Data collection and information reporting recommendations

    1. I recommend that the ministry’s data collection practices as they relate to institutional violence be restructured to facilitate the creation of targeted and timely policy responses.

      Consultation with the Information Management Unit, institutional staff, and data analysts must occur to ensure that any new platform created captures necessary information for present and future analysis of institutional violence. At a minimum, the new platform must capture multiple variables including, but not limited to, specific inmate populations, correctional employees, time and location of incidents, and institutions or regions of the province in order to identify patterns relating to institutional violence that may emerge.

    2. I recommend that the ministry conduct a detailed analysis of violence in each of Ontario’s correctional institutions. The methodology used in the Case Study: Toronto South Detention Centre should serve as a template for a preliminary localized analysis at each correctional site.

      This will ensure that variation between institutions due to inmate demographics, staff complement, and supervision culture and practices, among other factors, are given appropriate consideration. Methodology will need to be expanded to include other aspects of institutional violence, including inmate-on-inmate, staff-on-inmate, and staff-on-staff violence.

    3. I recommend that the monitoring of reported incidents of institutional violence be in regular time intervals, and as close to real-time as possible, to allow trend analysis that quickly recognizes developments or anomalies.

      The Correctional Services and Reintegration Act, 2018 creates an Inspector General role for continuous oversight of Ontario’s correctional institutions; monitoring institutional violence must be a key responsibility allocated to this office.

    4. I recommend that correctional managers and senior administrators conduct routine audits of reported incidents of institutional violence and their corresponding paperwork to ensure compliance with ministry policy and law. Timely completion of these audits should become a performance consideration.

    5. I recommend that the ministry create a new policy standardizing when and how to initiate an Inmate Incident Report following the completion of an Occurrence Report by a correctional employee.

    6. I recommend that sergeants and managers are trained on the utilization of the Modernization Division’s new digital platform for incident reporting, including the policy direction following the implementation of recommendation 1.5. from the Independent Review of Ontario Corrections’ Institutional Violence in Ontario: Final Report. This training must be completed prior to the rollout of the new platform.

    7. I recommend that data from the Offender Tracking Information System and the Modernization Division’s new digital Inmate Incident Report platform be integrated to allow for multi-variable analysis relevant to institutional violence.

    8. I recommend that data and trends pertaining to reported incidents of violence are regularly monitored at the institutional, regional, and corporate levels within the ministry.

      Until the Inspector General of Correctional Services is established, trends must be analyzed within MCSCS as close to real-time as possible and communicated between corporate, regional, and institutional levels promptly to inform the development of appropriate operational responses.

Institutional culture and staffing recommendations

    1. I recommend that the ministry develop a comprehensive staff mental health strategy to provide self-assessment, self-care, and external support for correctional employees to assist in coping with occupational stress and injuries.

    2. I recommend that the ministry develop a management model with a care-based, ethical, and empathetic decision-making framework for daily interactions with frontline staff that will positively impact staff-inmate interactions, improve officer wellness, as well as enhance institutional safety and security.

    3. I recommend that the ministry conduct annual “quality of environment” or “moral performance” audits of all correctional institutions benchmarked against international and evidence-based best practices.

    4. I recommend that the ministry undertake a review of the current MCSCS Correctional Services’ Use of Force Model and the effectiveness of the use of force training against evidence-based best correctional practices. This review must take into consideration the daily perception of risk and danger that correctional employees face, rather than the periodic occupational stressors that are experienced by police officers.

    5. The ministry may wish to consider the new Engagement and Intervention Model utilized by the Correctional Service of Canada and best practices used to manage violence in other confined settings, such as forensic mental health or dementia units of long-term care facilities.

    6. I recommend that the ministry revise the language of the current Use of Force policy to align with international standards of inmate treatment that allow for use of force only in accordance with safety and security objectives. I further recommend inclusion of a definition for the term ‘discipline’ to prevent ambiguity and conflation with the term ‘punishment’ in the MCSCS Use of Force policy.

    7. I recommend that the ministry accelerate its stated plans to review and update the existing Correctional Officer Training and Assessment (COTA) program curriculum. In revising the curriculum, the ministry must incorporate core competencies, and emphasize the importance of fostering an institutional culture characterized by legality, dignity, and respect. Training must always address the dual nature of correctional work which encompasses both security and care.

    8. I recommend that COTA redevelopment emphasize verbal and other de-escalation training including specific situational guidance for managing vulnerable or high-needs inmates.

    9. I recommend that the ministry work with justice partners and stakeholders to develop training for correctional employees on correctional and human rights law as well as criminal procedure. The newly developed training must be incorporated into the COTA curriculum.

    10. I recommend that the ministry establish policy for localized mentorship programs that can be operationalized at each correctional facility. These programs must outline minimum requirements for mentors and be available to all correctional staff and managers.

    11. I recommend that the ministry work with policing partners to develop joint policy and provide joint education sessions to correctional employees with the aim of fostering a better understanding of the police role in correctional matters and the legal requirements for criminal proceedings as they relate to pursuing charges when inmates engage in criminal conduct.

    12. I recommend that the ministry further collaborate with both provincial and local police services to develop dedicated police units that specialize in the investigation of incidents that occur within Ontario’s correctional institutions.

    13. I recommend that best practices for report writing be immediately developed and incorporated into COTA and ongoing staff training, with an emphasis on procedural fairness and minimum evidentiary standards for external legal proceedings.

    14. I recommend that the Personal Alarm Location system be implemented at the Toronto South Detention Centre following the completion of the Electronic Security System upgrade in 2019. An evaluation, including a cost-benefit analysis, must be undertaken within one year of the implementation of the Personal Alarm Location system.

    15. I recommend that any person entering the secure portion of a correctional facility undergo screening (i.e., handheld/walk-through metal detectors and parcel x-ray machines) in those institutions with the requisite space and technologies.

    16. Screening of all persons entering secure areas of Ontario’s correctional institutions is necessary to enhance the personal safety of staff and inmates, as well as maintaining public confidence by detecting and intercepting contraband.

    17. I recommend that the ministry engage with the Ministry of the Attorney General to establish guidelines supporting the need for swift and certain sentencing for inmates who are found guilty of a serious assault against correctional staff.

    18. I recommend that the ministry explore the introduction of a supervisory correctional officer position (i.e., Correctional Officer 3 [CO3]) to facilitate staff mentorship and assist with compliance and preventative security. Introduction of a supervisory correctional officer position is dependent on the review and potential reclassification of all correctional officer positions by post requirements.

    19. I recommend that appropriate role competencies be created for each of the correctional officer classifications (Correctional Officer 1 [CO1] through Correctional Officer 3 [CO3]) and that positions be filled based on a candidate’s ability to meet these competencies.

Operational practices recommendations

    1. I recommend that the ministry implement an evidence-based institutional security risk assessment tool that is validated for gender identity, ethnic populations, and Indigenous persons. This tool should be administered to all new admissions upon intake to identify individuals with a propensity for engaging in institutional violence so that staff and managers can be equipped with targeted preventive measures.

    2. I recommend that policy and operational practices align with the principle of least restrictive measures by ensuring that all inmates are held in minimum security settings unless the security risk assessment tool confirms additional security measures are required.

    3. I recommend that inmates be given written notice and explanation for their initial security risk classification and that reclassification occur at least once every 30 days.

    4. I recommend that the ministry establish standardized and validated measures to identify characteristics of inmates that warrant alerts to be entered into the Offender Tracking Information System. Alerts related to an inmate’s behaviour that may be indicative of physical or mental health symptoms must be verified by clinicians.

    5. I recommend that the ministry establish dedicated minimum, medium, and maximum security housing areas within each of Ontario’s correctional facilities and provide definitions of the conditions of confinement and operational procedures in these types of custody.

    6. I recommend that institutions that do not have the capacity to create separate units create an ‘alternate housing area’ that allows for individualized arrangements in line with the exhaustive list of alternate housing unit types outlined in the ministry’s Placement of Special Management Inmates policy, most recently revised in July 2018.

    7. I recommend that the ministry provide standards for the minimum conditions of confinement and an operational routine for each alternate housing unit within six months. These standards must align with the principle of least restrictive measures and be developed with input from the correctional bargaining unit.

    8. I recommend that oversight measures be put in place to ensure that updated alternate housing policies, which identify standardized definitions for alternate units, are being implemented appropriately and that this area of correctional practice be a focus of the Inspector General of Correctional Services created in the Correctional Services and Reintegration Act, 2018.

    9. I recommend that procedural safeguards and oversight mechanisms be applied to all alternate housing units that restrict out-of-cell time to less than that of the general population.

    10. I recommend that the ministry ensure that correctional staff and managers assigned to work in alternate units are carefully recruited, suitably selected, properly trained, and fully competent to carry out their duties in these specialized environments. These posts should be filled first via an expression of interest and not based on seniority alone.

    11. I recommend that the ministry establish or contract programs, program delivery, and meaningful activities in which all individuals held in custody may work, study, or participate and that rehabilitative programs comply with the needs identified in individual assessments.

    12. I recommend that the ministry collaborate with community partners and stakeholders to identify how existing community-based services and programs could be leveraged to promote an individual’s safe, gradual release from custody.

    13. I recommend that the ministry allocate appropriate resources and supports to ensure that evidence-based rehabilitative programs are routinely scheduled and consistently available in each institution based on individualized risk/needs assessments.

    14. I recommend that all individuals in custody classified to an alternate housing unit/area be assigned a dedicated case manager and be provided with an individualized care plan, and/or treatment plan, that includes rehabilitative programming where appropriate.

    15. I recommend that the Toronto South Detention Centre initiate a one-year pilot study to operationalize a Behavioural Care Unit, as outlined in the ministry’s July 2018 Placement of Special Management Inmates policy, using the following criteria:

      • Enhanced complement of staff to facilitate out-of-cell time and permit for dedicated case managers to ensure that each inmate classified to the unit has an inmate care plan developed, and that the care plan is appropriately followed.

      • Correctional officers to fulfill the role of case managers within the unit and the unit social worker to provide clinical support as needed.

      • Permanent rosters of correctional staff selected first through expressions of interest.

      • Correctional officers to be provided the opportunity to work eight-hour shifts if they are assigned to the Behavioural Care Unit for the duration of the pilot.

      • Dedicated mental health staff (registered nurse, social worker and psychologist) assigned to deliver treatment and programming to inmates classified to the Behavioural Care Unit.

      • Piloting the utilization of the Correctional Officer 3 (CO3) position that is filled via an expression of interest based on competencies required for the position. The CO3 position must be carefully recruited, suitably selected, properly trained and an adequately experienced officer to assist with compliance, preventative security, and increased demands working in this high-stress unit.

    16. I recommend that the ministry pilot the use of a cell door meal hatch with a ‘sally port’ function for a six-month duration in the three institutions with the highest incidents of hatch-related assaults. These specialty hatches must be limited in number and only be used in Behavioural Care Units following the implementation of clear operational procedures and the development of clear oversight mechanisms.

      Further analysis will be required by the ministry to determine the appropriate sites. Additionally, an evaluation of each pilot site must be completed within three months of the conclusion of the six-month pilot study, and must consider demographic information pertaining to the inmates whose cell door(s) is equipped with these specialty meal hatches, other interventions initiated in conjunction with the use of the specialty hatches, and outcomes while the specialty hatch is and is not in use.

    17. I recommend that the Toronto South Detention Centre be one of the pilot sites as per recommendation 3.16.

      43% of the reported inmate-on-staff incidents (not including threats) that occurred at TSDC in 2017 occurred through the cell door meal hatch. Given that the majority of these incidents occurred in a Segregation Unit, Special Handling Unit or Mental Health Assessment Unit, it is recommended that TSDC pilot the use of these specialty hatches in their Behavioural Care Unit. This pilot should be six-months in duration with an evaluative review taking place immediately following the pilot, as per recommendation 3.16.