6415 Calder, Suite B • Beaumont, Texas 77706
409.866.9920 • www.correctionalexperts.com
· Making a Difference!

April 19, 2008
MEMORANDUM FOR:

Gary E. Mead, Acting Director
Office of Detention and Removal Operations

FROM:

b6,b7c
.
Reviewer-In-Charge /) - ,
Creative Corredions

~.

b6,b7c

.

Euless City Jail Annual Detention Review

SUBJECT:

Creative Corrections conducted an Annual Detention Review of the Euless City Jail (ECJ)
located in Euless, Texas, on April 14-15, 2008. The facility is operated by the Euless Police
Department, which has a contract with the Immigration and Naturalization Ser
As
b6,b7c
noted on the attached documents, the team of Subject Matter Experts included
b6
b6
b6,b7c
Security;
Health Services;
Safety; and
, Food
b6,b7c
Chief of
Services. A review closeout was conducted on Apri115, 2008, with
b6,b7c
b6,b7c
Police;
, Assistant Chief of Police; Lieutenant
, Jail
b6,b7c
Administrator; and Sergeant
and included a discussion of all deficiencies and
concerns noted during our review.
.
Type of Review:
This review is a scheduled Detention Standard Review to determine general compliance with
established ICE National Detention Standards for facilities used for under 72 hours.
Review Summary:
The facility is not currently accredited by any correctional or health organizations.
Standards Compliance:
The following information summarizes the standards reviewed and the overall compliance for
this review. The following statistical information outlined provides a direct comparison of the
2007 ADR and this ADR conducted for 2008.
April25~

2007

Compliant
Deficient
At-Risk·
Not-Applicable

Review
28
0
0
0

April14-15~

2008

Compliant
Deficient
At-Risk
N ot-Applicable

Review
25
2
0

1

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY (LAW ENFORCEMENT SENSITIVE)

1/3

Discipline Policy-Deficient
All facilities housing ICE detainees are authorized to impose discipline on detainees whose
behavior is not in compliance with facility rules and regulations.
•

Facility policy does not identify a written disciplinary system, which uses progressive
levels ofreviews and appeals. The policy states detainees can be sanctioned withJoss of
privileges, disciplinary isolation and possible formal charges; however, the policy does
not describe any due process procedures to justify the imposition of sanctions.

•

Facility rules do not prohibit disciplinary action from being capricious or retaliatory.

•

Written rules do not prohibit staff from imposing the sanction "loss of correspondence
privileges".

•

The facility does not have a detainee handbook that informs detainees ofthe rules of
conduct, sanctions, or procedures for violations. Likewise, this information is not
disseminated to detainees verbally.

•

Detainee rights and responsibilities, prohibited acts, disciplinary severity scale and
sanctions are not posted in Spanish or English.

•

The facility policy does not include provisions for informally handling minor rule
violations.

Recommendations
Establish a written policy authorizing the facility to impose discipline on detainees whose
behavior is not in compliance with facility rules and regulations. This policy should direct that
disciplinary action is not to be capricious or retaliatory, that "loss of correspondence privileges"
cannot be imposed as a disciplinary sanction, and it should contain provisions for informally
handling minor rule violations. The rules of conduct, disciplinary sanctions and procedures for
violations should be defined in writing and communicated to all detainees. Portions ofthe
disciplinary policy containing detainee rights and responsibilities, prohibited acts, disciplinary
severity scale and sanctions should be available in English and Spanish, and posted in the
housing units.
Note: Although the Euless City Jail's disciplinary policy is deficient, their efforts to maintain a
high measure of security and control of detainees is not without merit. This "Under 72 hour"
facility is unable to employ a comparatively time-consuming disciplinary process since detainees
would be removed from the facility before charges could be adjudicated.

Emergency Plans-Deficient
Every facility will develop plans and procedures for handling emergency situations reasonably
likely to occur. The goal of these "contingency plans" is to control the situation without
endangermg lives or property.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY (LAW ENFORCEMENT SENSITIVE)

2/3

The Euless City Jail's emergency plans do not cover work/food strikes, escapes, adverse weather
or internal hostage situations. Additionally, there is no facility policy that mandates detainees
will be protected from personal injury, disease, or property damage.

Recommendations
Plans and procedures should be developed for handling emergency situations reasonably likely to
occur. These procedures should include statements addressing the protection of detainees from
personal injury, disease, or property damage. Written procedures should cover work/food
strikes, escapes, adverse weather, and internal hostage situations.

RIC·Issues and Concerns
Environmental Health and Safety
Personal protective equipment (eye protection and eye wash station) is needed for staff or
detainees using hazardous chemicals.
A technically qualified person should complete monthly fire and safety inspections.
Emergency exit floor plans and an area-specific exit diagram should be conspicuously posted in
public areas.

Contraband:
Upon arrival at the facility, detainees should be notified of items they can and cannot possess.

Security Inspections:
A staff member should search each vehicle entering and leaving the facility.

Use of Force:
Staff members should be trained in the performance ofthe use-of-force team technique in
addition to the two hours of self-defense tactics training they receive annually. The facility's use
of force policy should be amended to provide staff direction on immediate use of force
guidelines and requirements.

Recommended Rating and Justification
It is the Reviewer-in-Charge (RIC) recommendation that the facility receive a rating of
"Acceptable." It is also recommended by the RIC that a Plan of Action be required for this
facility to implement necessary corrective actions.

RIC Assurance Statement
All fmdings of this review have been documented on the Detention Review Worksheets and are
supported by the written documentation contained in the review file.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY (LAW ENFORCEMENT SENSITIVE)

3/3

.

r"'''~~
L'~.reat've
? " C 0 r r e c t ion s
DETENTION FACILITY INSPECTION FORM
FACILITIES USED LONGER THAN 72 HOURS
A. TYPE OF FACILITY REVIEWED
ICE Service Processing Center
D
ICE Contract Detention Facility
D
ICE Intergovernmental Service Agreement
~

Other Charges: (If None, Indicate N/A)
N/A
Estimated Man-days per Year
6000

B. CURRENT INSPECTION
Type ofInspection
~ Field Office D HQ Inspection
Date[s] of Facility Review
April 14-15, 2008

G.' ACCREDITATION CERTIFICATES ~ N/A
List all State or National Accreditation [s] received:
N/A
H. ' PROBLEMS / COMPLAINTS (COPIES MUST BE ATTACHED)
The Facility is under Court Order or Class Action Finding
D Court Order
D Class Action Finding
The Facility has Significant Litigation Pending
D Major Litigation
D Life/Safety Issues
~ None

C. PREVIous/MoST RECENT FACILITY REVIEW
Date[s] of Last Facility Review
April 25, 2007
Previous Rating
D Superior D Good ~ Acceptable D Deficient D At-Risk

I. FACILITY HISTORY
Date Built
01110/2002
Date Last Remodeled or Upgraded
N/A
Date New Construction / Bed Space Added
NIA
Future Construction Planned
DYes ~No Date: N/A
Current Bed space
Future Bed Space (# New Beds only)
75
Number: N/A Date: N/A

,

D. NAME AND LOCATION OF FACILITY
Name
Euless Police Department
Address
1102 W. Euless Blvd
City, State and Zip Code
Euless, Texas 76040
County
Tarrant County
Name and Title of Chief Executive Officer
(Warden/OIC/Superintendent)
b6,b7c
Chief of Police
Tel
mber (Include Area Code)
817 b6,b7c
Field Office / Sub-Office (List Office with Oversight)
Dallas Field Office
Distance from Field Office
25 miles
E. ICE INFORMATION
(Last Name, Title and Duty Station)
b6,b7c
/ RIC-Administration / Creative Corrections
am Member / Title / Duty Location
b6,b7c
/ 5MB-Security / Creative Corrections
Name of Team Member / Title / Duty Location
/ SME-Medical / Creative Corrections
b6
Name of Team Member / Title / Duty Location
/ 5MB-Food Service / Creative Corrections
b6
Name of Team Member / Title / Duty Location
5MB-Safety / Creative Corrections
b6,b7c
F. CDF/IGSA INFORMATION ONLY
Contract Number
Date of Contract or IGSA
IGSAAIDLS-6060-92
February 23, 1991
(Amended)
Basic Rates per Man-Day
$55.00

J. TOTAL FACILITY POPULATION
Total Facility Intake for Previous 12 months
9083
Total ICE Man Days for Previous 12 months
5717
K. CLASSIFICATION LEVEL (ICE SPCSAND CDFSONLY)
,;.' ".
L-l
L-2
L-3
Adult Male
N/A
N/A
N/A
Adult Female
N/A
N/A
N/A

.,

'.'

L. FACILITY CAPACITY

<": ." ',.'

Rated
Operational
Emer2ency
Adult Male
65
65
65
Adult Female
10
10
10
D Facility Holds Juveniles Offenders 16 and Older as Adults

M. AVERAGEDAILYPOPULATION
, ( •.; / ' ; i . ,
.,
ICE
Adult Male
15
<1
Adult Female

USMS
N/A
N/A

Other
22
2

N. FACILITY STAFFING LEVEL

I

b2High

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY (LAW ENFORCEMENT SENSITIVE)
© 2007 Creative Corrections, LLC (Rev. 12/8/07)

port:

I

SIGNIFICANT INCIDENT SUMMARY WORKSHEET
In order for Creative Corrections to complete its review of your facility, you must complete the following worksheet prior to your
scheduled review dates. This worksheet must contain data for the past twelve months. We will use this worksheet in conjunction with
the ICE Detention Standards to assess your detention operations with regard to the needs ofICE and its detainee population. Failure
to complete this worksheet will result in a delay in processing this report, and may result in a reduction or removal of ICE detainees
from your facility.

Assault:
Offenders on
Offenders!

WithW
WithoutW

Assault:
Detainee on
Staff

Number of Forced Moves, inc!.
Forced Cell Moves3

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

# Times Four/Five Point
Restraints Applied/Used
Offender / Detainee Medical
Referrals as a Result of Injuries
Sustained.
Escapes
Actual
Grievances:

# Received
# Resolved in Favor of
OffenderlDetainee
Reason (V=Violent, I=Illness,
S=Suicide, A=Attempted

Deaths

Psychiatric / Medical Referrals

Number
# Medical Cases Referred for
Outside Care
# Psychiatric Cases Referred
for Outside Care

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

-0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

6

5

0

0

0
0

0

Any attempted physical contact or physical contact that involves two or more offenders
Oral, anal or vaginal penetration or attempted penetration involving at least 2 parties, whether it is consenting or non-consenting
Routine transportation of detainees/offenders is not considered "forced"
Any incident that involves four or more detaineeS/offenders, includes gang fights, organized mUltiple hunger strikes, work stoppages, hostage situations,
maj or fires, or other large scale incidents

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY (LAW ENFORCEMENT SENSITIVE)
© 2007 Creative Corrections, LLC (Rev. 12/8/07)

Page 2 of4

DHSIICE DETENTION STANDARDS REVIEW SUMMARY REpORT
1. ACCEPTABLE

4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.

2. DEFICIENT

3. AT-RISK

4. REPEAT

5. NOT

FINDING

ApPLICABLE

Classification System
Detainee Handbook
Food Service
Funds and Personal Property
Detainee Grievance Procedures
Issuance and Exchange of Clothing, Bedding, and Towels
Practices

Suicide Prevention and Intervention
12.
SECURITY AND CONTROL
13.
Contraband
14.
Detention Files
15.
Disciplinary Policy
16.
Emergency Plans
17.
Environmental Health and Safety
18.
Hold Rooms in Detention Facilities
Key and Lock Control
19.
20.
Population Counts
21.
Security Inspections
Special Management Units (Administrative Detention)
22.
Special Management Units (Disciplinary Segregation)
23.
24.
Tool Control
25.
Transportation (Land management)
Use of Force
26.
Staff / Detainee Communication (Added August 2003)
27.
28.
Detainee Transfer
FINDINGS OF DEFICIENT AND AT-RISK REQUIRE WRITTEN COMMENT DESCRIBING THE FINDING AND
T IS NECESSARY TO REACH COMPLIANCE.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY (LAW ENFORCEMENT SENSITIVE)
© 2007 Creative Corrections, LLC (Rev. 12/8/07)

Page 3 of4

RIC REVIEW ASSURANCE STATEMENT
BY SIGNING BELOW, THE REVIEWER-IN-CHARGE (RIC) CERTIFIES THAT:
ALL FINDINGS OF NON-COMPLIANCE WITH POLICY OR INADEQUAfE CONTROLS, AND FINDINGS OF NOTEWORTHY ACCOMPLISHMENTS,
CONTAINED IN THIS INSPECTION REPORT, ARE SUPPORTED BY EVIDENCE THAT IS SUFFICIENT AND RELIABLE; AND
WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THIS REVIEW, THE FACILITY IS OPERATING IN ACCORDANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAW AND POLICY, AND PROPERTY
AND RESOURCES ARE BEING EFFICIENTLY UTILIZED AND ADEQUATELY SAFEGUARDED, EXCEPT FOR ANY DEFICIENCIES NOTED IN THE
REPORT.

b6,b7c

b6,b7c

Title & Duty

Reviewer in

b6,b7c

Creative Corrections

Creative Corrections

b6

Creative Corrections

Print Name, Title, & Duty Location
b6

RECOMMENDED RATING:

Creative Corrections

b6,b7c

Creative Corrections

o
o
I:8J
o

SUPERIOR
GOOD
ACCEPT ABLE
DEFICIENT
OAT-RISK

COMMENTS: The Euless City Jail is operated as a relatively small holding facility in support of the Euless Chief ofpolice.
Consequently, the detainees (both local offenders and ICE detainees) are housed for a very short time. The local offenders are
typically bonded out within hours or transferred to county facilities in less than 72 hours. The ICE detainees are housed only
overnight and rarely exceed a stay of less than 24 hours. Consequently, many of the ICE Standards which apply to longer term
incarcerations do not directly relate or apply to this facility. The Disciplinary Policy standard is an example of this. Administrative
rules and the hearing process do not exist at this facility. However, for a facility with this short average length of incarceration, a
formal process of rules and responsibilities and subsequent administrative review process would not favorably impact the operation.
The facility staff has an informal resolution process to intervene, separate, and more highly supervise those who act out until they are
relocated to a longer term facility. No evidence or history of this method causing threat or harm to ICE detainees, or others, was
apparent during this review. Therefore, the deficiency in the disciplinary standard negatively affected the overall rating, but will not
diminish the future safety ofICE detainees.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY (LAW ENFORCEMENT SENSITIVE)
© 2007 Creative Corrections, LLC (Rev. 12/8/07)

Page 4 of4

•

•

HEADQUARTERS EXECUTIVE REVIEW

I Review Authority
The signature below constitutes review of this report and acceptance by the Review Authority. OIC/CEO will have • ..,. from
receipt of this report to respond to all findings and recommendations.
HQDRO EXECUTIVE REVIEW: (Please Print Name)

Signature
b6,b7c

b6,b7c

Title

Date

Acting Chief, Detention Standards Compliance Unit

Final Rating:

IZI Acceptable

o Deficient
OAt-Risk

Comments: The Review Authority concurs with the "Acceptable" rating. A Plan of Action is required to correct the
deficiencies identified in the Emergency Plans, Discipline Policy, Environmental Health and Safety,
Contraband, Security Inspections, and Use of Force standards.

CC-324B-SIS

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY (LAW ENFORCEMENT SENSITIVE)