs duties
and receive strong disciplinary actions. Warden met
with C M and advised him of these findings and his
planned actions.

NIN

It appears that inmates may not
have been allowed the opportunity
to sign or refuse to sign (CR-2727)
withdrawal request forms after
final disposition of Class A and B
disciplinaries..

Warden's response 12/7/04: WCFA has corrected the
error. Inmates will be required to place their signature
on the CR-2727 while present at the hearing. If the
inmate refuses to sign the CR-2727 it will be signed by
the D-Board Chairman “refused to sign” and witnessed
by an alternate employee while the inmate is present.

2a

Warden's response 1/24/05: While we do not contest
the findings itself, the deficiency noted in this report
was a date to current deficiencies in the U/A testing
1 inmate refused to give a
previously identified. Although this was observed in
specimen for drug testing.
December of 2004, the error occurred in October of
Disciplinary report was entered but
2004. Effective November 10 of 2004, the previous
wasn’t heard by D-Board.
Disciplinary Officer was replaced due to failure to
complete assigned duties as required by policy and a
new tracking process implemented.

NIN

8 inmates paroling in November
04, were not drug-tested 30 days
prior to their release date.

Verified 2/8/05: By review of
inmate withdraw request forms,
CR-1834 hearing summary and
trust fund documentation.

Warden's response 1/24/05: WCF put into place a new
procedure to ensure future compliance. All inmates
going up for parole will be drug tested no later then the
second week of each month. Although these inmates
may not be granted parole, WCF has taken the
initiative to test regardless of the final result at a
CM Note: NCN issued for
tremendous cost to the facility when an inmate is
same/similar issue 9/20/04.
denied parole after recommendation by the initial
board. However, every diligent effort is being made to
ensure any inmate being considered for parole is
tested prior to parole hearing and upon initial parole
hearing recommendation.

Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print

TDOC MANAGEMENT
COMMENTS/NOTES

2/18/05 CMC note: Determined not to be
a non-compliance issue. Part of the
problem may be due to timeliness of
notification by BOPP of release of
inmates. Non-compliance indication to
be removed from tracking system.

1/05 monthly

WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR January 2005
OUTDATE OF
STANDING
REPORT ISSUE Y/N

1/27/05

No

Monitoring
Instrument

Drug Testing

ITEM
NO.

2h

NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE
The disciplinary board has been
imposing a sanction fee of 30.29
for a positive drug screen
disciplinary conviction. This
exceeds the cost of the
confirmation test.

CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE
ACTION TAKEN

Page 3
DATE/METHOD OF
CONFIRMATION BY
MONITOR/COMMENTS

TDOC MANAGEMENT
COMMENTS/NOTES

Warden's response 2/7/05: Starting on or about
January 27, 2005 all drug test requested from Lab One
will be eight panel confirmations at a total cost
(including tax) of $9.44. Inmates whose test shows a
positive confirmation will be charged this amount.

Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print

1/05 monthly

WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR February 2005
OUT-

DATE OF
STANDING
REPORT ISSUE Y/N

12/29/04

1/27/05

2/23/05

Yes

Yes

No

Monitoring
Instrument

Drug Testing

Drug Testing

Transfer of
Inmate

ITEM
NO.

NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE

CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE
ACTION TAKEN

2a

Warden's response 1/24/05: While we do not contest
the findings itself, the deficiency noted in this report
was a date to current deficiencies in the U/A testing
1 inmate refused to give a
previously identified. Although this was observed in
specimen for drug testing.
December of 2004, the error occurred in October of
Disciplinary report was entered but
2004. Effective November 10 of 2004, the previous
wasn’t heard by D-Board.
Disciplinary Officer was replaced due to failure to
complete assigned duties as required by policy and a
new tracking process implemented.

2h

The disciplinary board has been
imposing a sanction fee of 30.29
for a positive drug screen
disciplinary conviction. This
exceeds the cost of the
confirmation test.

Warden's response 2/7/05: Starting on or about
January 27, 2005 all drug test requested from Lab One
will be eight panel confirmations at a total cost
(including tax) of $9.44. Inmates whose test shows a
positive confirmation will be charged this amount.

Inmate was reclassed and
transferred to CBCX 2/3/05 even
though he was on the parole
hearing docket for February 05.
Inmate was transferred back to
WCFA for his parole hearing.

The inmate in question was reclassed to CBCX annex
in September of 2004. Classification supervisor began
sending his name to CDO in October as we are
required to send (10) ten inmate names per month for
annex placement. She sends the same names
monthly until they are transferred. CCC will now check
for parole hearing date monthly prior to submitting 10
names to CDO. If an inmate is scheduled for a parole
hearing within 60 days he will not be submitted.

3

Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print

Page 1
DATE/METHOD OF
CONFIRMATION BY
MONITOR/COMMENTS

TDOC MANAGEMENT
COMMENTS/NOTES

2/05 monthly

WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR March 2005
OUT-

DATE OF
STANDING
REPORT ISSUE Y/N

12/29/04

1/27/05

2/23/05

Yes

Yes

Yes

Monitoring
Instrument

Drug Testing

Drug Testing

Transfer of
Inmate

ITEM
NO.

NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE

CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE
ACTION TAKEN

Page 1
DATE/METHOD OF
CONFIRMATION BY
MONITOR/COMMENTS

2a

Warden's response 1/24/05: While we do not contest
the findings itself, the deficiency noted in this report
was a date to current deficiencies in the U/A testing
1 inmate refused to give a
previously identified. Although this was observed in
specimen for drug testing.
December of 2004, the error occurred in October of
Disciplinary report was entered but
2004. Effective November 10 of 2004, the previous
wasn’t heard by D-Board.
Disciplinary Officer was replaced due to failure to
complete assigned duties as required by policy and a
new tracking process implemented.

Verified 3/22/05: By review of
Drug Testing and Disciplinary
procedures and documentation.

2h

The disciplinary board has been
imposing a sanction fee of 30.29
for a positive drug screen
disciplinary conviction. This
exceeds the cost of the
confirmation test.

Warden's response 2/7/05: Starting on or about
January 27, 2005 all drug test requested from Lab One
will be eight panel confirmations at a total cost
(including tax) of $9.44. Inmates whose test shows a
positive confirmation will be charged this amount.

Verified 3/22/05: By review of
Drug Testing, Disciplinary and
Trust fund procedures and
documentation.

Inmate was reclassed and
transferred to CBCX 2/3/05 even
though he was on the parole
hearing docket for February 05.
Inmate was transferred back to
WCFA for his parole hearing.

Warden's response dated 3/1/05: The inmate in
question was reclassed to CBCX annex in September
of 2004. Classification supervisor began sending his
name to CDO in October as we are required to send
(10) ten inmate names per month for annex placement.
She sends the same names monthly until they are
transferred. CCC will now check for parole hearing
date monthly prior to submitting 10 names to CDO. If
an inmate is scheduled for a parole hearing within 60
days he will not be submitted.

3

Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print

TDOC MANAGEMENT
COMMENTS/NOTES

3/05 monthly

WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR April 2005
OUT-

DATE OF
STANDING
REPORT ISSUE Y/N

2/23/05

4/5/05

4/25/05

4/25/05

Yes

No

No

No

Monitoring
Instrument

Transfer of
Inmate

ITEM
NO.

3

NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE

Inmate was reclassed and
transferred to CBCX 2/3/05 even
though he was on the parole
hearing docket for February 05.
Inmate was transferred back to
WCFA for his parole hearing.

Disciplinary
Procedures

Disciplinary reports were entered
and served, however the
disciplinary reports were not heard
4a(1) nor were they continued by the
Disciplinary Board within
proscribed policy time limits of 7
calendar days.

Disciplinary
Procedures

( Liquidated Damages issue)
Inmate was segregated pending
investigation, charged on 4/20/05.
On 4/25/05 inmate was released
4a(5)
from segregation without having
had a disciplinary hearing within
policy time limit of 72 hours.
(Awaiting Legal interpretation)

Special
Management
Inmates

3b

Page 1
CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE
ACTION TAKEN

DATE/METHOD OF
CONFIRMATION BY
MONITOR/COMMENTS

TDOC MANAGEMENT
COMMENTS/NOTES

Warden's response dated 3/1/05: The inmate in
question was reclassed to CBCX annex in September
of 2004. Classification supervisor began sending his
name to CDO in October as we are required to send
Verified 4/20/05: By review of
(10) ten inmate names per month for annex placement.
parole docket and transfer of
She sends the same names monthly until they are
inmates.
transferred. CCC will now check for parole hearing
date monthly prior to submitting 10 names to CDO. If
an inmate is scheduled for a parole hearing within 60
days he will not be submitted.
Warden's response dated 4/18/05: Upon reviewing the
current disciplinary procedures, it has been
determined that additional reports were either not
heard or not continued as required by policy.
Disciplinary action has been taken against the
responsible staff. Whiteville Correctional Facility will
continue to monitor this process to ensure continued
compliance.

Four inmates were segregated
pending investigation without
proper approval from TDOC
Liaison’s nor were the
segregation’s requested by the
Shift Supervisor as required by
policy.

Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print

4/05 monthly

WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR May 2005
OUT-

DATE OF
STANDING
REPORT ISSUE Y/N

4/5/05

4/25/05

4/25/05

5/2/05

No

No

No

No

Page 1

ITEM
NO.

Disciplinary
Procedures

Disciplinary reports were entered
and served, however the
disciplinary reports were not heard
4a(1) nor were they continued by the
Disciplinary Board within
proscribed policy time limits of 7
calendar days.

Disciplinary
Procedures

5/31/05 CM Note: Advice from
TDOC Legal staff indicates:
"Since the newly directed DR was
not issued on the inmate on
Friday but was delayed until
Warden's response date 5/16/05: It is without dispute
Inmate was segregated pending
that the Unit Manager failed to complete and serve the Monday, the inmate should have
investigation, charged on 4/20/05.
been released from segregation
assault charge as specified. However that while the
On 4/25/05 inmate was released
4a(5)
disciplinary SHOULD have been served immediately; to avoid the 72 hour issue. The
from segregation without having
inmate could have been kept in
there is no non-compliance as the TDOC
had a disciplinary hearing within
lock up but only if the new DR had
Commissioner’s Designee initiated a new 72 hour
policy time limit of 72 hours.
been issued timely at the direction
period and the inmate released prior to it ending.
of the CD. Since it is obvious that
the inmate did not request a
continuance, that option does not
exist in this situation."

Special
Management
Inmates

Use of Force

3b

3g

NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE

Four inmates were segregated
pending investigation without
proper approval from TDOC
Liaison’s nor were the
segregation’s requested by the
Shift Supervisor as required by
policy.

A Use of Force incident occurred
4/21/05. Copies of the Use of
Force incident report were not
provided nor was TOMIS incident
report (LIBJ) #00613604 entered
until 4/25/05.

CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE
ACTION TAKEN

DATE/METHOD OF
CONFIRMATION BY
MONITOR/COMMENTS

Monitoring
Instrument

TDOC MANAGEMENT
COMMENTS/NOTES

Warden's response dated 4/18/05: Upon reviewing the
current disciplinary procedures, it has been
determined that additional reports were either not
heard or not continued as required by policy.
Disciplinary action has been taken against the
responsible staff. Whiteville Correctional Facility will
continue to monitor this process to ensure continued
compliance.
6/30/05 DCCO CMC Note: The liquidated
damages issue previously recorded
under this item number, which
specifically involve serving paperwork
on segregated inmates within prescribed
time limits, have been changed to item
numbers 4d and 4e on the revised
instruments. The issue of holding
hearings within 72 hours, specifically,
has been cited previously on 4/15/04.
Since this specific issue has only been
found in non-compliance one time in the
past 12 months, no liquidated damages
will be assessed at this time.

Warden's response dated 5/3/05: There is no
indisputable way to determine that he did/did not make
the required notification and receive the required
approval. All supervisors have had significant
experience and the knowledge that approval must be
obtained in order to segregate an inmate(s) and there
have been no issues of this nature in the past.

Warden's response dated 5/18/05: This was not a
planned use of force and facility
management/supervisors were not aware that a use of
force had occurred as the employee involved did not
make the shift supervisor aware of his actions.

Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print

6/30/05 DCCO CMC Note: This incident
involved improper actions by one staff
member, who acted on his own, and
does not indicate a systemic institutional
violation of/disregard for TDOC policy.
The institution took appropriate action
when supervisory staff became aware of
the situation. This has been determined
not to be a non-compliance issue.

5/05 monthly

WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR May 2005
OUT-

DATE OF
STANDING
REPORT ISSUE Y/N

5/2/05

5/3/05

No

No

Monitoring
Instrument

Use of Force

Disciplinary
Procedures

ITEM
NO.

3h

NIN

NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE

Page 2
CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE
ACTION TAKEN

Warden's response dated 5/18/05: It is not contested
by CCA that a use of force occurred and was not
Commissioner’s Designee was not
reported by the duty supervisor to the liaison/monitor
notified within (1) hour of this
as required. The error however is not a failure by the
spontaneous Use of Force
supervisor to provide notification as the incident
incident.
involved a case of employee misconduct and use of
force of which the supervisor was not made aware of.

Inmate was segregated pending
hearing and punitive status for a
period of continuous confinement
that exceeds a total of sixty (60)
days.

Warden’s response dated 5/16/05: Facility DOES NOT
CONCUR. In this case the inmate has continually
expired his punitive time and been released. He has
however refused to leave segregation resulting in an
additional charge each time for refusing cell
assignment.

Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print

DATE/METHOD OF
CONFIRMATION BY
MONITOR/COMMENTS

TDOC MANAGEMENT
COMMENTS/NOTES

Same as above.

6/30/05 DCCO CMC Note: This issue was
referred to the Compliance section. A
directive was issued stating :
"...concerning the length of time an
inmate can be continuously segregated.
Sixty days is a real limit. Releasing an
inmate for a day or restoring privileges
for a day is normally a function of
keeping the inmate in seg for over 30
days, not 60." AS placement or other
management practices should be used in
the future when dealing with similar
situations.

5/05 monthly

WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR June 2005
OUT-

DATE OF
STANDING
REPORT ISSUE Y/N

4/5/05

4/25/05

4/25/05

Yes

Yes

Yes

Page 1

ITEM
NO.

Disciplinary
Procedures

Disciplinary reports were entered
and served, however the
disciplinary reports were not heard
4a(1) nor were they continued by the
Disciplinary Board within
proscribed policy time limits of 7
calendar days.

Disciplinary
Procedures

Verified 6/28/05: By review of
Disciplinary and Segregation logs
and documentation. 5/31/05 CM
Note: Advice from TDOC Legal
staff indicates: "Since the newly
Warden's response date 5/16/05: It is without dispute
directed DR was not issued on
Inmate was segregated pending
that the Unit Manager failed to complete and serve the the inmate on Friday but was
investigation, charged on 4/20/05.
assault charge as specified. However that while the
delayed until Monday, the inmate
On 4/25/05 inmate was released
4a(5)
disciplinary SHOULD have been served immediately; should have been released from
from segregation without having
there is no non-compliance as the TDOC
segregation to avoid the 72 hour
had a disciplinary hearing within
Commissioner’s Designee initiated a new 72 hour
issue. The inmate could have
policy time limit of 72 hours.
period and the inmate released prior to it ending.
been kept in lock up but only if the
new DR had been issued timely at
the direction of the CD. Since it is
obvious that the inmate did not
request a continuance, that option
does not exist in this situation."

Special
Management
Inmates

3b

NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE

Four inmates were segregated
pending investigation without
proper approval from TDOC
Liaison’s nor were the
segregation’s requested by the
Shift Supervisor as required by
policy.

CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE
ACTION TAKEN

DATE/METHOD OF
CONFIRMATION BY
MONITOR/COMMENTS

Monitoring
Instrument

TDOC MANAGEMENT
COMMENTS/NOTES

Warden's response dated 4/18/05: Upon reviewing the
current disciplinary procedures, it has been
determined that additional reports were either not
Verified 6/28/05: By review of
heard or not continued as required by policy.
Disciplinary and Segregation logs
Disciplinary action has been taken against the
and documentation.
responsible staff. Whiteville Correctional Facility will
continue to monitor this process to ensure continued
compliance.

6/30/05 DCCO CMC Note: The liquidated
damages issue previously recorded under
this item number, which specifically involve
serving paperwork on segregated inmates
within prescribed time limits, have been
changed to item numbers 4d and 4e on the
revised instruments. The issue of holding
hearings within 72 hours, specifically, has
been cited previously on 4/15/04. Since this
specific issue has only been found in noncompliance one time in the past 12 months,
no liquidated damages will be assessed at
this time.

Warden's response dated 5/3/05: There is no
indisputable way to determine that he did/did not make
the required notification and receive the required
Verified 5/31/05: By review of
approval. All supervisors have had significant
Disciplinary and Segregation logs
experience and the knowledge that approval must be
and documentation.
obtained in order to segregate an inmate(s) and there
have been no issues of this nature in the past.

Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print

6/05 monthly

WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR June 2005
OUT-

DATE OF
STANDING
REPORT ISSUE Y/N

5/3/05

6/6/05

Yes

No

Monitoring
Instrument

Disciplinary
Procedures

Staffing

ITEM
NO.

NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE

Page 2
CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE
ACTION TAKEN

DATE/METHOD OF
CONFIRMATION BY
MONITOR/COMMENTS

6/30/05 DCCO CMC Note: This issue was
referred to the Compliance section. A
directive was issued stating : "...concerning
Warden’s response dated 5/16/05: Facility DOES NOT
the length of time an inmate can be
CONCUR. In this case the inmate has continually
continuously segregated. Sixty days is a
Verified 6/28/05: By review of
expired his punitive time and been released. He has
real limit. Releasing an inmate for a day or
Disciplinary and Segregation logs
however refused to leave segregation resulting in an
restoring privileges for a day is normally a
and documentation.
additional charge each time for refusing cell
function of keeping the inmate in seg for
assignment.
over 30 days, not 60." AS placement or
other management practices should be
used in the future when dealing with similar
situations.

NIN

Inmate was segregated pending
hearing and punitive status for a
period of continuous confinement
that exceeds a total of sixty (60)
days.

11b

Warden's response dated 6/6/05: Immediately upon
vacancy occurring, WCFA posted the position and
made all good faith efforts to fill as soon as possible.
Verified 5/29/05: By review of
Non-security position 118065 was Efforts to obtain someone to fill position within required
staffing legend, position filled on
not filled within 45 days
time frames were unsuccessful; however several
this date.
weeks before the end of the 45 day period, I was able
to recruit a former Nurse Practitioner of this facility on a
PRN (part-time) basis until she can start full time.

6/15/05

No

Security and
Searches

3d

The Shift Supervisor designates a
random selected number to be
searched at checkpoint; this
number is not documented in the
checkpoint logbooks for certain
days to verify this occurred. (Ref:
memorandum attached to policy
CCA 9-120).

7/5/05

No

Staffing

16

Security Addendum not signed by
staff.

TDOC MANAGEMENT
COMMENTS/NOTES

8/1/05 DCCO CMC Note: The position was
vacated 3/15, was covered pat-time from
4/7-5/29, and was filled full-time from that
date. The Warden's efforts to fill the position
are adequate. No non-compliance finding
will be recorded.

Warden's response dated 6/16/05: A review of log
entries and supervisor’s shift daily reports where
documentation of staff searches are required each shift
revealed that documentation of searches is
inconsistently being done. I am taking measures to
ensure that the practice and documentation is in
compliance.

Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print

6/05 monthly

WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR July 2005
OUT-

DATE OF
STANDING
REPORT ISSUE Y/N

6/15/05

7/5/05

8/5/05

Yes

Yes

No

Monitoring
Instrument

Security and
Searches

Staffing

Staffing

Page 1

ITEM
NO.

NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE

3d

The Shift Supervisor designates a
random selected number to be
searched at checkpoint; this
number is not documented in the
checkpoint logbooks for certain
days to verify this occurred. (Ref:
memorandum attached to policy
CCA 9-120).

16

Warden’s response 7/18/05: Whiteville Correctional
Facility will take the appropriate action to have each of
its current employees to read and sign the security
addendum. The certification form will be made a part
Security Addendum not signed by of the initial hire packet in order to address future hires.
staff.
However, pursuant to section 6.06 of the addendum,
the signed forms are to remain in the possession of the
contracting government agency and available for audit
purposes. Therefore, all signed forms will be
forwarded to the contract monitor for filing.

11b

CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE
ACTION TAKEN

DATE/METHOD OF
CONFIRMATION BY
MONITOR/COMMENTS

TDOC MANAGEMENT
COMMENTS/NOTES

Warden's response dated 6/16/05: A review of log
entries and supervisor’s shift daily reports where
documentation of staff searches are required each shift Verified 8/3/05: By review and
revealed that documentation of searches is
observation of checkpoint
inconsistently being done. I am taking measures to
procedures and documentation.
ensure that the practice and documentation is in
compliance.

Liquidated damages issue: Nonsecurity position (maintenance)
118046 was not filled within 45
days.

Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print

7/05 monthly

WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR August 2005
OUT-

DATE OF
STANDING
REPORT ISSUE Y/N

7/5/05

8/5/05

8/3/05

Yes

No

No

Monitoring
Instrument

Staffing

Staffing

Use of Force

ITEM
NO.

NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE

CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE
ACTION TAKEN

16

Warden’s response 7/18/05: Whiteville Correctional
Facility will take the appropriate action to have each of
its current employees to read and sign the security
addendum. The certification form will be made a part
Security Addendum not signed by of the initial hire packet in order to address future hires.
staff.
However, pursuant to section 6.06 of the addendum,
the signed forms are to remain in the possession of the
contracting government agency and available for audit
purposes. Therefore, all signed forms will be
forwarded to the contract monitor for filing.

11b

Warden's response dated 8/10/05: The appearance
that the maintenance position was unfilled in excess of
the forty-five day time frame was due to the Human
Resource Manager’s resignation. The approval memo
was forwarded to the Personnel Office where it was in
plain terms lost in the shuffle of transition from the
Liquidated damages issue: Non- previous Human Resources Manager and the newly
hired Human Resources Manager. I respectfully
security position (maintenance)
request that this not be viewed as a non-compliant
118046 was not filled within 45
finding, but human error occurring directly as the result
days.
of the vacancy in the Personnel Office. All steps were
made to fill the position within the 45 day period that
occurred. The paperwork and data entry function to
complete the process did not occur to support the
position fill date within the required time frame thus
giving the appearance the position went unfilled.

3a

On 7/27/05 a spontaneous Use of
Force (chemical agents) occurred.
Unit Manager administered OC to
control inmate after an altercation.
Staff completed 5-1a incident
report, however as of this date a
TOMIS (LIBJ) incident report has
not been completed and entered
as required by policy.

Page 1
DATE/METHOD OF
CONFIRMATION BY
MONITOR/COMMENTS

TDOC MANAGEMENT
COMMENTS/NOTES

9/12/05 CMC note: Liquidated damages
assessment is currently under review.

Warden's response dated 8/16/05 indicates that, after
review of the incident package, the TOMIS report had
not been completed. The Shift Supervisor and Unit
Manager did not ensure the report was entered on
TOMIS. The report was completed and entered on
TOMIS on August 3, 2005.

Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print

8/05 monthly

WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR August 2005
OUT-

DATE OF
STANDING
REPORT ISSUE Y/N

8/5/05

No

Monitoring
Instrument

Special
management
Inmates

ITEM
NO.

2b

NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE

CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE
ACTION TAKEN

An inmate was segregated 7/26/05
pending an investigation for
protective custody. The protective
Warden's response dated 8/16/05 appears to indicate
services routing form (CR-3241)
that the routing sheet was, in fact, forwarded to the
was not provided to the
Liaisons' office within 72 hours.
Commissioners Designee for
approval within the 72-hour policy
guideline.

Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print

Page 2
DATE/METHOD OF
CONFIRMATION BY
MONITOR/COMMENTS

TDOC MANAGEMENT
COMMENTS/NOTES
9/12/05 CMC note: The CM is requested
to verify the Warden's response that the
packet was sent to the CD on 7/27 and
segregation was approved within 72
hours. If the documents were forwarded
and proper approval was secured within
time guidelines, the non-compliance
report will be deleted.

8/05 monthly

WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR September 2005
OUT-

DATE OF
STANDING
REPORT ISSUE Y/N

7/5/05

8/5/05

Yes

Yes

Monitoring
Instrument

Staffing

Staffing

ITEM
NO.

16

11b

NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE

CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE
ACTION TAKEN

Page 1
DATE/METHOD OF
CONFIRMATION BY
MONITOR/COMMENTS

TDOC MANAGEMENT COMMENTS/NOTES

10/24/05 CMC note: Although the Security Addendum does
pertain, in large part, to policies and procedures relating to
NCIC terminals, it also pertains to the information
(rapsheets) generated by such terminals. Ref.: section 1.10
"… authorizes access to criminal history record information,
limits the use of the information,...ensures the security and
confidentiality of the information..., provides for
sanctions..."; 5.07 "the Contractor shall protect against any
unauthorized persons gaining access to...any of the data...In
Warden’s response dated 8/10/05: We dispute the nonno event shall copies of...criminal history record information
compliance in that at this time the purpose for the
be disseminated..."; 7.04 "The Contractor shall provide for
Security Addendum has not yet been carried out.
Security Addendum not signed by NCIC terminals have not been installed at CCA
CM note: Item outstanding, under the secure storage and disposal of all hard copy...".
facilities contracting with TDOC. Therefore, the nonstaff.
review.
The security addendum was added to the contract, at the
compliance notification is premature. [NOTE: Warden's
insistence of the TBI, to enable appropriate contract staff
original response of 7/18/05 was subsequently
such as counselors, unit management, etc., to have
withdrawn and this response submitted.]
appropriate access to rapsheets in order to make necessary
classification and security decisions. Insofar as the
addendum relates to NCIC information generated by the
system is concerned, the contractor is expected to provide
appropriate training to staff, and to document such training
on the form contained by the addendum. A copy of the
signed agreement may be forwarded to the Liaisons' office
for filing, however, it would also be appropriate to maintain
a copy in institutional training or personnel files.
Warden's response dated 8/10/05: The appearance
that the maintenance position was unfilled in excess of
the forty-five day time frame was due to the Human
Resource Manager’s resignation. The approval memo
was forwarded to the Personnel Office where it was in
plain terms lost in the shuffle of transition from the
Liquidated damages issue: Non- previous Human Resources Manager and the newly
hired Human Resources Manager. I respectfully
security position (maintenance)
request that this not be viewed as a non-compliant
118046 was not filled within 45
finding, but human error occurring directly as the result
days.
of the vacancy in the Personnel Office. All steps were
made to fill the position within the 45 day period that
occurred. The paperwork and data entry function to
complete the process did not occur to support the
position fill date within the required time frame thus
giving the appearance the position went unfilled.

Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print

10/24/05 CMC Note: Liquidated Damages assessment
notification sent to contractor by Commissioner dated
10/11/05.

9/05 monthly

WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR September 2005
OUT-

DATE OF
STANDING
REPORT ISSUE Y/N

8/3/05

8/5/05

9/19/05

Yes

Monitoring
Instrument

Use of Force

ITEM
NO.

NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE

3a

On 7/27/05 a spontaneous Use of
Force (chemical agents) occurred.
Unit Manager administered OC to
control inmate after an altercation.
Staff completed 5-1a incident
report, however as of this date a
TOMIS (LIBJ) incident report has
not been completed and entered
as required by policy.

2b

An inmate was segregated 7/26/05
pending an investigation for
protective custody. The protective
Warden's response dated 8/16/05 appears to indicate
services routing form (CR-3241)
that the routing sheet was, in fact, forwarded to the
was not provided to the
Liaisons' office within 72 hours.
Commissioners Designee for
approval within the 72-hour policy
guideline.

Yes

Special
management
Inmates

No

Inmate was segregated pending
investigation for fighting on
9/14/2005 at 10:50 am. He was
assigned to a cell but the occupant
would not allow him to enter so
staff placed inmate in a shower
stall while arrangements could be
Special
(NIN) made. Segregation staff continued
management No item to document the inmates location
Inmates
number throughout the night as being in
the shower. At approximately
6:30pm 9/15/05, after over 30
hours the inmate was removed
from the shower and placed in a
segregation cell. Staff has not
completed any type of reports to
reflect the incident that occurred.

CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE
ACTION TAKEN

Warden's response dated 8/16/05 indicates that, after
review of the incident package, the TOMIS report had
not been completed. The Shift Supervisor and Unit
Manager did not ensure the report was entered on
TOMIS. The report was completed and entered on
TOMIS on August 3, 2005.

Warden's response dated 9/27/05: Warden called
Asst. Commissioner shortly after this occurred and
discussed this situation with him. There is no violation
of policy or contract in this case as the decision to
remain in the shower was made by the inmate.
Supervisory staff acted on good intentions in following
the Warden’s previous directives to avoid uses of
force/use of OC when I/M’s refused to allow restraints
to be applied to remove them from a shower based on
reasoning that after a period of time they would decide
on their own to allow removal from the shower without
the need for force. In a number of cases over the last
several weeks this occurred after a brief period and no
need to use force. Secondly if OC agent had been
used we then would have had to put the inmate back
into the shower for decontamination. It is my belief that
in such situations force should be a last response as
long as the inmate is not presenting a risk of harm to
himself or others.

Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print

Page 2
DATE/METHOD OF
CONFIRMATION BY
MONITOR/COMMENTS

TDOC MANAGEMENT COMMENTS/NOTES

Verified 10/11/05: By review of
TOMIS reports, CCA 5-1 reports
for all Use of Force chemical
agents incidents.

CM Note10/11/05: While the
segregation package was
forwarded to the TDOC office the
routing sheet CR-3241 was not in
the package. The routing sheet
was completed by unit
management 8/2 and forwarded
to CD 8/305 for review/approval
and signature. Copy of routing
sheet present for review.

10/24/05 CMC Note: Non-compliance finding is appropriate.
9/12/05 CMC note: The CM is requested to verify the Warden's
response that the packet was sent to the CD on 7/27 and
segregation was approved within 72 hours. If the documents
were forwarded and proper approval was secured within time
guidelines, the non-compliance report will be deleted.

11/7/05 CMC note: Letter has been issued by Commissioner
indicating that this is a breach and that subsequent
breaches may result in liquidated damages.

9/05 monthly

WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR October 2005
OUT-

DATE OF
STANDING
REPORT ISSUE Y/N

7/5/05

8/5/05

Yes

Yes

Monitoring
Instrument

Staffing

Staffing

ITEM
NO.

16

11b

NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE

CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE
ACTION TAKEN

Page 1
DATE/METHOD OF
CONFIRMATION BY
MONITOR/COMMENTS

TDOC MANAGEMENT COMMENTS/NOTES

10/24/05 CMC note: Although the Security Addendum does
pertain, in large part, to policies and procedures relating to NCIC
terminals, it also pertains to the information (rapsheets)
generated by such terminals. Ref.: section 1.10 "… authorizes
access to criminal history record information, limits the use of the
information,...ensures the security and confidentiality of the
information..., provides for sanctions..."; 5.07 "the Contractor
shall protect against any unauthorized persons gaining access
Warden’s response dated 8/10/05: We dispute the nonto...any of the data...In no event shall copies of...criminal history
compliance in that at this time the purpose for the
record information be disseminated..."; 7.04 "The Contractor
Security Addendum has not yet been carried out.
shall provide for the secure storage and disposal of all hard
Security Addendum not signed by NCIC terminals have not been installed at CCA
CM note: Item outstanding, under copy...".
facilities contracting with TDOC. Therefore, the nonThe security addendum was added to the contract, at the
staff.
review.
compliance notification is premature. [NOTE: Warden's
insistence of the TBI, to enable appropriate contract staff such
as counselors, unit management, etc., to have appropriate
original response of 7/18/05 was subsequently
access to rapsheets in order to make necessary classification
withdrawn and this response submitted.]
and security decisions. Insofar as the addendum relates to NCIC
information generated by the system is concerned, the
contractor is expected to provide appropriate training to staff,
and to document such training on the form contained by the
addendum. A copy of the signed agreement may be forwarded to
the Liaisons' office for filing, however, it would also be
appropriate to maintain a copy in institutional training or
personnel files.
Warden's response dated 8/10/05: The appearance
that the maintenance position was unfilled in excess of
the forty-five day time frame was due to the Human
Resource Manager’s resignation. The approval memo
was forwarded to the Personnel Office where it was in
plain terms lost in the shuffle of transition from the
Liquidated damages issue: Non- previous Human Resources Manager and the newly
hired Human Resources Manager. I respectfully
security position (maintenance)
request that this not be viewed as a non-compliant
118046 was not filled within 45
finding, but human error occurring directly as the result
days.
of the vacancy in the Personnel Office. All steps were
made to fill the position within the 45 day period that
occurred. The paperwork and data entry function to
complete the process did not occur to support the
position fill date within the required time frame thus
giving the appearance the position went unfilled.

Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print

Verified 11/8/05: Health service
administrator vacant over 45
days, however, the position was
vacated 9/4/05, and the Warden
requested an extension 10/19/05.
10/24/05 CMC Note: Liquidated Damages assessment
Position was filled by acting
notification sent to contractor by Commissioner dated 10/11/05.
personnel from other CCA facility
11/1/05, and a new HSA was
hired 11/10/05 and began
training, will assume position
11/24/05.

10/05 monthly

WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR October 2005
OUT-

DATE OF
STANDING
REPORT ISSUE Y/N

8/5/05

9/19/05

Monitoring
Instrument

ITEM
NO.

NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE

An inmate was segregated 7/26/05
pending an investigation for
protective custody. The protective
Warden's response dated 8/16/05 appears to indicate
services routing form (CR-3241)
that the routing sheet was, in fact, forwarded to the
was not provided to the
Liaisons' office within 72 hours.
Commissioners Designee for
approval within the 72-hour policy
guideline.

Yes

Special
management
Inmates

Yes

Inmate was segregated pending
investigation for fighting on
9/14/2005 at 10:50 am. He was
assigned to a cell but the occupant
would not allow him to enter so
staff placed inmate in a shower
stall while arrangements could be
Special
(NIN) made. Segregation staff continued
management No item to document the inmates location
Inmates
number throughout the night as being in
the shower. At approximately
6:30pm 9/15/05, after over 30
hours the inmate was removed
from the shower and placed in a
segregation cell. Staff has not
completed any type of reports to
reflect the incident that occurred.

2b

CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE
ACTION TAKEN

Warden's response dated 9/27/05: Warden called
Asst. Commissioner shortly after this occurred and
discussed this situation with him. There is no violation
of policy or contract in this case as the decision to
remain in the shower was made by the inmate.
Supervisory staff acted on good intentions in following
the Warden’s previous directives to avoid uses of
force/use of OC when I/M’s refused to allow restraints
to be applied to remove them from a shower based on
reasoning that after a period of time they would decide
on their own to allow removal from the shower without
the need for force. In a number of cases over the last
several weeks this occurred after a brief period and no
need to use force. Secondly if OC agent had been
used we then would have had to put the inmate back
into the shower for decontamination. It is my belief that
in such situations force should be a last response as
long as the inmate is not presenting a risk of harm to
himself or others.

Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print

Page 2
DATE/METHOD OF
CONFIRMATION BY
MONITOR/COMMENTS
CM Note10/11/05: While the
segregation package was
forwarded to the TDOC office the
routing sheet CR-3241 was not in
the package. The routing sheet
was completed by unit
management 8/2 and forwarded
to CD 8/305 for review/approval
and signature. Copy of routing
sheet present for review.

TDOC MANAGEMENT COMMENTS/NOTES

10/24/05 CMC Note: Non-compliance finding is appropriate.
9/12/05 CMC note: The CM is requested to verify the Warden's
response that the packet was sent to the CD on 7/27 and
segregation was approved within 72 hours. If the documents
were forwarded and proper approval was secured within time
guidelines, the non-compliance report will be deleted.

11/23/05 CMC Note: Plan of Action submitted by Warden, is
under review. 11/7/05 CMC note: Letter has been issued by
Commissioner indicating that this is a breach and that
subsequent breaches may result in liquidated damages.

10/05 monthly

WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR October 2005
OUT-

DATE OF
STANDING
REPORT ISSUE Y/N

10/27/05

10/28/05

No

No

Monitoring
Instrument

Policies and
Procedures
Manual and
Operations
Plan

Special
management
Inmates

ITEM
NO.

1d

NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE

WCFA does not have a current
TDOC approved segregation
handbook.

Chief of Security reported to
TDOC Liaison that an inmate had
been released from protective
custody to general population
while pending protective custody
investigation (PCI). This move was
made before the Warden and
2e(3)
TDOC Liaison had approved the
protective custody panel
recommendation. This inmate was
on protective custody investigation
status with protective custody
pending at time of this unapproved
release.

CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE
ACTION TAKEN
Warden's response dated 11/3/05: The above write up
references TDOC policy 502.04. Upon detailed
research of the said policy, there is no reference to a
“segregation handbook.” Policy requires inmates to be
orientated and that orientation may occur using a
written packet of information. Although, policy and/or
the contract does not require a segregation handbook,
Whiteville Correctional Facility does issue a
“segregation information packet” to all inmates placed
in segregation and an orientation is completed of
segregation rules and regulation. The CR-2110 is also
signed by the segregated inmate(s) and placed in his
institutional file for viewing. In addition, the
Segregation Packet” is reviewed on an annual basis.

Page 3
DATE/METHOD OF
CONFIRMATION BY
MONITOR/COMMENTS

CM Note 11/10/05: WCFA staff
provided CCA form 1-13a
showing that the appropriate
segregation policies had been
reviewed by WCFA staff on
annual basis.

TDOC MANAGEMENT COMMENTS/NOTES

11/23/05 CMC Note: E-mail of clarification sent to Warden
11/4/05 indicating that a separate handbook, per se, may not
be required, however, approval in writing by TDOC is
required for any rules for the unit which differ from thosae of
the general population and are not authorized by TDOC
policy. Determination as to whether this is in noncompliance will be made when CM determines if all rules for
segregated inmates have been approved by TDOC.

Warden's response dated 11/1/05: On notification of
non-compliance, the following was discovered: Inmate
received a Protective Custody Services hearing. The
chairperson and committee recommended that the
inmate be released. Inmate wrote a statement stating
that he did not want to be released because he feared
for his life. The hearing was approved by the Assistant
Warden, however; was not approved by TDOC. Unit
Manager (Chairman) advised Segregation Correctional
Counselor to seek TDOC approval. However, proper
approval was not received. Unit Manager assumed that
proper notification and approval had been granted,
therefore, releasing the inmate. TDOC CM and
Assistant Warden discussed the placement of inmate,
at which time, both parties were of the understanding
that the inmate had not been released. Acting Unit
Manager noticed that he had been released. Upon
notification that the said inmate was in fact released to
general population, Assistant Warden revised the
original Warden’s action and returned the inmate to
Protective custody status as stipulated on his approved

Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print

10/05 monthly

WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR November 2005
OUT-

DATE OF
STANDING
REPORT ISSUE Y/N

7/5/05

8/5/05

9/19/05

Yes

Yes

Yes

Monitoring
Instrument

ITEM
NO.

NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE

CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE ACTION
TAKEN

Page 1
DATE/METHOD OF
CONFIRMATION BY
MONITOR/COMMENTS

Warden’s response dated 8/10/05: We dispute the noncompliance in that at this time the purpose for the Security
Addendum has not yet been carried out. NCIC terminals have
CM note: Item outstanding, under
not been installed at CCA facilities contracting with TDOC.
Staffing
16
Security Addendum not signed by staff.
review.
Therefore, the non-compliance notification is premature.
[NOTE: Warden's original response of 7/18/05 was
subsequently withdrawn and this response submitted. ]
CM Note10/11/05: While the
segregation package was
An inmate was segregated 7/26/05
forwarded to the TDOC office the
pending an investigation for protective
routing sheet CR-3241 was not in
Special
Warden's response dated 8/16/05 appears to indicate that the
custody. The protective services routing
the package. The routing sheet
management
2b
routing sheet was, in fact, forwarded to the Liaisons' office
form (CR-3241) was not provided to the
was completed by unit
Inmates
within 72 hours.
Commissioners Designee for approval
management 8/2 and forwarded
within the 72-hour policy guideline.
to CD 8/305 for review/approval
and signature. Copy of routing
sheet present for review.
Warden's response dated 9/27/05: Warden called Asst.
Commissioner shortly after this occurred and discussed this
Inmate was segregated pending
situation with him. There is no violation of policy or contract in
investigation for fighting on 9/14/2005 at
this case as the decision to remain in the shower was made by
10:50 am. He was assigned to a cell but
the inmate. Supervisory staff acted on good intentions in
the occupant would not allow him to enter
following the Warden’s previous directives to avoid uses of
so staff placed inmate in a shower stall
force/use of OC when I/M’s refused to allow restraints to be
while arrangements could be made.
Special
(NIN)
applied to remove them from a shower based on reasoning
Segregation staff continued to document
management No item
that after a period of time they would decide on their own to
the inmates location throughout the night
Inmates
number
allow removal from the shower without the need for force. In a
as being in the shower. At approximately
number of cases over the last several weeks this occurred
6:30pm 9/15/05, after over 30 hours the
after a brief period and no need to use force. Secondly if OC
inmate was removed from the shower and
agent had been used we then would have had to put the
placed in a segregation cell. Staff has not
inmate back into the shower for decontamination. It is my belief
completed any type of reports to reflect
that in such situations force should be a last response as long
the incident that occurred.
as the inmate is not presenting a risk of harm to himself or
others.

Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print

TDOC MANAGEMENT COMMENTS/NOTES
10/24/05 CMC note:…the contractor is expected to
provide appropriate training to staff, and to
document such training on the form contained by
the addendum. A copy of the signed agreement
may be forwarded to the Liaisons' office for filing,
however, it would also be appropriate to maintain a
copy in institutional training or personnel files.
10/24/05 CMC Note: Non-compliance finding is
appropriate. 9/12/05 CMC note: The CM is
requested to verify the Warden's response that the
packet was sent to the CD on 7/27 and
segregation was approved within 72 hours. If the
documents were forwarded and proper approval
was secured within time guidelines, the noncompliance report will be deleted.

11/23/05 CMC Note: Plan of Action submitted by
Warden, is under review. 11/7/05 CMC note:
Letter has been issued by Commissioner indicating
that this is a breach and that subsequent breaches
may result in liquidated damages.

11/05 monthly

WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR November 2005
OUT-

DATE OF
STANDING
REPORT ISSUE Y/N

10/27/05

10/28/05

No

Yes

Monitoring
Instrument

Policies and
Procedures
Manual and
Operations
Plan

Special
management
Inmates

ITEM
NO.

1d

NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE

WCFA does not have a current TDOC
approved segregation handbook.

Chief of Security reported to TDOC
Liaison that an inmate had been released
from protective custody to general
population while pending protective
custody investigation (PCI). This move
was made before the Warden and TDOC
2e(3)
Liaison had approved the protective
custody panel recommendation. This
inmate was on protective custody
investigation status with protective custody
pending at time of this unapproved
release.

11/16/05

No

Release
Procedures

3

11/21/05

No

Special
management
Inmates

4g

CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE ACTION
TAKEN
Warden's response dated 11/3/05: The above write up
references TDOC policy 502.04. Upon detailed research of the
said policy, there is no reference to a “segregation handbook.”
Policy requires inmates to be orientated and that orientation
may occur using a written packet of information. Although,
policy and/or the contract does not require a segregation
handbook, Whiteville Correctional Facility does issue a
“segregation information packet” to all inmates placed in
segregation and an orientation is completed of segregation
rules and regulation. The CR-2110 is also signed by the
segregated inmate(s) and placed in his institutional file for
viewing. In addition, the Segregation Packet” is reviewed on
an annual basis.

Page 2
DATE/METHOD OF
CONFIRMATION BY
MONITOR/COMMENTS

CM Note 11/10/05: WCFA staff
provided CCA form 1-13a
showing that the appropriate
segregation policies had been
reviewed by WCFA staff on
annual basis.

TDOC MANAGEMENT COMMENTS/NOTES

11/23/05 CMC Note: E-mail of clarification sent to
Warden 11/4/05 indicating that a separate
handbook, per se, may not be required, however,
approval in writing by TDOC is required for any
rules for the unit which differ from those of the
general population and are not authorized by
TDOC policy. Determination as to whether this is in
non-compliance will be made when CM determines
if all rules for segregated inmates have been
approved by TDOC.

Warden's response dated 11/1/05 states: "...Protective
Custody Services hearing... recommended that the inmate be
released...The hearing was approved by the Assistant Warden,
however; was not approved by TDOC... Unit Manager
assumed that proper notification and approval had been
granted, therefore, releasing the inmate... Assistant Warden
revised the original Warden’s action and returned the inmate to
Protective custody status as stipulated on his approved
Protective Services Hearing Sheet."

Warden's response dated 11/21/05 indicates that procedures
were examined and new procedures are being put in place to
cross check staff more closely to ensure this does not occur
again; records staff were counseled and trained again on
proper release procedures.
Warden’s response date: 11/29/05. Assistant Warden and
Two inmates were segregated pending
Assistant Chief conducted a meeting with all Senior
hearing. Their segregation packets,
Correctional Officer, Unit Managers and the Shift Supervisors.
property checklist, personal property
Proper procedures relating to: segregation packets, property
storage request form and TOMIS offender
checklist, personal property storage request forms and TOMIS
property (LIBN) all reflect their TV’s were
entries on LIBN were reviewed at length. All supervisory staff
taken and placed in storage prior to their
were made aware that if future non-compliant issues occur,
disciplinary hearing and punitive
disciplinary action will follow.
segregation status began on 11/17/05.
Several improper actions were taken by
WCFA staff concerning the release to
detainer of an inmate.

Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print

11/05 monthly

WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR DECEMBER 2005
OUT-

DATE OF
STANDING
REPORT ISSUE Y/N

7/5/05

8/5/05

9/19/05

Yes

Monitoring
Instrument

Staffing

ITEM
NO.

16

NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE

Security Addendum not signed by staff.

An inmate was segregated 7/26/05
pending an investigation for protective
custody. The protective services routing
form (CR-3241) was not provided to the
Commissioners Designee for approval
within the 72-hour policy guideline.

CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE ACTION
TAKEN

DATE/METHOD OF
CONFIRMATION BY
MONITOR/COMMENTS

Warden’s response dated 8/10/05: We dispute the noncompliance in that at this time the purpose for the Security
Addendum has not yet been carried out. NCIC terminals have
CM note 1/5/06: Item
not been installed at CCA facilities contracting with TDOC.
outstanding, under review.
Therefore, the non-compliance notification is premature.
[NOTE: Warden's original response of 7/18/05 was
subsequently withdrawn and this response submitted. ]

Yes

Special
management
Inmates

Yes

Warden's response dated 9/27/05: Warden called Asst.
Commissioner shortly after this occurred and discussed this
Inmate was segregated pending
situation with him. There is no violation of policy or contract in
investigation for fighting on 9/14/2005 at
this case as the decision to remain in the shower was made by
10:50 am. He was assigned to a cell but
the inmate. Supervisory staff acted on good intentions in
the occupant would not allow him to enter
following the Warden’s previous directives to avoid uses of
so staff placed inmate in a shower stall
force/use of OC when I/M’s refused to allow restraints to be
while arrangements could be made.
Special
(NIN)
applied to remove them from a shower based on reasoning
Segregation staff continued to document
management No item
that after a period of time they would decide on their own to
the inmates location throughout the night
Inmates
number
allow removal from the shower without the need for force. In a
as being in the shower. At approximately
number of cases over the last several weeks this occurred
6:30pm 9/15/05, after over 30 hours the
after a brief period and no need to use force. Secondly if OC
inmate was removed from the shower and
agent had been used we then would have had to put the
placed in a segregation cell. Staff has not
inmate back into the shower for decontamination. It is my belief
completed any type of reports to reflect
that in such situations force should be a last response as long
the incident that occurred.
as the inmate is not presenting a risk of harm to himself or
others.

2b

Page 1

Warden's response dated 8/16/05 appears to indicate that the
routing sheet was, in fact, forwarded to the Liaisons' office
within 72 hours.

Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print

TDOC MANAGEMENT COMMENTS/NOTES
10/24/05 CMC note:…the contractor is expected to
provide appropriate training to staff, and to
document such training on the form contained by
the addendum. A copy of the signed agreement
may be forwarded to the Liaisons' office for filing,
however, it would also be appropriate to maintain a
copy in institutional training or personnel files.

Verified 1/5/06: By review of
Movement confinement,
Protective routing sheets, TOMIS
Wardens report and monitoring of
10/24/05 CMC Note: Non-compliance finding is
segregation unit. CM Note
appropriate. 9/12/05 CMC note: The CM is
10/11/05: While the segregation
requested to verify the Warden's response that the
package was forwarded to the
packet was sent to the CD on 7/27 and
TDOC office the routing sheet CRsegregation was approved within 72 hours. If the
3241 was not in the package. The
documents were forwarded and proper approval
routing sheet was completed by
was secured within time guidelines, the nonunit management 8/2 and
compliance report will be deleted.
forwarded to CD 8/305 for
review/approval and signature.
Copy of routing sheet present for
review.

11/23/05 CMC Note: Plan of Action submitted by
Warden, is under review. 11/7/05 CMC note:
Letter has been issued by Commissioner indicating
that this is a breach and that subsequent breaches
may result in liquidated damages.

12/05 monthly

WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR DECEMBER 2005
OUT-

DATE OF
STANDING
REPORT ISSUE Y/N

10/27/05

10/28/05

11/16/05

11/21/05

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Monitoring
Instrument

Policies and
Procedures
Manual and
Operations
Plan

Special
management
Inmates

Release
Procedures

Special
management
Inmates

ITEM
NO.

1d

NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE

WCFA does not have a current TDOC
approved segregation handbook.

Chief of Security reported to TDOC
Liaison that an inmate had been released
from protective custody to general
population while pending protective
custody investigation (PCI). This move
was made before the Warden and TDOC
2e(3)
Liaison had approved the protective
custody panel recommendation. This
inmate was on protective custody
investigation status with protective custody
pending at time of this unapproved
release.

3

4g

Page 2

CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE ACTION
TAKEN

DATE/METHOD OF
CONFIRMATION BY
MONITOR/COMMENTS

TDOC MANAGEMENT COMMENTS/NOTES

Warden's response dated 11/3/05: The above write up
references TDOC policy 502.04. Upon detailed research of the
said policy, there is no reference to a “segregation handbook.”
Policy requires inmates to be orientated and that orientation
may occur using a written packet of information. Although,
policy and/or the contract does not require a segregation
handbook, Whiteville Correctional Facility does issue a
“segregation information packet” to all inmates placed in
segregation and an orientation is completed of segregation
rules and regulation. The CR-2110 is also signed by the
segregated inmate(s) and placed in his institutional file for
viewing. In addition, the Segregation Packet” is reviewed on
an annual basis.

CM note 1/6/05: Item
outstanding, WCFA in process of
TDOC approval for segregation
rules. CM Note 11/10/05: WCFA
staff provided CCA form 1-13a
showing that the appropriate
segregation policies had been
reviewed by WCFA staff on
annual basis.

11/23/05 CMC Note: E-mail of clarification sent to
Warden 11/4/05 indicating that a separate
handbook, per se, may not be required, however,
approval in writing by TDOC is required for any
rules for the unit which differ from those of the
general population and are not authorized by
TDOC policy. Determination as to whether this is in
non-compliance will be made when CM determines
if all rules for segregated inmates have been
approved by TDOC.

Warden's response dated 11/1/05 states: "...Protective
Custody Services hearing... recommended that the inmate be
released...The hearing was approved by the Assistant Warden,
however; was not approved by TDOC... Unit Manager
assumed that proper notification and approval had been
granted, therefore, releasing the inmate... Assistant Warden
revised the original Warden’s action and returned the inmate to
Protective custody status as stipulated on his approved
Protective Services Hearing Sheet."

Verified 1/5/06: By review of
segregation logs, TOMIS
Warden's report (MGH),
segregation end date report
(MGM), protective custody review
and protective routing sheets.

Warden's response dated 11/21/05 indicates that procedures
were examined and new procedures are being put in place to
cross check staff more closely to ensure this does not occur
again; records staff were counseled and trained again on
proper release procedures.
Warden’s response date: 11/29/05. Assistant Warden and
Two inmates were segregated pending
Assistant Chief conducted a meeting with all Senior
hearing. Their segregation packets,
Correctional Officer, Unit Managers and the Shift Supervisors.
property checklist, personal property
Proper procedures relating to: segregation packets, property
storage request form and TOMIS offender
checklist, personal property storage request forms and TOMIS
property (LIBN) all reflect their TV’s were
entries on LIBN were reviewed at length. All supervisory staff
taken and placed in storage prior to their
were made aware that if future non-compliant issues occur,
disciplinary hearing and punitive
disciplinary action will follow.
segregation status began on 11/17/05.
Several improper actions were taken by
WCFA staff concerning the release to
detainer of an inmate.

Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print

CM note 1/5/06: Item
outstanding, monitoring not
complete.

Verified 1/5/06: By review of
segregation logs, Segregation
packet documentation, inmate
property storage, property
inventory and property room
inventories.

12/05 monthly

WCFA SUMMARY OF NON-COMPLIANCE NOTIFICATIONS FOR DECEMBER 2005
OUT-

DATE OF
STANDING
REPORT ISSUE Y/N

12/6/05

No

Monitoring
Instrument

Staffing

ITEM
NO.

11b

NON-COMPLIANCE ISSUE

Two non-security positions were not filled
within 45 days.
Position #118064, Clinical Supervisor,
Position #118068, Registered Nurse.

CONTRACTOR RESPONSE/DATE/ CORRECTIVE ACTION
TAKEN

Page 3
DATE/METHOD OF
CONFIRMATION BY
MONITOR/COMMENTS

Warden’s response dated 12/8/05: WCF has advertised locally
and nationally in an attempt to fill these positions. WCF
continues to practice due diligence in filling these positions
however have not at this point been able to recruit applicants. CM note 1/5/06: Item still in nonRecruitment continues in an effort to fill these positions as
compliance and is outstanding.
expeditiously as possible. We are covering the CNS position
with an acting supervisor until the position is filled and covering
the RN position with overtime .

Instrument name and Item numbers for Liquidated Damages issues are in BOLD print

TDOC MANAGEMENT COMMENTS/NOTES

2/10/06 CMC note: A determination of breach
status is pending additional information
concerning RN coverage and acting CNS
credentials.

12/05 monthly