LCJC Committee briefing binder: Appearance of Correctional Service Canada, December 14, 2023

Official title: Appearance of the Correctional Service of Canada before the Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs (LCJC) December 14, 2023

On this page

1. Overview of the Bill
2. Opening remarks
3. Issues notes

3.1  Structured Intervention Units - Overall

3.2  External oversight

3.3  Brazeau, Reddock and Gallone Administrative Segregation Class Actions

3.4  Mental health support and investments – SIU specific

3.5  Overrepresentation of Indigenous offenders within an SIU

3.6  Overrepresentation of Indigenous Peoples

3.7  Implementation of Section 81 (Healing Lodges)

3.8  Correctional interventions for Black offenders

3.9  Victim notification and outreach

3.10 Dry cells and body scanners

4. Committee membership

1. Overview of the Bill

Background of the Bill

This enactment amends the Corrections and Conditional Release Act to, among other things,

(a) require that, if a person who is sentenced, transferred or committed to a penitentiary has disabling mental health issues, they will be transferred to a hospital;

(b) ensure that a person may only be confined in a structured intervention unit for longer than 48 hours on an order of a superior court;

(c) allow for the provision of correctional services and plans for release and reintegration into the community to persons from disadvantaged or minority populations by community groups and other similar support services; and

(d) allow for persons who are sentenced to a period of incarceration or parole ineligibility to apply to the court that imposed that sentence for a reduction if there has been unfairness in the administration of their sentence.

Preamble

Whereas meaningful and effective remedies and oversight are crucial to ensuring respect for the rule of law and human rights;

Whereas, in contrast to other branches of Canada’s criminal legal system, decisions made by the Correctional Service of Canada that impact human rights are not routinely subject to judicial oversight;

Whereas the Structured Intervention Unit Implementation Advisory Panel and the Office of the Correctional Investigator have documented persistent conditions of segregation in federal penitentiaries;

Whereas conditions of isolation and segregation have the potential to create and exacerbate risks to the well-being of persons, including in contravention of prohibitions on cruel and unusual treatment and punishment under section 12 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms;

Whereas persons kept in conditions of isolation and segregation can experience irreversible physical, psychological and neurological harm after as few as 48 hours;

Whereas those most marginalized, including Black and Indigenous peoples, members of the 2SLGBTQQIA+ community and those with disabling mental health issues, have been overrepresented in segregation, structured intervention units and other conditions of prisoner isolation;

Whereas international human rights standards and domestic inquiries, investigations and inquests prohibit segregation, at a minimum, of persons with mental and physical disabilities, young people, many women and those with disabling mental health issues;

Whereas the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada’s commitments require elimination of the overrepresentation of Indigenous peoples in federal penitentiaries as a means of redressing ongoing colonial harms;

Whereas the use of least restrictive measures and the consideration of alternatives to continued institutionalization are fundamental principles of Canada’s corrections;

And whereas segregation, structured intervention units and other forms of isolation are among the most costly and least effective ways of responding to individuals in need of social, cultural and health supports.

2. Opening remarks

Dear Chair and Members of this Committee.

Thank you for providing the Correctional Service of Canada with the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss Bill S-230, An Act to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act.

I have had the pleasure of meeting some of you before.

I am pleased to be joined here today by both Jay Pyke, our Acting Senior Deputy Commissioner, as well as Ginette Clarke who is the Acting Assistant Commissioner for Health Services.

Considering the topic you are studying I felt it important to personally be here to speak with you and to answer your questions.

This is because I was the Commissioner who oversaw the transformation of administrative segregation within our federal penitentiaries to Structured Intervention Units (SIUs). It has been a major transformational culture change for CSC.

And today, I remain both responsible for, and committed to, their successful implementation.

This is because the results of the SIUs will be part of my legacy as Commissioner.

I want to make it clear that the safety, security and well-being of inmates, correctional staff, and the public are a significant part of my responsibilities.

And the important work that we are doing in the context of SIUs will greatly facilitate those objectives.

As part of this, I monitor and read the data on SIUs on a weekly basis and speak with my colleagues both nationally and regionally about the results so that we can continually monitor and be responsive to opportunities for improvement.

It must be remembered that the transformation of administrative segregation was a truly historic transformation of our penal system.

And the changes we made were implemented on a significant scale.

Considering the magnitude of these changes, we knew that it would require time and adjustments to get everything perfect.

Especially considering that the operation of the SIUs began just months before the COVID-19 pandemic which had a significant and far-reaching impact, including within the prison system. 

Since the establishment of the SIUs, I have welcomed the feedback that I have received, and continue to receive, from stakeholders such as our oversight bodies, and from those who have appeared before this committee.

It is through processes such as these that we can continue to make ongoing improvements to the operation of the SIUs.

For example, in response to feedback we have received from both internal and external reviews and recommendations, a number of changes have been adopted to the SIU model.

This includes:

• Increasing opportunities for inmate engagement
• Improving our data collection, tracking and reporting
• Understanding and addressing regional differences across different SIUs
• Enhancing employee training and development, as well as enhancing our staffing model

The success we have seen include an increase in the percentage of inmates transferred to an SIU who have successfully reintegrated into the mainstream inmate population.

Also, due to active interventions and programming, as well as partnerships between regions, offenders who were previously reluctant are now choosing to participate in programs offered in the SIUs.

As a result, they are developing more positive attitudes and better conflict management skills, and applying what they learn.

I want to build upon this essential and successful work.

Members of this committee, I want to make it very clear that our operations have been and will continue to be transparent and accessible to our partners.

I continue working with members of the Implementation Advisory Panel and the Independent External Decision Makers to share data and review their important findings and recommendations.

I want to acknowledge the work they do in helping identify improvements, as necessary.

In addition to town halls that I have conducted with our stakeholders and partners, over the past year we have been hosting Open Houses for members of the public to see our SIUs firsthand.

I know some of you have previously visited our institutions, but for those who have yet to do so, I would encourage you to come speak to CSC members gathered here today after this meeting to schedule a time to tour a penitentiary and see an SIU firsthand. 

Senators, I know that our correctional system is a topic that generates strong and diverse viewpoints.

My commitment, as Commissioner and as someone who has worked for the Correctional Service of Canada for 40 years, is to maintain the safe operations of our institutions and SIUs, while also promoting offender rehabilitation.

To promote this, we offer interventions, activities, programs and mental health supports to those who are transferred to an SIU.

SIUs are not about punishment or causing harm.

Rather they are about helping inmates and providing them with the continued opportunity to support their safe return to the mainstream inmate population.

As Commissioner I will continue to work collaboratively with all stakeholders on the ongoing operation of SIUs.

3. Issues notes

3.1 Structured Intervention Units - Overall

• In November 2019, we abolished administrative segregation and implemented a new Structured Intervention Unit (SIU) model
• SIUs are being used only as a last resort when there is no reasonable alternative following efforts to manage inmates within the mainstream inmate population
• Before transferring an inmate to an SIU, every possible alternative is explored, such as mediation or conflict resolution, transfer to a different unit or range, involvement of the Inmate Welfare Committee or staff who have influence over the inmate, such as an Elder, Chaplain or Indigenous Liaison Officer
• SIUs are also meant as a temporary measure to help inmates adopt more positive behaviours that keep the institution safe and secure

Reviews

• A transfer to SIUs is overseen at multiple points including by:
  • the Institutional Head after 5 days and 30 days
  • the SDC at 60, ADCCO at 45 days and
  • IEDM at 90 days, then every subsequent 30 days
• There is a condition of confinement review by an IEDM if the minimum is not met every 5 days or 15 out of 30.
• This review takes place if an offender does not avail

Profiles

Inmates in SIUs have been shown to have more maladaptive behaviours like impulsivity, low frustration tolerance, frequently act in an aggressive manner, and more likely to hold attitudes that support instrumental or goal-oriented violence.

As of March 31, 2023:

• Average of number of transfers to an SIU for 2019 to 2020, 2020 to 2021 and 2021 to 2022 is 1,379.25
• 63.9% of inmates transferred to an SIU successfully reintegrated into the mainstream inmate population, compared to 66.4% in 2021 to 2022 and 56.2% in 2020 to 2021
• Median days in SIU was 15 days 2022 to 2023, compared to 26 days in 2021 to 2022
• During the last fiscal year, there was a daily average of approximately 173 inmates in an SIU across Canada, which represents less than 1.33% of the federal inmate’s population

3.2. External oversight

• One important difference between the previous regime and the current is that an inmate’s confinement in the SIU is subject to review by an external body
• Independent External Decision Makers (IEDMs) provide oversight of an inmate’s conditions and duration of confinement in an SIU
• They also monitor and review cases on an ongoing basis while providing recommendations and decisions to CSC
• In specific circumstances, IEDMs have the authority to decide whether an inmate should be released from the SIU or to make recommendations and alter the inmate’s conditions of confinement
• For example, an IEDM review is triggered to determine whether CSC took all reasonable steps to provide the opportunities when an inmate does not spend 4 hours out of cell or a minimum of 2 hours of interactions with others, for 5 consecutive days, or fifteen days out of a thirty-day period
• Even if the IEDM finds that CSC has taken all reasonable steps, if the inmate has been in the SIU without those opportunities for 10 consecutive days following their decision, the IEDM must determine more generally if the inmate should be released from the SIU
• As of March 31, 2023, there were approximately 5300 conditions of confinement referrals made to IEDM for review
• Of those reviewed by an IEDM, they concluded 80% of the time that CSC had taken all reasonable steps to provide inmates with the opportunity for 4 hours out of their cell with 2 hours of interaction with others

3.3. Brazeau, Reddock and Gallone Administrative Segregation Class Actions

Proposed response

• The Correctional Service of Canada remains committed to meeting its legal obligations
• Three certified class actions, known as Brazeau, Reddock, and Gallone, challenged the use of administrative segregation in federal correctional institutions
• The Court awarded damages for diagnosed seriously mentally ill (SMI) offenders who were placed in administrative segregation, and to non-SMI offenders placed in administrative segregation for more than 15 consecutive days
• We have been working with the appointed external claims administrator and class counsel to ensure the Protocol is implemented as outlined by the Courts

3.4 Mental health support and investments – SIU specific

• CSC has specific health assessment processes for individuals in Structured Intervention Units (SIUs)
• Health assessments, including mental health, are required within 24 hours of transfer to the SIU and every 14 days thereafter. A more in-depth mental health assessment is completed within 28 days of transfer to the SIU
• To ensure continuity of care, individuals in the SIU continue to receive health services at the appropriate level of care in accordance with any existing treatment plans
• Individuals are visited daily by a registered health care professional to conduct a wellness assessment to identify the emergence of physical and mental health symptoms for individuals who do not have identified pre-existing health needs. This also allows for the appropriate clinical monitoring and continuity of care for those who have identified pre-existing health needs
• A registered health care professional may, for health reasons, recommend to the Institutional Head that the conditions of confinement of an offender in an SIU be altered or that the inmate not remain in the unit
• If the Institutional Head does not agree with the health care professional’s recommendation, they must provide a rationale and seek review by a higher authority in National headquarters
• The Health Committee, chaired by the Assistant Commissioner of Health Services, will review the individual’s case and if the health care recommendation is again not implemented, an Independent External Decision Maker (IEDM) will review the case and make a decision

Proposed response (General)

• At the Correctional Service of Canada, one of our key priorities is the provision of professional, clinically independent, culturally responsive, integrated and coordinated person-centred care
• The Service is legislated to provide essential health care and reasonable access to non-essential health care to federally incarcerated individuals, in keeping with professionally accepted standards
• Effective and timely intervention in addressing mental health needs of federally incarcerated individuals is a priority
• The Service has an integrated mental health service delivery model and provides services along a continuum of care from admission to the expiration of an offender’s sentence or long-term supervision order and is responsive to the specific level of care required
• The Service has interdisciplinary teams of mental health professionals to provide collaborative services and supports, and interventions to assist individuals in addressing their mental health needs
• Mental health services are provided to individuals incarcerated in Correctional Service of Canada mainstream institutions, Regional Treatment Centres, Indigenous healing lodges, and in select sites in the community for those on conditional release/under supervision
• There are 5 regional treatment centres across Canada that care for male incarcerated individuals with serious mental health conditions and one treatment centre for incarcerated women with serious mental health conditions. These centres are accredited by Accreditation Canada and provide clinical assessment and inpatient treatment

If pressed - Suicide and self-injury

• The provision of health care, including interventions to address suicidal behaviours and self-injury, are initiated at intake and continue throughout the incarceration period, as needed. This includes ongoing screening and assessment and treatment
• The Service investigates the circumstances surrounding all offender suicides and self-injurious incidents resulting in serious bodily injury

3.5. Overrepresentation of Indigenous offenders within an SIU

Proposed response

• Among other significant changes, Bill C-83 enshrined in law CSC’s obligation to consider systemic and background factors unique to federally incarcerated Indigenous people in all decision-making
• Before authorizing transfer of an Indigenous person to an SIU, CSC will consider Indigenous Social History and identify culturally responsive alternatives and consultation with interdisciplinary team
• When a transfer is necessary:
  • Continue to offer culturally responsive support through access to Elders, Spiritual Advisors, and Indigenous Liaison Officers
• Examples of initiatives to provide culturally based opportunities for time out of cell and interactions with others in SIUs:
  • Stony Mountain Institution built a sweat lodge and dedicated a cultural room specifically for inmates in the SIU
  • Kent Institution – staff developed a painting initiative to increase interaction and time out of cell for Indigenous inmates in the SIU

3.6 Overrepresentation of Indigenous Peoples

• The overrepresentation of Indigenous peoples in the criminal justice system and correctional institutions is a reflection of the systemic disparities that all levels of government must work to fix
• We share the concerns about the overrepresentation of Indigenous peoples in federal institutions and are committed to taking actions to address systemic factors that have contributed to the disproportion, which includes:
  • Hiring a Deputy Commissioner for Indigenous Corrections in May 2023
  • The creation of Indigenous Interventions Centres to provide streamlined support to Indigenous offenders, from the commencement of their sentence
  • The streamlining of the Section 84 release process to remove barriers to early release to Indigenous communities
  • The implementation of several reintegration initiatives that support Indigenous offenders as they transition to a life in the community, including project funding for Indigenous organizations delivering trauma and life skills interventions
  • Implementing the Indigenous Offender Employment Initiative in Prairie, Ontario and Pacific regions
  • Culturally responsive correctional programming for Indigenous offenders and Inuit men offenders as well as training for staff
  • Work is ongoing to develop a culturally appropriate and Indigenous-informed security classification process, in partnership with universities and Indigenous communities

Progress

• The percentage of Indigenous people federally incarcerated who were granted a discretionary release at the time of their first release increased by 13% in the past decade, from 27% in 2012 to 2013 to 40% in 2022 to 2023
• In 2022 to 2023, 81% of Indigenous people under community supervision did not return to federal custody within 5 years of reaching the expiration of their sentence which is an increase from 79% in 2018 to 2019
• Since 2017, increased efforts to address Indigenous over-incarceration by enhancing culturally relevant and appropriate programs and support for Indigenous offenders, both in custody and on conditional release

3.7 Implementation of Section 81 (Healing Lodges)

Proposed response

• Healing lodges offer services and programs that reflect Indigenous culture in an environment that incorporates Indigenous peoples’ traditions and customs
• Currently 10 healing lodges in Canada:
  • 4 are CSC-operated
  • 6 are operated by Indigenous organizations and/or communities through Section 81 agreement
• CSC continues to enhance collaboration with Indigenous partners to create more opportunities for First Nations, Métis, and Inuit communities to help support the successful reintegration of Indigenous offenders
• This includes working with and funding Indigenous organizations and communities, while also working towards creating additional agreements in accordance with Section 81 of the CCRA to ensure that Indigenous offenders have access to culturally relevant programming and supports to expedite their safe return to the community

Progress

• In 2017, CSC strengthened the Section 81 funding arrangement to better support operations and respond to the needs of Indigenous governing bodies or Indigenous organizations managing Healing Lodges
• Since 2018, CSC has renewed or extended all existing agreements with Indigenous governing bodies/Indigenous organizations in the Quebec and Prairie Regions to provide ongoing access to culturally responsive environments pursuant to section 81 of the CCRA
• In July 2022, CSC introduced policy changes relating to the management of Section 81 agreements
• These are intended to reduce barriers to the full utilization of existing agreements and the creation of new agreements through relationship-building and renewed partnerships with Indigenous communities and organizations
• There was a 17% increase in bed utilization from 2022 to 2023. Currently, approximately 75% of Healing Lodge beds are occupied by federal offenders

3.8 Correctional interventions for Black offenders

Proposed response

• In 2022 to 2023, Black persons represented 9.2% of the overall incarcerated population, despite representing about 3% of the Canadian population
• CSC created an Ethnocultural Action Framework to better support ethnocultural offenders, including those who are Black and other racialized groups
• Over 60 staff members have been identified as Ethnocultural Site Coordinators to provide key support to offenders, including those who are Black or part of other racialized groups, at the site level on a volunteer basis
• We continue to provide Black offenders with interventions and services aimed at supporting their reintegration. This includes:
  • Addressing cultural, employment and mentorship needs
  • Receiving support from community service providers and volunteers, when possible
  • Providing culturally relevant materials for personal development purposes
  • When appropriate, recommending and facilitating Day Parole to “other locations”, which may include offenders’ home communities, or locations with increased access to relevant supports for successful reintegration
• Additionally, CSC finalized qualitative research, in collaboration with Nipissing University, to better understand the experience of ethnocultural offenders, including Black offenders
• In 2022, CSC also released an exhaustive quantitative research project on ethnocultural offenders that considered diversity trends in the incarcerated population; admission profiles; in-custody experiences; and release outcomes
• CSC is also working on developing a Black Offender Strategy to identify new opportunities to address the unique lived experiences and barriers faced by federally sentenced Black individuals
• This strategy will initially identify and determine ways to incorporate expand successful practices across the country and, where possible, anchor them in policies, procedures and practice nationally. The work will be finalized in the 2023 to 2024 fiscal year

Progress

• The percentage of Black offenders who were granted a discretionary release at the time of their first release increased by 17% in the past decade, from 31% in 2012 to 2013 to 48% in 2022 to 2023
• The rate of Black offenders who had their conditional release suspended while on supervision in the community decreased by over 11% between 2018 to 2019 and 2022 to 2023
• Between 2018 to 2019 and 2022 to 2023, the rate of Black offenders who have been convicted of a serious or violent conviction while on supervision in the community decreased by 36%
• In 2022 to 2023, 92% of Black offenders were not re admitted to federal custody within 5 years following the end of their sentence. This reflects a positive trend where, in 2018 to 2019, when this percentage was 87%
• Research suggests that correctional programs respond equally well to the needs of ethnocultural offenders
• Ethnocultural offenders show a decreased likelihood of recidivism after participating in correctional programs and comparable post-release outcomes
• Findings from a recent evaluation (2021) indicated that those who completed the Community Program (CP) experienced significant reductions in the likelihood of being returned to custody, either for any reason or for a new offence, relative to CP incompletion and eligible non-participants
• Those who completed the CP experienced an 81% decrease in the likelihood of a revocation for any reason compared to eligible non-participants, while those who completed the community maintenance program experienced an 86% decrease in the likelihood of a revocation for any reason compared to those with no exposure to it
• The evaluation found that the effectiveness of the Community Program did not vary across offender subgroups, indicating that White offenders, Black offenders, Indigenous offenders, and other Ethnocultural offenders all experienced comparable reductions in the likelihood of a revocation. The same results were also observed for the Community Maintenance Program

3.9 Victim notification and outreach

• CSC is committed to upholding victims’ rights and taking a victim-centered approach when making decisions or recommendations regarding inmates
• CSC provides information and notifications to victims based on provisions in the CCRA for individuals who meet the definition of a victim under the law: an individual who has suffered physical or emotional harm, property damage or economic loss as the result of the commission of the offence
• Victims may register to receive information about the inmate who harmed them. The CCRA lists the information victims can request to receive, including but not limited to:
  • Sentence information
  • Information about transfers and reasons for transfer
  • Eligibility and review dates for temporary absences and conditional release
  • The outcome of the review
  • The inmate’s release date
  • Destination and conditions of release
• Victim considerations are taken into account in case management recommendations and decision-making throughout the course of the inmate’s sentence
• The need to consider victim information is not new and has always been an integral component of risk assessment, release planning and supervision
• This includes reviewing all Victim Statements on file, whether it is Victim Impact Statement submitted in court or Victim Statement submitted directly to CSC
• At any time in an inmate’s sentence, a victim can submit a new or updated statement to CSC for consideration
• Victim concerns must be included in the overall assessment for transfers prior to the decisions. This is done by case management teams by consulting all victim Statements on file
• As per CSC policy, the Victim Services Unit notifies victims of transfers to a medium- or maximum-security institution (or unit within the same institution) the day that the inmate is transferred or as soon as possible afterward
• The CCRA allows CSC to notify victims of transfers to minimum-security units or Healing Lodges before they occur. When it is possible, the Victim Services Unit notifies registered victims 2 days in advance of the transfer
• The Victim Services Unit notifies registered victims of temporary absences at least 16 days prior to the occurrence, unless not practicable to do so
• The Victim Services Unit notifies victims of the month and year of review dates under the authority of the PBC in order to invite them to provide Victim Statements or updated Victim Statements for consideration in case preparation. The PBC informs victims of the actual date of upcoming hearings
• Currently, CSC has more than 8,000 registered victims and completes more than 30,000 notifications a year

3.10 Dry cells and body scanners

• CSC remains committed to keeping illicit contraband out of federal penitentiaries to ensure a safe and secure environment for staff, inmates and visitors
• Dry cells are used a last resort when there are reasonable grounds to believe an inmate is carrying contraband in their digestive system
• Amendments were passed by Parliament that addressed the Court’s decision to ensure that the use of these cells comply with the Charter
• The government has enhanced its reporting mechanisms, continue to ensure adequate provisions are provided to inmates in these cells, and give significant consideration to their mental and physical well-being
• In August 2022, a Ministerial Direction was issued to CSC to provide clarity on the use of dry cells while the government develops regulations to supplement the current law (CCRA)
• At the same time, we continue to explore new technologies as additional tools to detect the presence of contraband

4. Committee membership