UPDATE: Here's the link to archived video from today's hearing.
Rep. Jerry Madden calculates that TYC receives 66 grievances from youth per day, or around 10,000 per year (the average daily inmate population is around 2,400). The oversight committee had a good discussion today about the Youth Rights division and backlogs in processing youth complaints.
Complaints of physical and sexual abuse are still not be responded to "immediately," administrators admitted candidly, but they're prioritized so that more serious complaints won't take 2-3 months, as commonly occurs with other complaints. Many incidents may not be resolved within a calendar year of being filed, the agency was told, by which time youth may no longer be in TYC custody.
Will Harrell said delays by Youth Rights in processing complaints are beginning to erode the credibility of them, the Ombudsman and other youth advocates with the youth themselves. Harrell mentioned he's heard numerous youth complaints that they've been intimidated by staff from filing complaints, that staff may threaten to file a 225 (a disciplinary notice) if a student files a complaint. Another staffer (I couldn't tell who) said that about half of complaints by youth are related to disciplinary actions.
After the agency's failure to timely respond to complaints of abuse in West Texas, which is the heart of the Pyote scandal, generated such a nightmare at TYC over the last year, it's a shame the agency still hasn't beefed up staff enough to work through backlogs in processing youth complaints. Those systems' improvement was the main goal of most of the legislation last year, but they're still not operating as quickly, it sounds like, as legislators hoped or intended.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
.jpg)
65 comments:
Oh, the illustrious Will "Mr. Anecdotal" Harrell. Put on a uniform fat boy and go to work.
He's doing his job. Ignoring what the kids said is what got TYC into this mess.
I don't doubt for a second that some TYC staff have filed retaliatory grievances against kids, especially given the juvenile accusations and smears that sometimes occur in this blog's comment sectino among employees! Hell, before Mr. N, that's how management treated employees, why wouldn't employees treat the youth that way?
I didn't know staff could file grievances against the munchkins. :)
@3:21 - It used to be that the simple fact of a staff grievance (in bureaucratic parlance a "225") actually could keep a youth from being discharged, at least for 90 days. This came out repeatedly in testimony last year as a big barrier to youth filing complaints - the method of staff retaliation actually functioned to lengthen their stay (for those with indeterminate sentences), and since youth complaints weren't being acted on, anyway, kids wouldn't report stuff. It's telling, e.g., that the Pyote case was reported by a volunteer, not through a youth complaint.
Retaliation for filing grievances, whether student or employee, is something that occurred on a regular basis when I was employed at TYC. I write from personal experience. I never thought it would happened to me, being an honest and hardworking employee. However, my professional career took a turn for the worse the day I filed a grievance. I did not win my grievance, but had the wisdom and good sense to move on with my career. The person making the decision on the grievance naturally covered for her employee. Of course, what goes around comes around, and naturally, she got it good in the end, being forced out. An indicator of a sound grievance system is one with limited or no retaliation. Every indication at TYC shows its grievance system is a by-product of unethical managers. I wish Mr. N well in trying to remedy it. TYC staff and students deserve that much.
I've been concerned about this issue for some time. This is where I'd like to see the State Auditor's Office come back into TYC and take a look.
Also, they need more money for investigators! Wasn't that abundantly clear to everybody from today's hearing?
If they need more money for investigators, why in the hell did the investigators they have demand handguns, shotguns, bullet proof vests, and all the other "perks" as well as an expensive remake of their central office space. These investigators work for TYC because they are not qualified and could not get a "real" job in law enforcement. The have flown under the radar this whole time, God knows what would happen if the State Auditors Office investigated that department. What are they going to do, chase down a TYC escapee in their new crown vic's and shoot them with their new guns??????? Money could of been better spent on staff, training, and speeding up the invesitigatory process!
To 3:50 who said...
"Every indication at TYC shows its grievance system is a by-product of unethical managers...."
Talk about hitting the nail on the head! You got it EXACTLY right!
The kids are in danger.
More than anything else, they are a danger to one another.
The reason is a fear of enforcing discipline.
TYC is motivated from crisis to crisis and no one who does not work directly with the kids on a daily basis has a clue as to what causes the crisis.
Grits, you are a nice guy but you are clueless.
I suspect the next crisis will come when one of the youth kills another and that will come from a lack of supervision.
The lack of supervision will be due to handicapping the caring adults who would otherwise privide the structure that is needed to keep these misguided from harming one another.
Grits, you need to learn where the danger is because your lack of knowledge makes you dangerous.
So you're saying, what? They shouldn't take youth complaints seriously? Shouldn't process them in a timely fashion? What, exactly, am I clueless about?
I don't downplay the need for security, but kids getting abused is what started all this, and if they're being intimidated out of complaining, that's important to know. I didn't say it - the OIG (who're cops), the Ombudsman, the Youth Rights division are the ones who said those allegations are out there.
A big problem throughout all this has been the lack of a strong union speaking on behalf of employees. If this involved local police, you can bet their unions would be involved neck deep. But don't blame youth advocates because they're doing a better job than the folks who're supposed to represent you! I promise they're more sympathetic to employee concerns than a lot of other interests in this political soap opera.
Inmate complaints in every system, adult and juvie, are often frivolous. So what? An investigation will separate the wheat from the chaff. (And after all, what else is there to do?) But when that assumption empirically wound up covering up allegations of pedophilia at multiple units, IMO you lost the right to claim youth complaints should never be taken seriously.
The back log is because...that person that was supposed to be hired to only by the grievance clerk, never happened..dropped from a youth rights person on every campus to 5 regional investigators and now the youth rights person is back putting in grievances...somebody needs to make up their mind and let the youth rights investigator come back and do their jobs.
Any facility that DOES NOT by now have at least one staff member (somewhere in the vicinity of the superintendent's office) whose entire daily duties consist of retrieving, reviewing, entering, and assigning the youth grievances, tracking the due dates for resolution, reviewing resolutions for compliance with policy, assisting youth with appeals, entering appeals, tracking due dates for appeals (1st, 2nd, etc.), ensuring compliance with policy on appeals, assembling and filing resolutions... is a facility in trouble. Complaints coordinators also have to ensure grievance clerks are trained and equipped. This should not include complaints from the public, complaints from parents, and complaints that allege mistreatment. There should be other staff members to handle those issues.
I am one who remembers January 2003 when the central office suddenly handed the youth complaints system to the admin assistants for the superintendents. Some of my former counterparts are probably still be struggling with it.
Our facility routinely processed about 300 complaints a month. As we have seen this year, the liabilities are too great to give it to someone as an additional duty.
Again, if TYC isn't providing a staff position in every facility dedicated to routine youth complaints, it is probably headed for more trouble.
To Grits
2/22/2008 06:26:00 PM
You see nothing of the bigger danger. It is going to take a crisis to correct your vision.
I am sorry. I know you mean no harm. You haven't worked with the kids and you don't know how to balance one problem against another.
The problem of the youth gaming your sympathy is now putting them in more danger than any safety they are getting being empowered by any new grievence proceedure.
You are not getting what you think you are getting. You are getting a trade off and you are losing. Or, should I say the kids are losing?
Did everyone see Mr. Nedelkoff's "Vision and Framework" message on the TYC website?
Well said 7:52pm, very well said.
What did they mean you should have checked Martinez out with the OIG before you hired him back?
I would like someone to ask Mr. Harrell this question all I want is an honest answer. Making this both fair to staff and students. How many grievences have been filed on the staff in all the facilities, and how many have been found to be true? I plan on sending in for the open records report to answer this question in the near future. And how many of these staff have been to trial and been convicted of a crime? What happened to innocent until proven guilty.
What some are overlooking is the comment made by Ms Strong about Youth Care Investigators and Youth Rights Specialists. In order to get the required 12 Youth Rights Specialists (who now handle the Grievance system), TYC cut back to only 8 Investigators (from 20). Meanwhile, mistreatment allegations have not abated. Add it up - there used to be 20 civilian investigators. Now we have 7 OIG cops and 7 civilian investigators. (There are 2 open OIG positions, and an open YCI position.) The OIG investigate all kinds of criminal activity, including kid on kid, staff on kid, staff on staff, fraud, and aprehension of escapees. The remaining 7 youth care investigators investigate all allegations of abuse, neglect and exploitation - including some of those cases that are also investigated by the OIG. Both the OIG investigators and the Youth Care Investigators are averaging 80+ cases apiece.
Do the math.
You might add that Ms Pope outright lied when she said that all the YRS positions had been filled. 5 of the YRS coordinators started this month. The new grievance system, that Ms Pope said was up and running, is not scheduled for introduction until next month.
@7:52 who wrote: "You haven't worked with the kids and you don't know how to balance one problem against another."
Of course, neither have any of the legislators. Perhaps you need to learn to explain your views better to people who don't share your experience.
But let's grant for a moment that I'm dangerously naive and don't know what I'm talking about. I still want to know: "you're saying, what? They shouldn't take youth complaints seriously? Shouldn't process them in a timely fashion?"
What are the implications of your experience and worldly knowledge for how TYC should process complaints? Should they just not do it? What is the point of your comments here? What is the preferred outcome, in your view?
I suggested a simple computerized system 6 months ago (here on Grits) that would put an end to staff/student grievance clerk influence on youth wanting or needing to file a grievance (students being afraid to file one since everyone knows if they have and what they said). The set up of the program ensures every student's daily access and cuts out the need for grievance clerks, a facility person to enter data and is directly received by the OIG office. No middle man and no paper trail for staff or other students to retaliate against the student since they would not have access to what the student said. No one at the facility would.
The same computer program could be used for staff to file their grievances (without co-workers or facility administrators having access to the information).
If someone becomes interested, let me know; I'll restate it (or Grits can pull it out of the archives and repost it).
Pinpoint
Pinpoint: I am interested. Please put it out there.
Pinpoint, I remember when you first put forward your idea. I don't think your system solves many problems at all.
1. The students must ask for access to a computer and can't be left completely alone there.
2. The student needs to print a hard copy, to prove he really filed the grievance.
3. There has to be a way to ensure the student entering the grievance has correctly identified himself.
4. Many students couldn't complete a grievance on the computer without help from staff or another student.
5. No matter what, youth can still claim "Mr. So-and-so" knew they were filing on him and he retaliated. Often, it's the student himself who informs the staff, for reasons I won't comment on here.
6. You are correct that the grievance will go directly into the system, but will there be 15 or so people at the central office to sift through the complaints and send the routine complaints (food, haircuts, someone called them a name...) back to the facility for resolution? That will cause a significant delay. No help there.
7. Someone at the facility still has to print the complaint, work the problem, get the youth to sign that they accept or want to appeal. Then someone else has to enter the resolution into the computer so the tracking process can be completed and central office personnel can see everything going on in that facility’s system.
8. (Forgive me, Grits, but) Make it too easy, and you'll get even more "Miss So-and-so needs a better place to park her new car" sort of grievances. The central office would not allow us to define abuse of the grievance system, therefore the students could write whatever they wanted to as many times as they wanted to, without worrying whether they were telling the truth or just playing games. Every complaint has to be answered and accepted.
The only real solution is more boots on the ground (sorry for the military metaphor). A larger staff will lead-turn (sorry, another military metaphor) problems before students decide to formally complain. There should be more people to work the complaints filed so they can be resolved in a more timely fashion. Then, students and parents and members of the public will have more confidence in the system and fewer grievances might be filed. And if staff are not overworked and beaten down, they will show more empathy and the youth will have more trust in them.
Also, it's not always clear to me whether people are referring to routine complaints (milk was spoiled, shoes don't fit, undeserved 225) or allegations that require the immediate attention of a youth rights person ("I was slammed and my tooth is chipped").
This was my suggestion back in May of 2007. Actually, this was a second re-posting of it. I can't remember when I had initially posted my proposal.
"To 7:10 pm
My suggestion is that the grievance systems (both for employees and students) should be computerized.
The cost of putting computers in a private location on each facility and allowing people the access and time is VERY doable. The cost would be minimal compared to its benefit.
For students, the time provided to every student, every day can easily be worked into their daily routine. Not every student will want to file a complaint every day, so the time taken to do this would be manageable. But every student should be provided the opportunity every day. If necessary, even having them log into the computer and selecting an option that they do not wish to file one that day.
Taking them to a location on each campus with several computers set up (with "their eyes only" views of their computer screens) is within the capabilities of every campus. It is my suggestion that the complaint system be formatted as a "drop down" or easy selection boxes to choose areas of complaints and provide all staff names that work at the facility in drop down form as well. Many students have difficulty spelling and writing so this would aid them in expressing their issues as well as making it less time consuming. An area for typing information should also be provided as well so they can put it in their own words if they so choose.
Each location should have cameras capturing the area to ensure no one is violating the student's privacy, threatening him/her in any way and to prevent others from attempting to impersonate or tamper with the system. I do not suggest any printer for the student complaint area. This would prevent anyone from gaining access to what the student said. The student should have the option of sending a copy of his or her complaint to a folder or email account set up for them by the complaint agency. Every student in TYC should have their own account. Not a typical email account that they can send or receive messages from, only one to store their complaint information.
The computerized complaint system for both staff and students should be developed, housed, maintained and monitored by an outside agency. The complaints received would be classified either as investigations of abuse and forwarded to law enforcement or as standard complaints and issued to grievance personnel to resolve.
Staff could access their own complaint computers set up in a private area within their facilities and have a printer available if they wanted to keep a copy. They should also be given the option of having a computerized personal account to keep copies of their complaints if they preferred not to have a printed copy. The format available to staff could also be in a drop down box format to make it easier and less time consuming. Complaints received would be handled in the same manner as the students- by outside people without agency affiliations.
Computers for both staff and students would serve no other function but to write complaints. No other programs, no internet capabilities or functions.
That is my opinion on how to have a complaint system that could actually work for both staff and students.
Pinpoint"
This can still be done. It would provide more security and integrity than anything in place (and to my knowledge) anything else proposed.
Pinpoint
Thank you 10:41 for taking the time to make these points. I have responded to your questions with my response indicated with an * before it.
2/22/2008 10:41:00 PM wrote:
Pinpoint, I remember when you first put forward your idea. I don't think your system solves many problems at all.
1. The students must ask for access to a computer and can't be left completely alone there.
*Not true. Cameras (recorded) in the room where the student is using the computer (but does not show the screen) would ensure youth supervision for the time he/she is using the computer. A monitor showing the student would be available on the outside of the room and would allow the staff person to view the student (but not their information) and intervene should the student do anything inappropriate in the room. Anyone entering the room would be recorded so youth would have proof of staff misconduct if there was any. Recorded video would only be available to OIG staff (server and recording operation housed at OIG office).
2. The student needs to print a hard copy, to prove he really filed the grievance.
*No. With my system, a copy of the student's grievance would go into their own personal mailbox. It would be similar to an email system (but they can only send grievance info into their own personal box and cannot be used to message others). The mailbox can only be accessed by the student or by OIG personnel if needed. Upon request, the student can have his/her copies of grievances mailed to their home/guardian address as well.
3. There has to be a way to ensure the student entering the grievance has correctly identified himself.
*Pin numbers or other means of ID can easily be established. Camera recorded computer usage would ensure no one else is using the student's info.
4. Many students couldn't complete a grievance on the computer without help from staff or another student.
*That is why easy to use "drop down" selections, picture boxes and pre-made grievance topics are suggested to make it simple. There would also be an option for the student to type out their info if needed. Remember, the initial grievance does not have to contain every single detail- just the most important facts or issues that will categorize it into the type of response it needs (immediate, etc.). If the grievance does not contain enough information to understand the issue or nature of the complaint, OIG personnel can request further information (as they do now).
5. No matter what, youth can still claim "Mr. So-and-so" knew they were filing on him and he retaliated. Often, it's the student himself who informs the staff, for reasons I won't comment on here.
*This system (nor any system) can keep youth from opening their mouth when they shouldn't. However, this system makes it virtually impossible for staff to find out in any other way- except if the student tells them him/herself. With this new system would also come a training of both students and staff- informing them of this.
6. You are correct that the grievance will go directly into the system, but will there be 15 or so people at the central office to sift through the complaints and send the routine complaints (food, haircuts, someone called them a name...) back to the facility for resolution? That will cause a significant delay. No help there.
*Not necessarily true. If drop down boxes or "check the box" responses are used, "key word" indicators can be used to "flag" complaints that should be expedited due to risks/hazards. Central office/facility personnel would have no access complaints. They would be handled by the OIG office.
7. Someone at the facility still has to print the complaint, work the problem, get the youth to sign that they accept or want to appeal.
*The complaint would go to the OIG office directly. They would assign the person to resolve it. It could be an OIG investigator, youth rights or any other person assigned by the OIG office. This system is not to take the human element out of the resolution of the complaint. But, it will ensure more accountability of who it gets assigned to (especially not to anyone involved or named) and in the thoroughness in which it is resolved (not bypassing or breezing over issues).
Then someone else has to enter the resolution into the computer so the tracking process can be completed and central office personnel can see everything going on in that facility’s system.
*The completed grievances would be returned to the OIG office (not central office). Central office would have no access to the completed grievances until reviewed by the OIG (no access to change beforehand or make grievances "disappear" as what was happening before). Central office would have NO access to the computer system to maintain its integrity.
8. (Forgive me, Grits, but) Make it too easy, and you'll get even more "Miss So-and-so needs a better place to park her new car" sort of grievances. The central office would not allow us to define abuse of the grievance system, therefore the students could write whatever they wanted to as many times as they wanted to, without worrying whether they were telling the truth or just playing games. Every complaint has to be answered and accepted.
*If there is a grievance system, it will be "misused" with petty and false complaints. That is the nature of human beings. No two people have the same definition of what a legitimate complaint is. No system will eliminate that issue sorry to say. The best any system can do is train, retrain and train some more.
The only real solution is more boots on the ground (sorry for the military metaphor). A larger staff will lead-turn (sorry, another military metaphor) problems before students decide to formally complain. There should be more people to work the complaints filed so they can be resolved in a more timely fashion. Then, students and parents and members of the public will have more confidence in the system and fewer grievances might be filed. And if staff are not overworked and beaten down, they will show more empathy and the youth will have more trust in them.
* I agree whole heartedly that there should be more "boots on the ground". However, my preference for this system would be to have more OIG personnel to do it (or move grievance personnel to the OIG office instead of being at facilities), etc. More people is always the best solution. My goal is for complete integrity of the system away from TYC Central Office and the facilities.
Also, it's not always clear to me whether people are referring to routine complaints (milk was spoiled, shoes don't fit, undeserved 225) or allegations that require the immediate attention of a youth rights person ("I was slammed and my tooth is chipped").
*Both types of complaints would still come through on the same system. As they have been, they would be sorted according to the type of complaint and the severity of the issue.
If you still have concerns or would like to address the above more, please ask. Please understand I am not stating this is an 100% fulproof system. However, as any issues arise, they can be addressed. Also, I still feel it has much more integrity than anything else in place or that has been proposed (to the best of my knowledge)- and it is feasible to put in place.
Pinpoint
That is a great idea, Pinpoint. I'm serious.
How fast can you build that and ensure that it works w/in TYC's infrastructure, security, and existing systems? There are several systems analysts positions open. If we need a new server, even a virtual one, to keep the system segregated, or new software to build it, I'm sure IBM will just rush the order right through for us without that 6-12 month delay all the other consolidated agencies are experiencing. Also need to check on how much it will cost to more than triple the email accounts. And since the OIG will get everything, does this mean we get rid of the YRS?
If you've already built this system, how much?
There might be reasonable answers to these questions. Have you written out your proposal and sent it to the OIG, or to Will, or to IRD, or to Nedelkoff?
The nosy admin. asst at WTSS would not like this system. She meddles in all the youth grievances and employee issues!
(This will be long, so I apologize up front.)
Pinpoint, the best part of your proposal is that if the student enters his complaint at a computer, it eliminates one step for the local clerk who would otherwise do that. Possibly, the resolution could be entered with the student and supervisor at the computer together, also eliminating someone else’s keystrokes at the back end. The student would have to accept or appeal by using his unique, confidential PIN (which he will need to remember and keep secret).
There are many logistical limitations, but I’ll list only two: A secure room with camera, dedicated computer is only the beginning. A staff member will have to be assigned to the grievance computer room almost around the clock. Facilities don’t have enough staff as it is. Virtually all of the youth will ask for copies of their complaints to be mailed home – imagine the time and postage involved to make that happen. Then, imagine the phone calls that will roll in to the superintendent and case managers from parents wanting to know what is going on.
From the inception of the TYCS system in about 1999, the central office personnel could read all the complaints from any facility as soon as they were entered. They did not have time to read them all. The best they could do is hound us about our overdue lists and monthly reports.
Drop down boxes: Please imagine the number of staff at the OIG to read through upwards of 500 complaints A DAY and decide which ones allege mistreatment (needing photographs, medical attention, video capture, statements, separation of youth from staff or youth from youth…) and which are routine. Many complaints have two, three, or four issues and have to be broken out and directed to different staff members for resolution. If a student checks a box to complain about spoiled milk and another box about alleged mistreatment, someone will need to send one portion to the food service director and the other portion to the OIG. Then, the OIG has to contact the “boots on the ground” to take photographs, statements, have the student seen for injuries, separate him from the accused staff or youth… This system will cause more delay, not less. Believe me, the OIGs consider themselves to be too well trained, too experienced, and too valuable to spend their days reviewing all those grievances. Actually, to ensure the best use of the system, there should be OIGs on duty reading grievances as they are submitted for 16 or 20 hours a day. Automation often results in less satisfaction because it always increases expectation. I don’t think my grandmother put clean linen on her beds every week back in the days of wringer washers and clotheslines.
Too much blame has been placed on perceived staff retaliation for complaints and administrators’ interference in the process. (There has been very little “covering up” and a great deal of overwhelming work. I am one who knows.) Those problems will not go away by increasing the automation of complaint processing. The old “Youth Rights Specialist” concept works well. That person should not be beholden to the chief administrator or anyone else in the building. This is the concept of the facility “Inspectors General” that were set up to be after 2003. If youth think their line staff are failing them, they can know there is an impartial person to go to for help. It is/was a good idea and retains the human element.
“The best any system can do is train, retrain and train some more.” This is the truest statement you made. It is a daily struggle, but TYC staff members have to be trusted to be ethical, honest, know the policy, and have the students’ best interest at heart. It’s possible that computer automation can speed up the process, but weaknesses in the current system attributed to the human element can only be solved by more of the human element. In the end, the computer cannot solve the student’s problem.
Please let me amend my post: There may be fewer than 500 complaints filed on an average day. I am out now, so I can't really arrive at an estimate. The overall TYC population is lower, but there is more emphasis on youth grievances so I don't really know how it all shakes out. Someone can check the automated TYCS system,though -- it's all there!
"...when that assumption empirically wound up covering up allegations of pedophilia at multiple units..." The weaknesses in the complaints system did not cause the allegations, Grits, and if allegations of pedophilia are frivolous, why would anyone bother to cover them up? You make no sense. Furthermore, widespread, systemic pedophilia in TYC facilities has not been shown! Allegations are not confirmations, something the general public does not understand.
The complaint system definitely failed to highlight what turned out to be credible allegations. They may or may not turn into convictions, but they should never have been ignored.
If you want to believe all the various allegations of pedophilia are frivolous, you and I must agree to disagree. I suggest you contact Howard Witt and see if you can convince him of your position. Or maybe the Texas Ranger who investigated at WTSS.
The first of the five stages of grief is denial, and clearly after all this time some people haven't gotten past it yet.
Grits, I'm 9:42 a.m. If you’re referring to West Texas, you continue to go back to one location, one situation. If students were filing grievances about the two alleged perpetrators and the complaints were being ignored or dunked, the system didn’t work correctly.
I don’t believe all the various allegations of pedophilia are frivolous -- I believe that most are. But all should be investigated, no matter how unlikely they sound. And if the
Ranger was so convinced, why didn’t he arrest the two?
I’m not in denial about any of this -- I was there. If I’m grieving, it’s over ruined careers (not mine), damaged families (not mine), and youth still not getting the help they need. I intend to move past it some day, but not until some things are fixed.
Grits, me, 9:42 again. The situation Howard Witt has been writing about could turn out to be a perfect example of a youth making an allegation in order to mitigate her own bad behavior. Is she accusing the same staff she assaulted? Which came first, her assault of the staff or her allegation of sexual assault? I don't know the answers to these questions. Now, she's apparently being released early as a result. Have you and Howard Witt already tried and convicted the accused staff? Why would you believe her over him, not knowing either one?
I'm referring to West Texas, Brownwood, Corsicana, and several other incidents that came out of the investigation last spring, including one girl who became pregnant by a TYC staffer. The link under Howard Witt's name leads to a story of another indictment in Brownwood, not Pyote.
Be that as it may, what's the beef with processing complaints in a timely fashion? They have to be evaluated and credible ones should be acted on. I'm know staff feel the same way about the 225s. What's the problem? Why not get that stuff right?
Your question about Howard Witt came in while I was writing the other response. It's not just him. He reported those allegations first, then when the OIG and the DA investigated too it led to an indictment in December. Maybe it will be unfounded, but it's more than just a reporter's say so.
To 12:32-
How fast can you build that and ensure that it works w/in TYC's infrastructure, security, and existing systems?
*I do not have a pre-built computer program of this. However, one could be easily created by an IT person.
And since the OIG will get everything, does this mean we get rid of the YRS?
*Instead of "getting rid of" the YRS; those that Mr. Harrell would feel qualified to move to his office should be moved under him. The additional staff would help in making caseload assignments to a humanly possible rate.
My goal of making the entire grievance system separate is to remove as much facility "control" as possible. The part in which the facilities are responsible for; their resolutions and handling of the grievance will be reviewed by the OIG, not someone at the local facility. The accountability will be in the hands of the OIG.
If you've already built this system, how much?
*The "system" is only in my head. However, it is not complicated. Yes, there would be the need for additional computers, a separate server, the process to link all facility complaint computers to the OIG, the additional accounts, cameras, making the actual computer program and the transfer of staff to the OIG. It could be done within a few months if the administration felt it was a priority to act upon.
Have you written out your proposal and sent it to the OIG, or to Will, or to IRD, or to Nedelkoff?
*No. Having posted this 6 months ago, the idea was available to those interested. Now that the new administration is in place, if there is interest, I would do so.
Response to 8:19
There are many logistical limitations, but I’ll list only two: A secure room with camera, dedicated computer is only the beginning. A staff member will have to be assigned to the grievance computer room almost around the clock.
*Why would a staff need to be dedicated to the room? Having the cameras in place allows the JCO staff in charge of the youth to be responsible for that youth's supervision while in the room (via a video monitor outside the room). When no student is in the room, there is no need for a staff person to be there.
Virtually all of the youth will ask for copies of their complaints to be mailed home – imagine the time and postage involved to make that happen.
*This option for students (to mail home their grievances) has already been in place. Students can mail them now. However, as part of the effort to reduce the cost of mailing hard copy versions; during the set up of the program, approved email address for parents or guardians could be used as well. For families that do not have computers at home, they could be encouraged to set up free email accounts at their local library to have access. For those who still want a hard copy mailed, that cost is already happening within TYC.
Then, imagine the phone calls that will roll in to the superintendent and case managers from parents wanting to know what is going on.
*This is a bad thing? Parents and guardians SHOULD know what is happening. TYC has proclaimed for years that they want more parent involvement. Not to mention that anything involving abuse or neglect- it is the law that a parent/guardian is to be informed. As it happens now and has in the past, all too frequently parents are not informed of incidents of mistreatment due to lack of access, failure to send out the notices, etc. And, as in the previous answer- parents and guardians already call now. I personally feel that more calls from parents or guardians checking on the welfare of students is not a bad thing. It keeps accountability in place.
An increase in calls is to be expected with the implementation of any new program that opens up access. But, in time, that will level off as well.
Drop down boxes: Please imagine the number of staff at the OIG to read through upwards of 500 complaints A DAY and decide which ones allege mistreatment (needing photographs, medical attention, video capture, statements, separation of youth from staff or youth from youth…) and which are routine.
*Staff already do that now. However, instead of at the facility level, that process would go to the OIG office. FTE's for those facility positions (and I realize this will not make some happy with the already unstable job situation) would be transferred to the OIG. The staff numbers to accomplish that task is already in place, they would just need to be moved. However, more individual are still needed since those positions are overwhelmed where they are now.
Many complaints have two, three, or four issues and have to be broken out and directed to different staff members for resolution. If a student checks a box to complain about spoiled milk and another box about alleged mistreatment, someone will need to send one portion to the food service director and the other portion to the OIG. Then, the OIG has to contact the “boots on the ground” to take photographs, statements, have the student seen for injuries, separate him from the accused staff or youth… This system will cause more delay, not less.
*The scenario you gave already happens now. However, it is done manually and at the discretion of the facility person reviewing it. Some issues can be missed or downgraded due to each person's "definition" of what a complaint is. Some can be influenced by inappropriate intentions. Being automated takes that out. The multiple issue situations are split today and would continue to be split out in the automated system. Having it automated would only increase that speed. As far as separating the staff/students involved; that directive should be given to the facilities by OIG staff as to who should be separated or put on admin. leave.
Believe me, the OIGs consider themselves to be too well trained, too experienced, and too valuable to spend their days reviewing all those grievances.
*Though I find your comment a little caddy (though possibly true based on your experience), the FTE's for the facility employees who are doing this would be moved to the OIG in addition to a request for more.
Actually, to ensure the best use of the system, there should be OIGs on duty reading grievances as they are submitted for 16 or 20 hours a day.
*The "all day" availability of OIGs would have to be considered based on funds for additional positions or overtime.
Automation often results in less satisfaction because it always increases expectation.
*This is where training and retraining again takes on importance. When everyone knows the system process, limitations and expectations- the satisfaction rate will level. However, I do see higher frustration rates with youth who have a difficult time reading and writing. In thinking about this, I would also propose a phone installation or web communication being available if they would rather video/audio record their complaint. These students would be identified and allowed to video/audio. These would be cases of very low functioning students as to not have all students doing this. Having OIG personnel transferring that students recorded issues to document form would take additional work time.
Too much blame has been placed on perceived staff retaliation for complaints and administrators’ interference in the process. (There has been very little “covering up” and a great deal of overwhelming work. I am one who knows.)
*I will strongly disagree with your comment here. As "one who knows" myself, it happens a lot.
Those problems will not go away by increasing the automation of complaint processing. The old “Youth Rights Specialist” concept works well.
*That system only worked well when there were well trained, non-affiliated, professional investigators in place who had manageable caseloads. Unfortunately the combination of all of those factors rarely happened.
It’s possible that computer automation can speed up the process, but weaknesses in the current system attributed to the human element can only be solved by more of the human element. In the end, the computer cannot solve the student’s problem.
* This proposed system, as I said before, is not 100% foolproof. No system is. However, we will just have to agree to disagree whether what I have proposed would have more integrity and value than the one in place or others proposed.
Pinpoint
Grits, 9:42 again. Then, we'll see if and when the Brownwood staff is taken to trial. One thing that is true: If the girl is lying, she'll never pay the price. She'll never have to answer for herself. But the accused staff is already paying.
Back to the poster who also caught the back door antics of the illustrious Sen. Whitmire and his reference to an OIG file on Eddie Martinez...you guys remember back to the VERY beginning of all this -
The reason we were given for Ray Brookins making it into TYC with all the 'investigations' he had in his past was that the OIG in TDCJ had the information but did not share with the Human Resources dept.
Therefore, when TYC asked for the reference, all HR had was what they had, not what the OIG had...if what Whitmire says is true (and I question EVERYTHING he says), are we not right back where we started? Good Lord, do we not ever learn? I'm not saying I believe the OIG has a file on Eddie, but IF they do, why is there not some notation in his personnel file to 'contact the OIG for further information' or something of that sort? More political bullsh#t and meddling for nothing gained...oh well, SSDD.
Grits, 9:42 again. Are you saying that it has been proven a girl is pregnant by a TYC staff member? I heard that allegation more than once, but it was always untrue. Wouldn't that have been written up by the DMN?
I don't have a beef with resolving grievances. They need to be resolved and every one needs to be treated seriously. My beef is that there are not enough people. Automating more of it will not help. Also, people working with the students HAVE to be trusted to some extent.
Pinpoint, I don't feel any better about your proposal than I did last summer. The system should have TYC staff keeping each other accountable without the luxury of letting the OIGs sort everything out from somewhere in the sky.
10:41-Pinpoint, I don't feel any better about your proposal than I did last summer. The system should have TYC staff keeping each other accountable without the luxury of letting the OIGs sort everything out from somewhere in the sky.
*Are you saying then that the system in place now is working?
*In a perfect world I would agree with you. If people actually did what they were supposed to do, that would work. Unfortunately, TYC is rampid with individuals in positions they should not be in. They misuse the position or don't have the qualifications to do the job.
TYC is one of the few, if not the only state agency involving youth that is allowed to "investigate itself". All other allegations of abuse and neglect within the state is handled by CPS/law enforcement. Unless the integrity of the investigation process towards youth can be established to be "uncontrolled and uninfluenced" by those at the facility level and within TYC Central Office, the system will still lack any credibility. The fox watching the hen house comparison still fits.
Pinpoint
Scott, the real problem with the current TYGS (grievance system) is that the reforms built into SB103 were not implemented by Ms Pope, despite what she claimed. Those YRS positions that were not filled by Youth Care Investigators converting to YRS were not filled until this month. As Ms Strong pointed out to the Committee, most of the positions were filled by gutting the ranks of Youth Care Investigators. That said, we now (finally) have a YRS at each campus. The YRS no longer reports to the local administration. The new "system" is due to go on line next month. Grievances will be consolidated in a single point, they will be screened for alleged criminal complaints and alleged abuse, neglect and exploitation complaints; and the rest will be assigned for resolution according to a matrix.
The major problem that still exists is that there are not enough OIG criminal investigators and not enough Youth Care Investigators to handle the number of serious allegations that come in. The field investigators, OIG and YCI, have in most cases developed a pretty good professional working relationship, particularly where cases overlap. Unfortunately, the two groups are not coordinated centrally and there are not enough field investigators of either kind. There are fewer total field investigators now, than there were before the reforms. This, despite the fact that the OIG investigators have responsibilities that go far beyond just investigating staff on youth cases. They are full-time State Police Officers, with all that implies.
Pinpoint, we are still not understanding each other. I thought we were talking about the system for routine, everyday complaints filed by youth. The OIG can monitor complaints filed even today via their computers. But I think the OIG will resist any attempt to hand them responsibility for the first look at all new grievances and then judging whether they were properly resolved.
When we talk about alleged mistreatment -- criminal behavior -- of course TYC should not investigate itself. Some of those complaints rise to the level of mistreatment and must be moved on to an OIG.
But if we confine the discussion to routine grievances, TYC does it the same way any other agency or organization does. All that is needed is to ensure youth have access to the system, enough staff are available to administer it, and that its integrity can be assured. No amount of automation or oversight from above can ensure that beyond a shadow of a doubt.
To 9:42, 10:41 - Still waiting to hear what all this implies for a policy solution. Are you saying complaints shouldn't be processed, that the number of investigators shouldn't be increased? What is the point of the naysaying and denial?
We will see if they go to trial, you're right. Though in the case of the girl who got pregnant, we can already be pretty sure! And that WAS written up in the DMN (see here, e.g.), which is where I first heard of it. It was at Marlin, and the guy was fired over it. I also talked to a couple of people last year privately about the backstory so that I have reason to believe he was not fired frivolously.
You're right, there are not enough people investigating, which was the point of the post. But if you increase the number of investigators there will be some investigative resources that evaluate frivolous charges, by the nature of the beast. Failing to look past that to the really serious complaints is a feature the adult and juvie systems both have in common, historically. It's seen as an excuse to ignore real complaints that many turn out to be false. At some point TYC has to get past that position, IMO, after all that's happened, and begin to treat youth AND staff complaints in good faith.
I'm saying there need to be MORE people to process and investigate the grievances. I'm saying that EVERY complaint is important and should be treated seriously. The "policy solution" is more staff per student.
It is important that everyone understands some basic definitions, so that we are not talking across each other.
There are now three levels of investigations in TYC.
1. Criminal investigations investigated by qualified law enforcement officers (primarilly, but not exclusively, the OIG);
2. Investigations of Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation conducted under the Texas Family Code by Youth Care Investigators;
3. Grievances which are administered by the Youth Rights Specialists and are investigated by staff as assigned by the YRS.
The Youth Care Investigators and the Youth Rights Specialists work for the Youth Rights Division, which reports directly the the Executive Director. The OIG reports to the Conservator.
Under the current system, it is entirely possible that a youth's grievance will be investigated at all three levels, sometimes simultaneously (not good) and sometimes sequentially (good). Youth written grievances are just one of the means by which claims of mistreatment or criminal activity are brought to the attention of the professional civil and criminal investigators.
Wow, thanks, 2:16. Very clear and concise information. Very helpful.
2:16- I understand the levels of investigations.
Regardless, each level starts at the same place- with a student complaint. In my opinion, every student complaint should go through (sent to and screened by)the OIG office. From that point they should be distributed to the appropriate level. This is for integrity of the complaint and for over sight. NO facility or TYC Central Office person should have access to any complaint before the OIG screens it and then assigns it out to the appropriate person to resolve it (be it a criminal investigator, YRS or other staff). The grievance system for both youth and staff has never had integrity. This would stop that and also put a stop to the multiple investigations going on (that you mentioned) on the same issue. That is a waste of man power and also very likely "taints" the investigation for the next person trying to resolve it.
Regardless, you obviously do not care for what I have suggested. To each his own. However, other than pointing out things you feel will not work or are issues with my suggestions, I have not seen any solutions or suggestions from you.
Pinpoint
I don't want to diminish the importance of any of the attempts of reforms, but I want to point out that the WTSS situation was a unique set of circumstances that cumulated in the misdeeds of one, maybe two, individuals. Nothing anyone does will ever eliminate the "human" factor. Scott, I would never denigrate Will's character, but he doesn't have the budget to do what needs to be done. He's a good man, but he's tilting windmills. Ultimately, these young people are never going to get what they really need. Jesus was pretty accurate when he said, "The poor will be with us always." We need to work towards change, but it always takes more resources than we are willing to provide.
Pinpoint, I'm not the helpful person who posted at 2:16, but here are my suggestions: I don't think the system will ever have integrity unless the OIG not only receives and assigns all grievances, but investigates and resolves them all, too. That will eliminate that pesky overdue list. Then, the OIG will have to mete out any discipline or training required, because you can't trust the supervisors at the facility to make sure it happens. The OIGs better be allowed to develop the system, too and install the equipment. Then, they have to go and train the staff and students on how the system is used, too, and come to the facility to post the policies for everyone to read. Better not trust the unit personnel to do any of that. Also, OIGs need to come and monitor the grievance computer rooms every day. Otherwise, there will never be integrity of the system. It's better to keep the facility administration in the dark about problems as long as possible -- at least as long as it takes the OIG to decide who gets the complaint. That way we'll have integrity of the system. When the paper copies of grievances are mailed home, better let the OIG stuff the envelopes and run them through the mail machine, to be sure no TYC staff catch a glimpse or know the student's home address. When parents call to ask about their children's grievances, better put the OIG on the phone because you can't trust the unit personnel to tell them the truth. Those are my suggestions for ensuring integrity of the system.
8:04- You have pretty much summed up everything I would like to happen. My goal is for the grievance system itself to be separate from the facilities and TYC central office (for both staff and students) as much as possible to give credibility, integrity and maybe even some faith back to employees and students that their issues will actually be addressed and in a fair, appropriate manner. Until these systems are taken out of the reach of individuals at the facility and Central Office level, students and staff alike will continue to feel that the system is corrupted (and rightfully so).
However, there are some issues I am aware that the OIG will not have knowledge or the ability to take an action on for students (ie. - not getting soap on a daily basis, only getting one sock, etc.). However, the OIG would be responsible for reviewing the response/action taken on the grievance (as someone already has to do now).
Since in my suggestion the youth could/should be required to log into the complaint computers daily (saying they either do or do not have a complaint to file), a follow up question can be sent to them (via computer by the OIG) to see if the action taken by the staff to address their issue (no action, took action, etc.) was the same as what the staff resolving the issue said it was. This doesn't have to be on every case. It could be used as a monitoring tool.
The OIG would also follow up with any disciplinary action given to staff (to ensure it was actually done, recorded in employee files and in the complaint system). This would be on both the student and staff complaints systems.
However, in fairness- records of student issues (making false complaints, duplicate complaints for issues already resolved, etc.) would also be recorded. When this occurs at an amount deemed "abusing the complaint system" a counseling with the student and OIG staff would occur, documented and a copy of the counseling sent to the parent/guardian. This would be one of those times training and more training would need to occur since everyone's definition of what a "complaint" is differs.
Unfortunately, I don't believe even with the OIG staff being in charge of these tasks that the "overdue list" need would go away. Likely, two lists would occur; one for the OIG office since they would be responsible for most of them and still one at the facility level. Complaints the OIG are not able to resolve (such as the ones I listed above) would make the over due still necessary to ensure the assigned staff at the facility level resolved them in a timely/appropriate (actually addressed the issues) manner. However, what would change is if the staff did not handle it appropriately or in a timely manner, the OIG department would request 1) retraining of the staff resolving the issues (documented); 2) a disciplinary warning should the behavior/lack of actions continue (documented) and 3) disciplinary action. The type or amount of disciplinary action would depend on the type of issues addressed (the more severe the issues, the more severe the disciplinary action). The OIG would then follow up with facilities to ensure the disciplinary action took place and recorded was in all appropriate areas.
The OIG staff would not receive any special treatment regarding timelines and thoroughness of issues resolved. They would be subject to the same disciplinary measures that facility staff would be. Transferring facility staff FTE’s to the OIG office and adding additional FTEs would help reduce the amount of overdue issues.
I believe I have said enough on this now as it is taking up huge amounts of space on this string. If you want further information, post it or send your request to Grits.
Thanks for the interest and I do hope TYC sets up a system the staff and students feel has integrity.
Pinpoint
Hey BB
If you need help writing that book I think Pinpoint is good at typing...
10:29- Nice.
Snide responses like yours keep those on this forum from speaking when they could have worthwhile things to say. I have made an effort to suggest things I feel would turn a broken system around and you respond that it only appears I can type.
Other than snide remarks about the length of my comments (which I already addressed), do you have anything to suggest that will fix what is broken?
Pinpoint
Pinpoint, when people feel threatened, they make snide remarks. Don't let the commentor upset you. Knowledge is power and some are afraid of that. You suggestion merits a looking at by TYC-IRD and implemented. It would keep the nosey superintendent's secretaries from knowing and meddling in youth grievances.
Pinpoint, I am 8:04. That was my attempt at humor but I didn't do very well, I guess. (You'll have to admit that the sight of an OIG having to stuff envelopes and run mail machines would be kinda funny.)
I don't have a dog in the hunt anymore, but from experience I can't agree with much of your plan. Thinking outside the box is always a good idea, though. Forge ahead.
Why are you people coming on here and saying you don't like the automated suggestion and then just leave it at that? You don't say why, say what you'd do different or anything. 12:05 sounds right. You guys are probably the corrupt ones or threatened so you don't want it changed. You don't say anything that makes pinpoint's suggestion sound like a bad idea except you want to whine like a dog.
To 5:03 p.m.: I have exchanged several posts with Pinpoint yesterday and today about his idea for more automation of the grievance system. I tried to explain where I thought the strengths and weaknesses in his system would be, made a poor attempt at humor, and now I wish him lots of success. If TYC decides to work on adopting Pinpoint's concept, the same thing will happen: Stakeholders will identify problems and come up with solutions. I thought that's what Pinpoint wanted us to do here.
I thought I had something to contribute because I have years of direct experience with the complaints system. Offering counterpoints shouldn't prompt you to imply I am corrupt or whining.
5:47 I was talking about the ones coming on here that weren't giving any ideas, just whining and leaving. I saw your posts and they were good ones. What made me mad were the ones coming on here with nothing but whining to say. They just want to complain about anything but won't help out. I'm glad you said something and pinpoint gave ideas back. That's how it should be. Not dogs coming on here, pissing on a good idea and just leaving.
The nosey secretaries are now officially out of the loop. We finally have Youth Rights Specialists, who are not in the facility reporting chain, administering the grievance system. They are due to get training in the new system in early March.
The OIG are cops. We need them. In the past when a civilian investigator confirmed abuse on a staff, the case was forwarded to the local PD which filed the case in the circular file. Now we have our own cops to pursue the cases and a bunch of prosecutors to prosecute the cases.
Now that we have the Youth Rights Specialists in place, some of the problems with the grievance system may be alleviated. We still have a problem, though with getting cases that go beyond simple grievances investigated. There are currently only 9 OIG positions (7 filled) and 8 Youth Care Investigator positions (7 filled). The YRS are by definition youth advocates. They are not in a position to conduct unbiased investigations. For that we need more OIGs and YCIs.
Perhaps the YCIs should be moved under the control of the OIG. That would assure better coordination of assignments and eliminate the current duplication of effort that now goes on. At the local levels, in most cases, there is already a good working relationship among both types of investigators.
Is there ANYONE out there that helps STAFF who have filed grievances? I filed a grievance within the time lines by policy (if you don't, they will dismiss it rather quickly). My resolution was given a timeline by policy of when I was supposed to receive it. It is now about 2.5 months past the resolution deadline and I haven't seen my resolution yet. I know I'm supposed to have the right to appeal the resolution but if one never gets their resolution, it's pretty hard to grieve the result. I emailed Mr. N. but haven't heard anything yet. I know he is very, very busy and has bigger issues to tend to than my little grievance and it's resolution that never came but is there anyone else (that can be trusted) to help a staff about their grievance? Believe you me, retaliation is alive and well and I don't want any more of that. I have a family to feed. I really believe that what I grieved about, was a direct result (of course, I can't prove that) of an earlier grievance that I filed in the first place. I guess that's a pretty good way to handle a grievance. Just NEVER issue a resolution and the staff can't grieve it. At least that appears to be what's going to happen to me. Something isn't right about this that's for sure.
7:49, I'm not try to top your waiting time, but I waited SIX MONTHS for my staff grievance to be resolved by the Central Office investigators. The whole time I was transferred from my work station. They didn't get off their butts and do anything until I threatened to get a lawyer. They were trying every way they could to get me to quit- throwing every hardship they could at me. I hung in there and the results of the grievance proved what I already knew- I was INNOCENT. I saw the writing on the wall and got the hell out of TYC as fast as I could after that. They made it clear that staff who were trying to do things right and not cover up issues were targets of the administration. Don't know if that's the case for you, but from what I've seen- nothing in TYC has changed since I've been there.
Thanks, 6:16, for the information. If there are YRSs tending to the youth grievances, and they aren't reporting to the superintendent, that should give the system the credibility it needs. They are there in the facility, and can retrieve and assign complaints much faster than someone in Austin because they know the lay of the land and the local practices. (Also, they won't care if anyone calls them "nosey.")
Nothing has changed at all since your worked for TYC. IMO, superintendents are still trying to use intimidation and retaliation against employees who do their jobs and report wrong doings. Most superintendent's secretaries look the other way and do not report or care to report what their bosses do. It's strange through all the chaos & crisis the agency is in, I wonder how many secretaries have actually reported the wrong doings of their bosses or continue to do. It would make for interesting reading, oh well!
It's a double edged sword, if the secretary does not like you, neither does the supt and vice a versa. I believe that many wrong and malicious acts stem from what scretaries tell superintendents.
At least that's the case where I work. It may be the humidity that adversely affects them in this area. You are not the first to wait on a resolution, makes one wonder whose desk it's sitting for such a long period of time. You were wise to leave TYC, most of us are looking for jobs because several facilities are on the chopping block once more!
They were trying to rid the agency of the "silos" but instead they've instituted layer upon layer of them. Pray for TYC employees, the good lord won't send them to hell when they die, he'll realize they lived it working at TYC.
Will, one of his assistants and a volunteer (academic) consultant were just at the facility where I work. They talked with a lot of kids, and with a lot of staff. He made a close inspection of the Security unit, including examining the BMP files. When they were done, he stopped by the Supt's office and briefed the Supt. All, in all, I think he did a professional job of it. This is not the first time he has been here - he seems to show up every 4 - 5 weeks. Unannounced drop-ins are a good way of getting an accurate snap-shot of what is going on at any particular moment in time.
Don't assume every kid in TYC can read and write much less know how to point and click on a computer. That's one bold assumption of your grievance system.
Now a video recording kiosk with one button to push might get you somewhere.
Post a Comment