DOCSLIB.ORG

California State Prison

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Case 2:90-cv-00520-LKK-JFM Document 4308 Filed 01/25/13 Page 1 of 354 Raymond F. Patterson, M.D., D.F.A.P.A1 1904 R Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20009 Telephone: 301-292-3737 Facsimile: 301-292-6272 REPORT ON SUICIDES COMPLETED IN THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION IN CALENDAR YEAR 2011 I. Introduction This is the thirteenth Report on Completed Suicides in the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR or Department), covering the 34 such deaths which occurred in calendar year 2011.2 It is submitted as part of the Special Master’s continuing review of the defendant’s compliance with court ordered remediation in the matter of Coleman v. Brown, No. CIV S-90-0520 LKK JSM P (E.D.Cal). As discussed in detail below, a number of significant findings that are very concerning emerged from this reviewer’s examination of all 34 suicides in 2011. Among these are the following: In 2011, a CDCR inmate died by suicide every 10.73 days on average. The rate of CDCR inmate suicides in 2011 was 21.01 per 100,000, which was essentially unchanged since 2010, when it was 21.1 per 100,000. The rate for 2012 rose to 23.72 per 100,000, based on a reported CDCR inmate population of 134,901 at mid-2012.3 These rates stand in stark contrast to the rate of 16 suicides per 100,000 across U.S. State prisons in 2010.4 They also compare unfavorably with the average rates during the decade from 2001 to 2010 among the eight largest state prison systems during that decade, and with average rate of the U.S. Federal prison 1 Curriculum Vitae attached as Exh. A. 2The CDCR reported 33 suicide deaths, but based on this reviewer’s examination, an additional death, identified as case number 34 below, was more likely than not to have been a suicide, for a total of 34 suicide deaths in 2011. 3 Source: CDCR Website, archives, population as of midnight June 30, 2012. 4 The source of all citations in this report to other prison systems’ suicide rates is the Website, U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. 2010 is the most recent year for which the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics has published data on suicide rates in U.S. State prisons, and 2008 is the most recent year for which it has published data on suicide rates in U.S. Federal prisons. 1 Case 2:90-cv-00520-LKK-JFM Document 4308 Filed 01/25/13 Page 2 of 354 system from 2001 to 2008 (the most recent year for which the U.S. Bureaus of Justice Statistics reports suicide rates in U.S. Federal prisons): o Florida, 2001-2010: 8 per 100,0005 o U.S. Federal Prisons, 2001-2008 (most recent year reported): 9 per 100,0006 o Georgia, 2001-2010: 12 per 100,0007 o Ohio, 2001-2010: 12 per 100,0008 o Michigan, 2001-2010: 14 per 100,0009 o Pennsylvania, 2001-2010: 15 per 100,00010 o Texas, 2001-2010: 16 per 100,00011 o Illinois, 2001-2010: 17 per 100,00012 o New York, 2001-2010: 20 per 100,00013 Thirty-minute welfare checks for inmates newly admitted to administrative segregation units were not conducted consistently. Mandatory custodial checks were not completed consistently in administrative segregation units or in general population. In five of the suicide cases in 2011, identified as inmates G, R, X, AA, and EE, rigor mortis had already begun prior to the discovery of the inmate’s body.14 In three of these five cases, the inmate was housed in administrative segregation at the time of the suicide. The onset of rigor mortis indicates that in these five cases, at least two to 5 Approximated average prison population of 89,768, based on population report closest to mid-point of period, i.e. 12/31/05. Website, U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics. 6Approximated average prison population of 187,618, based on population report closest to mid-point of period, i.e. 12/31/05. Website, U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics. 7 Approximated average prison population of 48,749, based on population report closest to mid-point of period, i.e. 12/31/05. Website, U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics. 8 Approximated average prison population 45,484, based on population report closest to mid-point of period, i.e. 12/31/05. Website, U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics. 9Approximated average prison population of 49,546, based on population report closest to mid-point of period, i.e. 12/31/05. Website, U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics. 10 Approximated average prison population 42,380, based on population report closest to mid-point of period, i.e. 12/31/05. Website, U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics. 11 Approximated average prison population of 169,003, based on population report closest to mid-point of period, i.e. 12/31/2005. Website, U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics. 12 Approximated average prison population of 44,919, based on population report closest to mid-point of period, i.e. 12/31/05. Website, U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics. 13 Approximated average prison population of 62,743 based on population report closest to mid-point of period, i.e. 12/31/05. Website, U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics. 14 Rigor mortis is defined as “the stiffness of joints and muscular rigidity of a dead body, caused by depletion of ATP in the tissues. It begins two to four hours after death and lasts up to about four days, after which the muscles and joints relax.” COLLINS ENGLISH DICTIONARY (2003 ed.) 2 Case 2:90-cv-00520-LKK-JFM Document 4308 Filed 01/25/13 Page 3 of 354 four hours had passed since the time of death before the bodies were discovered, underscoring the importance of timely welfare checks and custodial checks. In 25 or 73.5 percent of the 34 CDCR suicide cases in 2011, there was at least some degree of inadequacy in assessment, treatment, or intervention, which is essentially unchanged since the rate of 74 percent among suicides which occurred in 2010. Inadequacies appeared among conduct of suicide risk evaluations, treatment and/or clinical interventions, non-completion of timely custody welfare checks, and potential lifesaving interventions such as administration of CPR or problems with the use of an automated external defibrillator. Trend analysis shows a disturbing rise in the rate of suicides across the seven-year period of 2005 through 2011, when the average suicide rate was 21.6 per 100,000. This is compared to the average rate shown by trend analysis for the six-year period of 1999 through 2004, when the average rate was 16.2 per 100,000. Alarmingly, in 50 percent of the suicide cases in 2011, inmate suicide risk evaluations were either not done, or found levels of “low” or “no appreciable” risk of suicide, without adequate consideration of risk factors, past history, and/or review of medical records. As a result, interventions that could have been appropriate were not implemented. Among 16 of the 34 suicides -- identified as inmates B, C, D, G, H, I, J, Q, T, V, W, X, Z, BB, CC, and FF – cardiopulmonary resuscitation, including availability or use of the Automated External Defibrillator (AED) and/or first aid, were not performed in a timely and/or appropriate manner. Among these 16 cases were 11 cases – identified as inmates B, C, H, I, J, Q, T, Z, BB, CC, and FF - involving failures to follow policies regarding availability and/or use of the AED. There were no suicide deaths by CDCR inmates in any Department of State Hospitals (DSH) facilities or CDCR Mental Health Crisis Beds (MHCBs). There was one suicide in an Outpatient Housing Unit (OHU) and two suicides in a Psychiatric Services Unit (PSU) in calendar year 2011. In 2011, there were four suicides at the California Men’s Colony (CMC). This follows six suicides at the same institution in 2010, which was an unprecedented high for any single CDCR institution from 1999 through 2011. None of the four suicides at CMC in 2011 were determined to have been more likely foreseeable and/or preventable than not. 3 Case 2:90-cv-00520-LKK-JFM Document 4308 Filed 01/25/13 Page 4 of 354 CDCR failed to comply with post-suicide review and reporting timeframes in seven or 20.6 percent of cases in 2011, which was an improvement over preceding years, but in five cases there was no signed review and approval by the Directors or their designees of the Statewide Mental Health Program or Adult Institutions in the documents provided, as required by the Program Guide. II. Format, Terminology and Definitions Unlike past annual suicide reports by the special master’s expert, this report is presented in narrative format. It is supported by tables, charts, and graphs which appear in Appendices A through E, and by reviews of each of the individual suicide cases in 2011, appearing in Appendix F. The terms “foreseeable” and “preventable” are used in this report as they have been in previous reports. They describe the adequacy and implications of CDCR suicide prevention policies and procedures, staff training and supervision, clinical judgments, and utilization of clinical and custodial alternatives to reduce the likelihood of completed suicides. The term “foreseeable” refers to those cases in which available information about an inmate indicates the presence of substantial or high risk for suicide, and requires reasonable clinical, custodial, and/or administrative intervention(s).
Recommended publications
  • California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

    California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation

    California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation Institution abbreviation, City, State and zip code. Prison Name Abbreviation City State Zip Avenal State Prison ASP Avenal CA 93204 California City Correctional Center CAC California City CA 93505 California State Prison, Calipatria CAL Calipatria CA 92233 California Correctional Center CCC Susanville CA 96130 California Correctional Institution CCI Tehachapi CA 93561 Centinela State Prison CEN Imperial CA 92251 Central California Women’s Facility CCWF Chowchilla CA 93610 California Health Care Facility CHCF Stockton CA 95215 California Institution for Men CIM Chino CA 91710 California Institution for Women CIW Corona CA 92878 California Men's Colony CMC San Luis Obispo CA 93409 California Medical Facility CMF Vacaville CA 95696 California State Prison, Corcoran COR Corcoran CA 93212 California Rehabilitation Center CRC Norco CA 92860 Correctional Training Facility CTF Soledad CA 93960 Chuckawalla Valley State Prison CVSP Blythe CA 92225 Deuel Vocational Institute DVI Tracy CA 95376 Folsom State Prison FSP Represa CA 95671 High Desert State Prison HDSP Susanville CA 96127 Ironwood State Prison ISP Blythe CA 92225 Kern Valley State Prison KVSP Delano CA 93216 California State Prison, Lancaster LAC Lancaster CA 93536 Mule Creek State Prison MCSP Ione CA 95640 North Kern State Prison NKSP Delano CA 93215 Pelican Bay State Prison PBSP Crescent City CA 95531 Pleasant Valley State Prison PVSP Coalinga CA 93210 RJ Donovan Correctional Facility RJD San Diego CA 92179 California State Prison, Sacramento SAC Represa CA 95671 Substance Abuse Treatment Facility SATF Corcoran CA 93212 Sierra Conservation Center SCC Jamestown CA 95327 California State Prison, Solano SOL Vacaville CA 95696 San Quentin SQ San Quentin CA 94964 Salinas Valley State Prison SVSP Soledad CA 93960 Valley State Prison VSP Chowchilla CA 93610 Wasco State Prison WSP Wasco CA 93280 N.A.
  • State of California California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation Adult Programs

    State of California California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation Adult Programs

    STATE OF CALIFORNIA CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION ADULT PROGRAMS Annual Report Division of Addiction and Recovery Services June 2009 MISSION STATEMENT The mission of the Division of Addiction and Recovery Services (DARS) is to provide evidence-based substance use disorder treatment services to California’s inmates and parolees. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION ADULT PROGRAMS DIVISION OF ADDICTION AND RECOVERY SERVICES MATTHEW L. CATE SECRETARY KATHRYN P. JETT UNDERSECRETARY, ADULT PROGRAMS C. ELIZABETH SIGGINS CHIEF DEPUTY SECRETARY (Acting), ADULT PROGRAMS THOMAS F. POWERS DIRECTOR DIVISION OF ADDICTION AND RECOVERY SERVICES SHERRI L. GAUGER DEPUTY DIRECTOR DIVISION OF ADDICTION AND RECOVERY SERVICES ACKNOWLEDGEMENT This report was prepared by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitations’ (CDCR) Division of Addiction and Recovery Services’ (DARS) Data Analysis and Evaluation Unit (DAEU) with assistance from Steven Chapman, Ph.D., Assistant Secretary, Office of Research. It provides an initial summary of performance indicators, demographics and background information on the DARS Substance Abuse Treatment Programs. The information presented in this report is designed to assist the treatment programs and institutional staff in assessing progress, identifying barriers and weaknesses to effective programming, and analyzing trends, while establishing baseline points to measure outcomes. Under the direction of Bill Whitney, Staff Services Manager II; Gerald Martin, Staff Services Manager I; Sheeva Sabati, Research Analyst II; Ruben Mejia, Research Program Specialist; Krista Christian, Research Program Specialist, conducted extensive research and analysis for this report. Peggy Bengs, Information Officer II and Norma Pate, Special Assistant to the Deputy Director, DARS provided editorial contributions. NOTE: In 2007, DARS designed the Offender Substance Abuse Treatment Database to monitor and evaluate programs.
  • Prison Suicide: an Overview and Guide to Prevention National Institute of Corrections

    Prison Suicide: an Overview and Guide to Prevention National Institute of Corrections

    U.S. Department of Justice National Institute of Corrections Prison Suicide: An Overview and Guide to Prevention National Institute of Corrections Morris L. Thigpen, Director Susan M. Hunter, Chief Prisons Division John E. Moore, Project Manager Prison Suicide: An Overview and Guide to Prevention By Lindsay M. Hayes Project Director National Center on Institutions and Alternatives Mansfield, Massachusetts June 1995 This document was prepared under grant number 93P01GHU1 from the National Institute of Corrections, U.S. Department of Justice. Points of view or opinions stated in this document are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. Copyright © 1995 by the National Center on Institutions and Alternatives The National Institute of Corrections reserves the right to reproduce, publish, translate, or otherwise use, and to authorize others to publish and use all or any part of the copyrighted material contained in this publication. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS FOREWORD .......................................................................................................................................v PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ..................................................................................vi 1. INTRODUCTION AND LITERATURE REVIEW ..............................................................1 2. NATIONAL AND STATE STANDARDS FOR PRISON SUICIDE PREVENTION ...........................................................................................................8
  • Suicide Research: Selected Readings. Volume 2

    Suicide Research: Selected Readings. Volume 2

    SuicideResearchText-Vol2:SuicideResearchText-Vol2 8/6/10 11:00 AM Page i SUICIDE RESEARCH: SELECTED READINGS Volume 2 May 2009–October 2009 J. Sveticic, K. Andersen, D. De Leo Australian Institute for Suicide Research and Prevention WHO Collaborating Centre for Research and Training in Suicide Prevention National Centre of Excellence in Suicide Prevention SuicideResearchText-Vol2:SuicideResearchText-Vol2 8/6/10 11:00 AM Page ii First published in 2009 Australian Academic Press 32 Jeays Street Bowen Hills Qld 4006 Australia www.australianacademicpress.com.au Reprinted in 2010 Copyright for the Introduction and Comments sections is held by the Australian Institute for Suicide Research and Prevention, 2009. Copyright in all abstracts is retained by the current rights holder. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act, 1968, no part may be reproduced without prior permission from the Australian Institute for Suicide Research and Prevention. ISBN: 978-1-921513-53-4 SuicideResearchText-Vol2:SuicideResearchText-Vol2 8/6/10 11:00 AM Page iii Contents Foreword ................................................................................................vii Acknowledgments ..............................................................................viii Introduction Context ..................................................................................................1 Methodology ........................................................................................2 Key articles Alexopoulos et al, 2009. Reducing suicidal ideation
  • Exhibit a to 3JP December 2020 Status Report.Xlsx

    Exhibit a to 3JP December 2020 Status Report.Xlsx

    Case 4:01-cv-01351-JST Document 3518-1 Filed 12/15/20 Page 1 of 2 EXHIBIT A Case 4:01-cv-01351-JST Document 3518-1 Filed 12/15/20 Page 2 of 2 Exhibit A Population as of December 9, 2020 Institution Design Capacity Actual Population Population as % of design capacity Total housed in adult institutions1 85,083 91,852 108.0% Total housed in camps 1,655 Total housed out of state 0 Individual CDCR Institutions - Men Avenal State Prison 2,920 3,395 116.3% California State Prison, Calipatria 2,308 2,952 127.9% California Correctional Center* 3,883 2,227 57.4% California Correctional Institution 2,783 2,966 106.6% California State Prison, Centinela 2,308 3,082 133.5% California Health Care Facility, Stockton 2,951 2,389 81.0% California Institution for Men 2,976 2,064 69.4% California Men's Colony 3,838 3,115 81.2% California Medical Facility 2,361 2,038 86.3% California State Prison, Corcoran 3,116 3,947 126.7% California Rehabilitation Center 2,491 2,123 85.2% Correctional Training Facility 3,312 4,311 130.2% Chuckawalla Valley State Prison 1,738 1,871 107.7% Deuel Vocational Institution 1,681 1,364 81.1% Folsom State Prison 2,066 2,089 101.1% High Desert State Prison 2,324 3,329 143.2% Ironwood State Prison 2,200 2,811 127.8% Kern Valley State Prison 2,448 3,636 148.5% California State Prison, Los Angeles 2,300 2,732 118.8% Mule Creek State Prison 3,284 3,897 118.7% North Kern State Prison 2,694 2,614 97.0% Pelican Bay State Prison 2,380 2,231 93.7% Pleasant Valley State Prison 2,308 2,781 120.5% RJ Donovan Correctional Facility 2,992 3,595
  • Continuing the Dialogue on Canada's Federal Penitentiary System

    Continuing the Dialogue on Canada's Federal Penitentiary System

    CONTINUING THE DIALOGUE ON CANADA’S FEDERAL PENITENTIARY SYSTEM A Little Less Conversation, A Lot More Action Jarrod Shook OPENING UP A CONVERSATION In our conclusion to Volume 26, Number 1&2 – Dialogue on Canada’s Federal Penitentiary System and the Need for Penal Reform – we at the Journal of Prisoners on Prisons (JPP) left off with the following hope: … that our readers, and in particular Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada Jody Wilson-Raybould who was mandated to review criminal justice, laws, policies and practices enacted during the 2006-2015 period under the previous government, will take seriously the voices of prisoners (Shook and McInnis, 2017, p. 300). To encourage this process, the 19 October 2017 launch of the JPP included a press release summarizing the recommendations for penitentiary reform made by those who participated in the dialogue. Copies of the journal (Shook et al., 2017a), the press release, along with an article summarising the project (Shook and McInnis, 2017), and information about where the journal can now be accessed online (see www.jpp.org) were also sent directly to Prime Minister Trudeau, Minister of Justice and Attorney General Jody Wilson Raybould, Minister of Public Safety Ralph Goodale, former CSC Commissioner Don Head, Members of Parliament on the Standing Committee on Public Safety & National Security, as well as the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights. These materials were also provided to members of the Senate Committee on Human Rights, the Offi ce of the Correctional Investigator, the research offi ces of CSC and Public Safety Canada’s, major media outlets, and a network of university colleagues whom we requested that they consider incorporating the special issue into their course content and required course reading lists.
  • Suicide in Correctional Facilities

    Suicide in Correctional Facilities

    Suicide in Correctional Facilities Suicide in Correctional Facilities Albert De Amicis, MPPM University of Phoenix Faculty September 14, 2009 Suicide in a Correctional Facility Table of Contents ABSTRACT........................................................................................................................iii INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………....1 NCIA 1981 SUICIDE VICTIMS PROFILE – Table -1.......................................................3 DEFINE THE PROBLEM………………………………………………………………....8 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES……………………………………………………………..14 ESTABLISH THE EVALUATION CRITERIA……………………………………….....16 EVALUATING ALTERNATIVE POLICIES …………………………………………... 17 Alternative One - Elayn Hunt Correctional Center Suicide Prevention Plan.......... 17 Alternative Two - Jefferson County Corrections: Inmate Watch Program Helps Prevent Suicides..............................................................22 DISTINGUISHING AMONG ALTERNATIVES……………………………………….. 25 Alternative One - Elayn Hunt Correctional Center Suicide Prevention Plan.......... 25 Benefit Cost Analysis Salaries – Table-2....................................28 Alternative Two - Jefferson County Corrections: Inmate Watch Program Helps Prevent Suicides..............................................................30 DISTINGUISHING AMONG ALTERNATIVE POLICIES..............................................31 APPLICATION OF THE SATISFICING METHOD – Table-3.........................................31 MONITORING AND IMPLEMENTATION OF POLICIES ………………………........32 SUMMARY.........................................................................................................................33
  • Supermax Isolation

    Supermax Isolation

    one Supermax Isolation Solitary confinement has been part of American correctional practice since the birth of the nation. Th e idea of isolating prisoners for their own good was supported in the fi nal years of the eighteenth century by such prominent fi gures as Benjamin Franklin and his friend Benjamin Rush, the pioneering psychiatrist. During that era, many Quakers viewed crime as a moral lapse and jail as a place where prisoners would be left by themselves in a cell and would be expected to search their souls about their errant ways and be “penitent” (thus the origin of the word penitentiary). But over the years, prison funding could not keep pace with a growing prison population, so this kind of solitary confi nement for the general population of prisoners was abandoned as too expensive to construct for or to maintain. Where solitary was retained, its original rehabilitative rationale was stripped away; it was now openly used merely as a dreaded punishment and deterrent within the prison and as a convenient means of separating out, for months, years, even decades, individuals whose inclusion in the general prison population might pose problems for prison management. the long history of solitary confinement in the united states Th e fi rst correctional facility in the nation to consign prisoners to single cells was the Walnut Street Jail in Philadelphia. It was originally built in 1773 to handle the overfl ow of prisoners from the nearby, massively overcrowded High Street Jail. Th ere were simply too many debtors, paupers, prostitutes, thieves, and ex- slaves going to jail for the jailers to fi nd the space to house them.
  • CALIFORNIA PROFESSIONAL FIREFIGHTERS 1780 Creekside Oaks Drive, Sacramento, CA 95833

    CALIFORNIA PROFESSIONAL FIREFIGHTERS 1780 Creekside Oaks Drive, Sacramento, CA 95833

    CALIFORNIA PROFESSIONAL FIREFIGHTERS 1780 Creekside Oaks Drive, Sacramento, CA 95833 Adin Fire Protection District Aerojet Fire Services Ken Richardson, Fire Chief Greg Granados, Fire Chief P.O. Box 16 P.O. Box 13222, BLD 02-028 Adin, CA 96006 Sacramento, CA 95813 Office: (530) 299-4700 Fax: Office: (916) 355-4251 Fax: (916) 355-4035 General Email: General Email: Chief Email: Chief Email: [email protected] Dept. Web: Dept. Web: City Web: City Web: MACS Designator: ADI Personnel: Mostly Volunteer MACS Designator: AFS Personnel: Paid County: Modoc Fire Dept. ID: 25005 County: Sacramento Fire Dept. ID: 34003 Agnews Developmental Center Air National Guard Fire Dept. Mike Horton, Fire Chief Christopher Diaz, Fire Chief 3500 Zanker Road 5323 E. McKinley Ave. San Jose, CA 95134 Fresno, CA 93727 Office: (408) 451-7403 Fax: (408) 451-7411 Office: (559) 454-5315 Fax: (559) 454-5329 General Email: General Email: Chief Email: [email protected] Chief Email: [email protected] Dept. Web: Dept. Web: City Web: City Web: MACS Designator: ASH Personnel: Paid MACS Designator: REE Personnel: Paid County: Santa Clara Fire Dept. ID: 43490 County: Fresno Fire Dept. ID: 10800 Alameda City Fire Dept. Alameda County Fire Dept. Doug Long, Fire Chief David Rocha, Fire Chief 1300 Park Street 6363 Clark Avenue Alameda, CA 94501 Dublin, CA 94568 Office: (510) 337-2100 Fax: (510) 521-7851 Office: (925) 833-3473 Fax: (925) 875-9387 General Email: [email protected] General Email: Chief Email: [email protected] Chief Email: [email protected] Dept. Web: www.cityofalamedaca.gov/City-Hall/Fire Dept.
  • Suicide Watch

    Suicide Watch

    SUICIDE Anyone who cares about kids wants to know: Why are so many young people intent on destroying themselves? And what can schools do to save them? BY REBECCA JONES Reprinted with permission from American School Board Journal Photo: © JFB/Stone © May 2001 by the National School Boards Association n Dec. 1, 2000, a 17-year-old boy set up a video suicide does happen, that’s the worst possible [time] to try to camera in the parking lot of Granada Hills High fly by the seat of your pants.” School just outside Los Angeles. Then he Now is the time, he and other experts say, to identify vul- turned up his car radio and shot himself in the nerable children and protect them from themselves. But how? head. Several federal agencies are collaborating to develop suicide- Dozens, maybe hundreds, of students wit- prevention guidelines for school districts, based on guidelines nessed the shooting. It was the second suicide developed in New Zealand. Work has been slow because the among the school’s 3,700 students in three research in this area isn’t always clear and the experts don’t al- weeks. Another Granada Hills student had ways agree. But researchers, experts, and attorneys agree on weighted herself down and jumped into her family’s the importance of a few principles: swimming pool. OThousands of kids end it all, or try to, every year. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates 5,000 KNOW WHAT YOU’RE DEALING WITH young people kill themselves each year, but suicide experts say A Los Angeles principal calls Richard Lieberman—known as the true toll is probably two or three times higher.
  • Master Bulletin Template

    Master Bulletin Template

    □ 1605 AVENAL STATE PRISON □ 4118 CALIFORNIA CORRECTIONAL □ 1503 CALIFORNIA CORRECTIONAL P.O. BOX 8 CENTER INSTITUTION #1 Kings Way P.O. BOX 790 P.O. BOX 1031 Avenal, CA 93204 711-045 Center Road 24900 Highway 202 (559) 386-0587 EXT. 5082 Susanville, CA 96127 Tehachapi, CA 93581 TRS: DIAL 7-1-1 (530) 257-2181 EXT. 4550 (661) 822-4402 EXT. 4380 TRS: DIAL 7-1-1 TRS: DIAL 7-1-1 □ 4168 CALIFORNIA CITY CORRECTIONAL □ 3914 CALIFORNIA HEALTH CARE □ 3612 CALIFORNIA INSTITUTION FOR FACILITY FACILITY MEN P.O. BOX 2646 P.O. BOX 32050 P.O. BOX 128 22844 Virginia Boulevard 7707 S. Austin Road 14901 Central Avenue California City, CA 93504 Stockton, CA 95213 Chino, CA 91708 (760) 246-7600 EXT. 7506 (209) 467-2644 (909) 597-1821 EXT. 4651 TRS: DIAL 7-1-1 TRS: DIAL 7-1-1 TRS: DIAL 7-1-1 □ 4106 CALIFORNIA INSTITUTION FOR □ 4804 CALIFORNIA MEDICAL FACILITY □ 4005 CALIFORNIA MEN’S COLONY WOMEN P.O. BOX 2000 P.O. BOX 8101 P.O. BOX 6000 1600 California Drive Highway 1 16756 Chino-Corona Road Vacaville, CA 95696 San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 Corona, CA 92878 (707) 448-6841 EXT. 2296 (805) 547-7946 (909) 597-1771 EXT. 5252 TRS: DIAL 7-1-1 TRS: DIAL 7-1-1 TRS: DIAL 7-1-1 □ 3310 CALIFORNIA REHABILITATION □ 1606 CALIFORNIA STATE PRISON, □ 1995 CALIFORNIA STATE PRISON, CENTER CORCORAN LOS ANGELES COUNTY P.O. BOX 1841 P.O. BOX 8800 44750 60th Street West 5th and Western 4001 King Avenue Lancaster, CA 93536 Norco, CA 92860 Corcoran, CA 93212 (661) 720-2000 EXT.
  • Degrees of Freedom

    Degrees of Freedom

    February 2015 D of F EXPANDING COLLEGE OPPORTUNITIES for Currently and Formerly Incarcerated Californians Stanford Criminal Justice Center Chief Justice Earl Warren Stanford Law School Institute on Law and Social Policy UC Berkeley School of Law DEGREES OF FREEDOM: Expanding College Opportunities for Currently and Formerly Incarcerated Californians February 2015 A report of the Renewing Communities Initiative Acknowledgements This report was co-written by Debbie Mukamal, Rebecca Silbert, and Rebecca M. Taylor. This report is part of a larger initiative – Renewing Communities – to expand college opportunities for currently and formerly incarcerated students in California. Nicole Lindahl was a contributing author; Nicole Lindahl and Laura Van Tassel also provided research assistance for this report. The research and publication of this report has been supported by the Ford Foundation. The authors thank Douglas Wood of the Ford Foundation for his vision and leadership which catapulted this report. The authors are grateful to the many people who provided information, experience, and guidance in the development of this report. These individuals are listed in Appendix A. Any errors or misstatements in this report are the responsibility of the authors; the recommendations made herein may, or may not, be supported by the individuals listed in Appendix A. Founded in 2005, the Stanford Criminal Justice Center serves as a research and policy institute on issues related to the criminal justice system. Its efforts are geared towards both generating policy research for the public sector, as well as providing pedagogical opportunities to Stanford Law School students with academic or career interests in criminal law and crime policy.