IDOC ADMINISTRATORS CLARIFY JPAY EMAIL TIMELINES... SORT OF
In an effort to clarify official IDOC policy, Dale Shackelford recently had emails sent to Chief of Prisons Ashley Dowell. Ms. Dowell then assigned Mr. Ross Castleton, Deputy Chief of Prisons, to investigate and answer the questions. The following are some of the questions and responses (as received).
Q: In the simplist of terms, the actual number of days staff have to release an email, photo or video from the time it is received at the facility from Jpay to the prisoner.
A: The number of days staff have to release an email photo or video from the time it is received at the facility is 5 days if it is approved. If it is not approved and goes to investigations, it can be held up to 10 days. (EDITOR'S NOTE: Mr. Castleton indicates that the ECMs may be held 5 days, not 5 BUSINESS days, however, despite staff who are authorized to review ECMs working 24/7, SOP usually indicates that times do not include weekends or holidays.)
Q: Same question, but what is the number of days staff have to release an OUTGOING email after the prisoner sends it?
A: If an outgoing electronic communication is flagged, it should be reviewed and released if approved in 5 days.
[NOTE: One of the problems is with the interpretion of the current SOP in that it gives so many days for initial review, another so many days for another review, etc. Some staff have argued that emails do not have to be released for up to (and sometimes more) than 3 weeks. There needs to be a simple number of (working) days determined and communicated to both staff and prisoners.]
Q: In simple terms, how long should it be before a prisoner is notified that an ECM is being held for review?
A: A notice that an ECM is being held for review should be sent to the inmate within 5 days.
[NOTE: Staff are taking sometimes weeks to "review" ECMs before releasing them. Sometimes, prisoners are unaware that an email had even been sent, while at other times, knowing an email was sent on a date and time certain, has to wait weeks for it to be released. As it stands, staff at ISCC are interpreting the SOP as not requiring any notification that an incoming ECM is under review - no matter how long it takes if the ECM is finally released (which begs the question, if they know the ECM will be released - why is it still under review?).]
[NOTE: An electronic notice is generally generated when an ECM is initially taken for review, but in that notice, there is only the fact that something was taken, with no information on who sent it, when it was sent, why it was taken, who took it or anything else. The paper Notice required by SOP is not generated until days or even weeks later (if at all).]
Q: How (and why) is it that regular mail (which, prior to the implementation of the inmate email system consisted of thousands of pieces of mail per day) is to be delivered within 24 hours of receiving it in the mailroom - yet email, most of which containing but a few lines of text - are allowed to be delayed for weeks?
A: Our policy is to process flagged electronic communication within 5 days. At that time it is released, destroyed or sent for investigation and notification is sent to the inmate. If it is sent to investigation, an additional 5 days are allowed to process. Electronic communication which is not flagged, is delivered directly to the inmate.
I applaude Mr. Castleton's attempt to clarify the matters presented (is it 5 BUSINESS days, or 5 days period?). Either way, Mr. Castleton's words are still not being heeded at the ISCC where an attachment (drawing of human internal organs) was removed from an email sent to Shackelford in late May and as of the third week in June, there has been no notice - electronic or otherwise - regarding the confiscation of a drawing which fits all the parameters of IDOC SOP, and if nothing else, certainly qualifies as a medical or anatomical drawing authorized by SOP.
Family or friends who would like to know more about ECM deadlines should contact the Idaho Department of Correction via their website at www.idoc.idaho.gov, or the facility at which the prisoner is housed.
Q: In the simplist of terms, the actual number of days staff have to release an email, photo or video from the time it is received at the facility from Jpay to the prisoner.
A: The number of days staff have to release an email photo or video from the time it is received at the facility is 5 days if it is approved. If it is not approved and goes to investigations, it can be held up to 10 days. (EDITOR'S NOTE: Mr. Castleton indicates that the ECMs may be held 5 days, not 5 BUSINESS days, however, despite staff who are authorized to review ECMs working 24/7, SOP usually indicates that times do not include weekends or holidays.)
Q: Same question, but what is the number of days staff have to release an OUTGOING email after the prisoner sends it?
A: If an outgoing electronic communication is flagged, it should be reviewed and released if approved in 5 days.
[NOTE: One of the problems is with the interpretion of the current SOP in that it gives so many days for initial review, another so many days for another review, etc. Some staff have argued that emails do not have to be released for up to (and sometimes more) than 3 weeks. There needs to be a simple number of (working) days determined and communicated to both staff and prisoners.]
Q: In simple terms, how long should it be before a prisoner is notified that an ECM is being held for review?
A: A notice that an ECM is being held for review should be sent to the inmate within 5 days.
[NOTE: Staff are taking sometimes weeks to "review" ECMs before releasing them. Sometimes, prisoners are unaware that an email had even been sent, while at other times, knowing an email was sent on a date and time certain, has to wait weeks for it to be released. As it stands, staff at ISCC are interpreting the SOP as not requiring any notification that an incoming ECM is under review - no matter how long it takes if the ECM is finally released (which begs the question, if they know the ECM will be released - why is it still under review?).]
[NOTE: An electronic notice is generally generated when an ECM is initially taken for review, but in that notice, there is only the fact that something was taken, with no information on who sent it, when it was sent, why it was taken, who took it or anything else. The paper Notice required by SOP is not generated until days or even weeks later (if at all).]
Q: How (and why) is it that regular mail (which, prior to the implementation of the inmate email system consisted of thousands of pieces of mail per day) is to be delivered within 24 hours of receiving it in the mailroom - yet email, most of which containing but a few lines of text - are allowed to be delayed for weeks?
A: Our policy is to process flagged electronic communication within 5 days. At that time it is released, destroyed or sent for investigation and notification is sent to the inmate. If it is sent to investigation, an additional 5 days are allowed to process. Electronic communication which is not flagged, is delivered directly to the inmate.
I applaude Mr. Castleton's attempt to clarify the matters presented (is it 5 BUSINESS days, or 5 days period?). Either way, Mr. Castleton's words are still not being heeded at the ISCC where an attachment (drawing of human internal organs) was removed from an email sent to Shackelford in late May and as of the third week in June, there has been no notice - electronic or otherwise - regarding the confiscation of a drawing which fits all the parameters of IDOC SOP, and if nothing else, certainly qualifies as a medical or anatomical drawing authorized by SOP.
Family or friends who would like to know more about ECM deadlines should contact the Idaho Department of Correction via their website at www.idoc.idaho.gov, or the facility at which the prisoner is housed.