W.Va. Corrections Releases Statewide Policy As Inmate Population Continues To Decline

West Virginia corrections officials this week released a redacted version of its policy for handling and preventing COVID-19 in the state’s jails, prisons and other correctional facilities.

Staff for the Division of Corrections and Rehabilitation notified West Virginia Public Broadcasting Wednesday that the information was available online in response to a Freedom of Information Act request for the DCR’s policy. However, information on how individual facilities are localizing and implementing the DCR policy remains confidential. 

The statewide plan, which the DCR says has been in place since March 20, provides recommendations and rules for hygiene, sanitation, spacing and isolation for those with symptoms — as well as those most at risk of dying from infection, due to age or preexisting health conditions.

The DCR plan is based on a model that Kansas-based health consultant VitalCore Health Strategies developed, using recommendations from the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The policy was approved by the American Correctional Association.

Redacted information includes guidance for transporting incarcerated individuals who need medical care, and the details of how inmates should be screened for COVID-19 symptoms. DCR staff have referred to a section of state code allowing them to redact this information because it could potentially aid an inmate in efforts to escape or cause harm. 

West Virginia has not reported any cases of the virus in its facilities. Nationally, incarcerated populations have seen the deaths of corrections staff, federal inmates and state inmates at facilities in Indiana, Louisiana, Ohio and New York, to name a few. 

How Jails, Prisons Enforce Policy Remains Confidential

To ensure implementation of the policy, the West Virginia DCR asks each of its facilities to fill out a worksheet, included within the policy documentation, elaborating on how they plan to localize the statewide policy, and what resources they have for enforcing some of the hygiene and spacing recommendations. 

How West Virginia’s jails and prisons answer these worksheets remains closed to the public. 

Spokesman Lawrence Messina for the Department of Military Affairs and Public Safety, which oversees the DCR, said a federal judge has “already agreed that these materials reflect policy directives and operational procedures of personnel relating to the safe and secure management of inmates or residents that if released, could be used by an inmate or resident to escape a facility, or to cause injury to another inmate, resident or to facility personnel.” 

U.S. District Judge Robert Chambers initially reviewed the state’s COVID-19 response policy for correctional facilities weeks ago, under seal before the DCR made its division-wide policy public this week. This was after a group of West Virginia inmates, represented by the legal firm Mountain State Justice, requested that Chambers order the DCR to create a plan and reduce its incarcerated population. 

Through its now public, division-wide policy for COVID-19, the DCR asks that jails and prisons promote and facilitate good hygiene habits, like handwashing. 

The accompanying worksheet asks “How will good health habits be promoted with your staff?” and “Are soap dispensers or hand soap available in all employee and incarcerated person restrooms? … What is the plan to ensure incarcerated individuals have an adequate supply of bar soap?”

In regard to spacing needs, the worksheet asks facilities to describe their capacity for isolating inmates displaying potential COVID-19 symptoms.

DCR’s policy recommends isolating these individuals to one-person cells. When that’s not possible, it recommends facilities cohort these groups accordingly in a setting where beds are at least six feet apart, and those who potentially are infectious should wear a face mask to limit the likelihood of disease transmission.

For inmates who have been exposed to the coronavirus the worksheet asks, “What rooms could be used for group quarantine?” 

It also asks about the preparedness of a facility to provide enough face masks to those quarantined in a group setting to last 14 days as recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The DCR policy goes on to recommend facilities identify inmates with “comorbid conditions” like diabetes, heart or lung disease, and, “if possible, quarantine them in single cells.”  

There is a section specifying how facilities should care for the sick, saying “treatment consists of assuring hydration and comfort measures.” It allows certain medication like Ibuprofen or Tylenol for fevers, and it calls on facilities to use “a low threshold” when deciding whether an inmate with shortness of breath should be transported to a hospital.

Staff who know they have come into contact with someone with the coronavirus are advised to stay home in quarantine for 14 days. The policy also advises staff who display potential symptoms to stay home. 

The policy doesn’t specifically address coronavirus testing, which already is in short supply nationwide, but the worksheet does ask what individual facilities’ county health departments are advising and offering in that regard. 

The policy calls for staff dealing with quarantined inmates to have the appropriate protective equipment, including gowns, gloves, eye protection and face masks. 

Reducing The Incarcerated Population

Groups such as the West Virginia chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union have advocated for the DCR to reduce its incarcerated population, stating more room makes it easier to enforce social distancing guidelines from the federal government.

The DCR seems to understand the same, also recommending in its policy that facilities stagger their recreation and mealtimes, that they discontinue pill lines and either discontinue or modify group activities.

West Virginia’s incarcerated population continues to decline as the state releases more inmates that criminal justice officials have determined impose little to no risk on public safety. 

According to numbers from the Department of Military Affairs and Public Safety provided on Thursday, April 16, there were 4,085 people incarcerated throughout West Virginia’s regional jails, which have a total capacity for 4,265 beds. On Monday, April 6, DMAPS reported there were more than 4,300 people in West Virginia’s 10 regional jails.

Four individual jails were still at overcapacity on Thursday. According to numbers from DMAPS, Southern Regional Jail had 58 more people than its capacity, Tygart Valley Regional Jail had 61 more people, Northern Regional Correctional Facility and Jail had 27 more people and North Central Regional Jail had 110 more. 

In prisons, there were 5,139 people across 13 locations, which have a total 5,437 beds. No individual prison was over capacity on Thursday. 

Other than reducing the incarcerated population, the DCR policy calls for facilities to reduce contact by ending free-flowing, self-service food stations like salad bars. 

For sanitation, the policy recommends facilities assign more inmates to cleaning duties. 

Correctional facilities ended family visits in March. The policy calls on the corrections staff to “support communications with family members” of incarcerated individuals, which is available through phone or video communications. 

The policy recommends administering flu shots to inmates and staff when they’re in stock, and frequently testing for the flu, because the two diseases have similar symptoms. 

Staff are screened for COVID-19 symptoms as they come into work. That includes their temperature, according to the policy.

Newly arriving inmates are screened as they arrive at a facility, or as they display potential COVID-19 symptoms, and certain inmates are screened depending on the types of jobs they work in a facility, like those in food service or a medical department. 

Additional specifics on inmate screening were redacted. 

Emily Allen is a Report for America corps member. 

Public Criticizes Police Department’s ‘Use Of Force’ Policy At Community Forum

A decades-old policy regarding the Charleston Police Department’s permitted use of force was under fire Tuesday night as city leaders and their constituents gathered to discuss a recent and controversial incident involving two local officers. 

The mayor’s office, the police department and area clergy held a community forum at the local Emmanuel Baptist Church to address an investigation police concluded in late October. Two officers were reviewed for the way they arrested 27-year-old Freda Gilmore earlier this month, a black woman with special needs.

Police said Gilmore had been resisting arrest.

The department’s Professional Standards Division determined the officers, mentioned at the forum as Joshua Mena and Carlie McCoy, had followed the department’s policy appropriately, and after almost a week of paid administrative leave the officers were allowed to return to their jobs on Friday, Oct. 25. 

However, several community members and leaders who spoke Tuesday night continue to scrutinize the handling of the arrest, which was captured on video and shared hundreds of times across Facebook. In the video, one officer is holding Gilmore against the pavement, while another officer appears to be punching her. 

“[T]here is no policy that could justify, in this particular instance … the behavior of the officer that administered the blows to that young woman laying flat on the ground, with an officer on her back,” said Ricardo Martin, president of the Charleston branch of the NAACP.

“If there is a policy [or] if there is a training video that you can hold up to that particular incident and the way it was handled, and say that this policy exonerates the misbehavior of that officer, we’re in trouble,” Martin added. 

When some attendees requested to hear the policy for themselves, Police Chief Opie Smith described it as being “thirty-paged” and something he wished he had the words to explain. 

Sgt. Jason Webb, who works with the department’s public services unit, mentioned the policy dates back to the 1980s. 

“Our ‘use of force’ policy is based on a continuum,” Webb explained to attendees. “So let’s say someone is verbally harassing someone else, then there’s a proper use of force for that, alright? This incident fell under active resistance, which is somebody actively resisting being put into custody by the police officers. Unfortunately, at this time, a fist is considered, under use of force policy, [an] impact weapon.”

Gilmore’s father and stepmother were present for the forum Tuesday night, in addition to Alisyn Proctor, the woman who recorded the incident on her cellphone. 

Proctor was arrested and charged with disorderly conduct the same evening as Gilmore, according to what police said at the forum.

“It’s just not right, the way my daughter was treated by a police officer,” said father Richard Gilmore. “Then they go do their own investigation, and then let the officers go back to work like it’s okay.”

Several people also complained about the police department’s internal investigation, saying the matter should’ve been examined by an external group and it lacked transparency. Forum attendees said they were disappointed the officers were allowed to return regardless of the policy, and that during the investigation the officers continued receiving pay for their time away. 

Some attendees shared lists of requests with Mayor Amy Goodwin and Police Chief Smith. That includes a group of several pastors representing churches in the Charleston area, who are asking Goodwin and the city council to respond in writing within ten days.

“We respectfully request that the mayor immediately refer this case for independent review, by the Kanawha County Prosecutor and the FBI, for a thorough investigation and evaluation of the conduct of the patrolmen in question,” said Rev. Dr. Lloyd Allan Hill. “We request that the patrolmen McCoy and Mena be returned immediately to administrative leave, pending the results of that independent review, by the aforementioned agencies.”

A coalition to “#KeepUsSafeCharlestonWV” held a press conference in the church lobby roughly half an hour before the forum to share their requests, which include revising the police department’s “use of force” policy, mandating police officers to have working body cameras on them during all shifts and creating a mental health intervention team. 

This #KeepUsSafeCharlestonWV coalition also requested the police department finish implementing an eight-point anti-racism platform that the city started a few years ago but never finished. 

The coalition and the NAACP, one of the groups forming the coalition, called on the city multiple times Tuesday night to support the creation of citizen review boards to monitor police activities and discipline officers who are out of compliance.

“It’s something that they have started before, but there’s kind of been a fall off from that,” said Andrea Tyree, communications specialist for Healthy Kids and Families WV, another group in the coalition. “So we’re specifically asking them to continue releasing monthly data on their arrest demographics, and actually conduct the annual coalition-lead anti-racism trainings.”

During the forum, West Virginia NAACP President Owens Brown mentioned his group had proposed the creation of such a board in Wheeling in 2017, but nothing came to fruition. 

This article was updated on Wednesday, Nov. 13., to accurately reflect the gender of the officers involved.

Emily Allen is a Report for America corps member.

House Bill Would Strengthen Whistleblower Protections

Leaders in West Virginia’s House of Delegates say they plan to strengthen a number of ethics laws in West Virginia this legislative session. The first piece of legislation making its way through that chamber this year is House Bill 2006, increasing penalties for violating the state’s Whistle-Blower Law.

A whistleblower is someone who notifies the authorities when a person or organization they work for is involved in some kind of illegal activity. West Virginia’s Whistle-Blower Law protects a public employee from retaliation after coming forward about abuse from his or her employer.

House Judiciary Chairman John Shott, of Mercer County, is the bill’s lead sponsor. He says the penalties currently on the books for an employer who violates this law – or retaliates against the employee doing the whistleblowing – is a fine of up to $500 as well as a suspension from his or her job for up to six months. But Shott says House Bill 2006 changes that.

“It gives them a greater penalty, and it also increases the monetary penalty from $500 to $5,000, but it takes it out of the hands of the judge except to make a finding, and puts it back in the hands of the public agency to take the action against the offender,” Shott said.

The bill makes it clear that the offender would have to personally pay the fine. Instead of the six month suspension, the bill gives the public agency the option to completely terminate any employee who tries to discourage or punish a whistleblower.

“A person who reports misconduct or waste should not be retaliated against,” Shott said, “and this just strengthens the protection of those people so they feel comfortable coming forward if the penalties for someone who retaliates against them are strengthened.”

Delegate Barbara Evans Fleischauer, of Monongalia County, is the Minority Chair for House Judiciary. She says she thinks the bill is a great improvement, adding her name to the legislation as a co-sponsor.

“If we have somebody that comes forward and says there’s fraud, there’s abuse going on, and then they’re retaliated against, I think they’re doing something that helps the public, and so I think that making the person who is retaliating personally liable is the way it should be,” Fleischauer noted, “The taxpayers shouldn’t have to cover the cost of the fine. I think it’s a really good bill.”

Fleischauer says this bill is an example of how legislators can work in a bipartisan way to create better policy in the state.

Chairman Shott says this ethics bill will be one of several to come before the House this session.

Comment Period on Proposed Education Changes Ends Next Week

The public has the chance to comment through early next week on proposed state Board of Education policy changes on course offerings.

The board proposal would require high schools to offer students an optional computer science course. The Charleston Gazette-Mail reports it also would change social studies and science requirements and course offerings.

Under one proposal, schools would be allowed to determine course instructional time. Previously, counties had to request state board policy waivers before offering high school credits for courses with fewer than 8,100 instructional minutes.

If approved, the changes would take place the next school year. The public comment period ends on March 14.

Unmanned Aircrafts Prohibited on Appalachian Trail Grounds

The National Park Service is prohibiting the use of unmanned aircrafts on the Appalachian National Scenic Trail grounds.

The National Park Service issued the new policy this week for the Appalachian Trail. Park officials say it will remain in effect until they can determine that unmanned aircraft landings, launchings, or operating will not result in any negative impacts to the park grounds.

The policy was issued due to complaints from visitors and staff, as a drastic increase in noise disturbance and even harassment from those operating the unmanned aircrafts occurred.

Wendy Janssen, the superintendent of the Appalachian National Scenic Trail, stated that not only would this policy affect the Appalachian Trail, but would also affect all 401 National Park Service units. The policy will be in effect for at least 18 months, and then a future policy may be discussed.

An unmanned aircraft is any device used or intended for flight without direct human intervention from within or on the aircraft. Examples include model airplanes, quadcopters, and drones used for either recreation or commerce.

The park service has not yet identified, analyzed, or examined how the unmanned aircrafts would affect the Appalachian National Scenic Trail. Officials say they are working to determine the most appropriate policy to protect park resources and ensure visitors have a rich experience.

New Policy Requires A Through F Grade for West Virginia Schools

Parents across the state may soon have a better understanding of how their child’s school is fairing thanks to a new grading system adopted Monday by the state Board of Education.

The change comes after a directive from Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin during his State of the State Address in January. In his address, he specifically called on the board to implement and A through F grading scale.

Beginning July 1, schools will be ranked on that new grading scale, a practice some current board members think will make the process easier for parents to understand and also evoked more community participation.

“I think we all agree that one of the things that is needed is more community involvement in our schools,” said former Board President and current member Wade Linger, “and if nothing else this will signal which communities need to get involved the most the soonest.”

The grades themselves are based on student achievement and school quality and include a list of criteria including proficiency rates, observed growth and graduation rates for high schools.

Not all board members agreed with the new practice, however. Dr. William White was the only nay vote on the measure.

“I have a problem with labeling schools in a way that creates a very negative impact on that whole community,” White said.

“It doesn’t just impact the school, it also impacts the neighborhood, housing values, recruitment could be a major issue. So, those are some much deeper issues that we have to deal with.”

Along with the new school evaluation system, the state board will also implement a new county school system approval method. Under the new system, individual school scores will be added up to show the county’s overall health.

The newly approved policy also sets out intervention methods for low performing schools, an appeal process for schools who disagree with their evaluations, and awards and recognitions for schools who consistently achieve.
 

Exit mobile version