Culture change ensures safety for staff and youths in Juvenile Corrections.

Aseries of significant incidents involving youth safety occurred at the Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections (ADJC) in 2002 and 2003, resulting in a year-long investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division under the auspice of the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act. Gov. Janet Napolitano did not wait for the findings from the Department of Justice before she took steps toward correcting the problems. In October 2003, Napolitano appointed 30-year law enforcement professional Michael Branham as interim director for ADJC. He immediately began to develop programs and strategies that would quickly improve the safety of youths committed to the department.

In January 2004, Napolitano received the results of the Department of Justice investigation, which identified five main issue areas that required immediate attention by ADJC. These areas included suicide prevention, juvenile justice, education, medical care and mental health/rehabilitative services. In March 2004, ADJC received a draft agreement from the justice department. Concurrently, Branham was appointed director of ADJC.

Implementing Changes

One of the many initiatives implemented by Branham was to infuse integrity, accountability and a sense of ownership into the agency culture. This initiative would lead the agency to the necessary culture change that would ensure a safe environment for both staff and youths. A major first step was to retool the Internal Affairs Unit, which would later become the Inspections and Investigations Division. The division's clear chain of command to the director was established to ensure timely notification of significant issues and events. A Zero Tolerance Project was also developed, along with a reporting mechanism that would allow anyone to report serious staff misconduct directly to the director. It was a declaration that all sexual, physical and verbal abuse was deemed inappropriate and unacceptable behavior would not be tolerated.

The Inspections Unit

Within the Inspections and Investigations Division, the Inspections Unit was charged with providing the director and his leadership team, comprised of agency division directors and managers, with a "baseline" of where the agency stood regarding daily operations and compliance with policy and procedure. This information was determined through random audits, formal audits, leadership-directed inspections and safety inspections.

The first roll-out of this inspection process was revealing, but not surprising, to both the director and his leadership team. Many deficiencies and problems were identified. Rules and procedures existed primarily on paper, but best practices were being determined by the local facility management. A lack of consistency among all facilities was pervasive. As a result of these findings, a Policy and Procedure Unit was developed. This unit collaborated with stakeholders within the agency to revamp the policies and procedures so that they matched the best practices being used.

The Inspections Unit eventually evolved from focusing on an auditing function, which identified current problems, to a system that created an atmosphere of self-analysis and continuous improvement throughout the agency. Not only would audits document the findings of system deficiencies and problems but would require that the audited stakeholder develop an action plan to rectify them. This plan could include training, recommended changes to policies and/or actual systems, and process changes.

The next critical and most necessary step was to ensure that action plans were being implemented. This was accomplished through follow-up audits. Each inspection/audit conducted by the unit members remains open until this final step is completed. The action plan should contain specific completion dates per agreement between the Inspections Unit and the audited stakeholder.

In order to internalize the quality assurance process, inspectors were assigned to each of the agency's facilities, which are locked, residential secure care facilities, in January 2007. These inspectors are referred to as institutional coordinators (IC). They perform quality assurance functions and support facility leadership in developing continuous improvement activities. Their primary focus is to initially monitor "core" areas, such as separation/exclusion, use of force, youth on youth assaults, suicide prevention and grievances.

The ultimate mission and goal of the Inspections Unit is that all employees can take pride and ownership in continuous improvement. Empowering the employees to participate in the QA process increases their confidence that best practices are being followed. This also ensures that timely decision-making and consistent operations are followed throughout the agency.

The Investigations Unit

Many steps were immediately taken to improve the quality of investigations of incidents occurring within ADJC's jurisdiction. Investigators' pay was increased in order to attract seasoned, quality investigators, and training was enhanced in order to bring in the best investigative practices available. In addition, the Investigations Unit was divided into a Criminal Investigation Unit and a Professional Standards Unit.

Criminal investigation. The Criminal Investigation Unit was staffed with Arizona Certified Police Officers to investigate criminal allegations, with an understanding that an in-house Criminal Investigations Unit would be more responsive and have a better understanding of the agency mission and culture. This particular staffing would allow tailoring of the investigative responses to the unique environment and victimolgy present in a juvenile correctional system. Also important was improving the working relationships between local prosecutors in the regional areas where ADJC facilities exist. The probability of effective prosecution was enhanced by educating the prosecutor in the nuances of the cases, victimology and the impact these cases have on the safe operation of secure care facilities. Investigative policies and procedures were developed to codify best practices and clearly lay out all the steps and expectations involved in conducting investigations. These policies included multidisciplinary protocols for the following: county attorneys, child protective services, law enforcement, and medical and mental health caregivers in the investigation of child abuse crimes.

Professional standards. The Professional Standards Unit was staffed with experienced, professional corrections officers, who were trained as investigators, to examine alleged staff misconduct. Working relationships with ADJC's legal staff (youth rights ombudsman and the attorney general liaison) were improved, raising confidence that the investigation of youth grievances that involve alleged staff misconduct were transparent and thorough. In addition, an Employee Conduct Policy was written in order to promote consistent discipline and identify consequences for unacceptable behavior.

An automated case management system was developed and implemented that would electronically and immediately route all alleged criminal offenses and serious staff misconduct allegations to the Investigations Unit for review, assignment and investigation. Prior to this process, cases were submitted in paper format by administrators. The automation further allowed clear supervisory oversight and quality control of the investigations. An added feature was the electronic routing of summaries of the investigations to ADJC leadership team members. This automated process provided transparency and a "real time" look at events occurring within the agency's jurisdiction.

Other measures. Additional components were added to the Investigations Unit to further promote a safe environment for ADJC youths and staff. A "narcotic detection only" Canine Unit was implemented to detect and prevent the introduction of drugs into ADJC facilities. Two youth corrections officers and their Labrador retriever partners attended a rigorous nine-week certification process. Since the implementation of the Canine Unit, seizures of illegal drugs have dropped dramatically. A homeland security/intelligence officer position was added to promote agency readiness to disasters. Drill disaster planning and table top exercises were implemented and have become part of an emergency preparedness initiative. Beginning September 2004, a background investigator was permanently assigned and trained to conduct thorough background checks of perspective employees. The unit also developed a database to track every step of all background investigations for contractors, providers, interns, volunteers and visitors to the secure care facilities. This has increased the integrity of all background investigations and improved the quality of employees who have contact with ADJC youths.

A Lasting Structure

It takes a tremendous amount of effort and dedication for ADJC to complete its mission and properly serve the state, community, youths and their families. To accomplish this, ADJC has established a structure of support within the agency, comprised of multiple divisions that together strive to make the department successful. The Inspections and Investigations Division, and the initiatives created within, is only one part of a much larger structure designed to create and support a culture of safety, respect, responsibility and positive communication for all staff and youths.

John Dempsey is chief administrator of the Inspections and Investigations Division for ADJC.