My personal introduction to Handel IT and the RiteTrack software system (see my previous blog) was in no small part due to the topic of seclusion. While the topic of seclusion and room confinement is bigger than RiteTrack software, seclusion has become a big issue for juvenile and adult facilities in Ohio and across the country.
As the former director of the Perry Multi-CountyJuvenile Facility, I served a mandate to provide rehabilitation to juveniles in a correctional setting, rather than a punitive punishment in an institutional setting. I firmly believed that seclusion, as a form of punishment, was detrimental to our philosophy of assisting and helping youth. In short, if you locked a juvenile in a room (seclusion), how would you expect him to reintegrate into a therapeutic treatment model without unintended consequences such as an unwillingness to engage in a treatment program? My belief is that seclusion, used solely as punishment, was counter to a treatment philosophy of engagement and making better choices. Although as a director, I also understand that there were times in which the only means of protecting an individual youth, my staff and the facility as a whole was seclusion. These issues of when is seclusion necessary, when is seclusion needed, and when does seclusion become a punitive issue are concerns that all directors deal with in our profession. They are also issues that, at some point in time, we have to give answers to for why we did what we did and why we made the decisions we made.
When I had to provide a total of the number of seclusion hours for 2013 in our facility, I believed that my total number of hours would be pretty low (fewer than 100 hours). After all, I opposed room confinement as a form of punishment. After we compiled the numbers, I was surprised to learn that I had signed off on over 300 hours of seclusion for my youth during 2013. That is more than three times my original estimation, and that high number made me re-think my role as a director. Not only had I not stayed true to my principle that seclusion had to be used on a very limited basis, but also my standard had not been transferred to my staff in a way that put that principle into practice at our facility.
In April of 2014, two months after collecting that seclusion data for the state, I watched a PBS Frontline special presentation on seclusion in the Maine State Prison. Prison Warden, Rodney Boufford, was actively attempting to reduce seclusion hours for his inmate population. While I understand that the inmates Warden Boufford was dealing with were much different from the juveniles I was dealing with, the topic of seclusion is still very relevant. It was very interesting to see the inmates in Maine and hear what they were saying, while also hearing from the warden, supervisors, line staff, psychologist and others who oversee them on a daily basis. I was surprised that the idea of reducing isolation was even present in a state institution with very violent and aggressive felons and a generally negative-thinking atmosphere. However, they were not only thinking of reducing seclusion hours; they were beginning to implement it. The show takes about an hour to watch, and I recommend it as an important segment for those involved in corrections.
The Frontline special and new statistics required by the state of Ohio got me thinking. Am I, as an administrator, doing enough to reduce the confinement times in my facility, and do our policies as a facility reflect our need to reduce confinement time? At our monthly supervisory meeting a few days after watching Frontline, I addressed the need to revamp our policies and procedures and to eliminate room confinement as an issue of punishment and time and as appropriate only in cases where the safety of staff and others is at risk. Our current policies were time-focused (i.e., one incident equals so many hours of confinement). Our new policies would be behavior-focused whenever youth were complying and there was no documented threat to the safety of the staff or other youth. The new policies would encourage youth to begin the process or re-engaging into the general population and everyday activities. Because the facility activities were meant to be therapeutic and if you could get the youth to engage in therapeutic opportunities, then you could begin treatment.
While my ideas were agreed upon overall, there were many who expressed reservations. I heard concerns such as the changes I championed would “harm the staff and would make youth believe that we were not serious about dealing with behavioral issues.” Some felt that if we made these changes, focusing on reducing room confinement, that “someone, another youth or a staff member would be hurt.” I listened to all of their issues and then I encouraged my supervisory staff to view the video and then come back to me with their thoughts. I also asked each one of them to estimate the number of seclusion hours that they believe we had accumulated in 2013. I had not given them our actual number, but I had used the number of 300+ seclusion hours as my example. Every single person asked gave me a number that was much lower than that. So I challenged them to watch the video to see what they are doing in the State of Maine and then to tell me why we couldn’t do the same thing in our facility. I also told them that the number of seclusion hours that they all had estimated for 2013 was a very different number than what we had actually accumulated. My point was that we thought we were doing well, but the 2013 seclusion hours showed me that as a group we had failed.
At our next meeting we addressed the topic of seclusion and this time there were very few detractors. All the supervisory staff agreed that we needed to reduce our confinement time, and that we needed also to continue to do our duty to protect the other youth and the staff and maintain the therapeutic environment of the facility. To do all those things we needed to create a balance between protection and seclusion. That balance needed to be evident in our policies and procedures, as well as in our thinking and in our implementation. We agreed that if we could create a balance, then we would better fulfill the need and responsibility for both safety and treatment.
The topic of seclusion was also very relevant in Ohio at the time. The Ohio Department of Youth Services was under federal monitoring for various reasons, and nearing the end of the monitoring the issue of seclusion or room confinement became a concern. The state began addressing how it could reduce seclusion hours of youth. In addition to its being a valid issue, it was also a requirement for “getting out from under federal monitors.” Recently Ohio Department of Youth Series was released from the lawsuit and has made very progressive and needed changes in seclusion hours.
See these two articles: Lawsuit over: Everyone won and Judge ends federal monitoring monitoring of Ohio’s youth prison system
The article above from the Cleveland Plain Dealer reports: “The state has also dramatically rolled back its use of solitary confinement – also called ‘seclusion’. An infraction that brings 8 hours of seclusion now would have been punished with 600 hours of seclusion when the lawsuit was filed, according to Cynthia Coe, a U.S. Justice Department attorney involved with the case.”
I was surprised when I read those numbers and remember having to re-read the paragraph again. “…infraction that brings 8 hours now would have been punished with 600 hours.” This was the trend in corrections in adult and juvenile systems just 7 years ago. I was amazed at how “behind” we as a corrections community were, but also pleased with how far we have come.
Looking back, I wonder if I would have addressed the issue of seclusion quicker in my facility if I had had valid data that would have given me a better understanding of seclusion hours. In the recent JDAI reporting the finding suggested the following:
“’The revised JDAI Detention Facility Standards prohibit the use of room confinement for discipline, punishment, administrative convenience, retaliation, staffing shortages, or reasons other than as a temporary response to behavior that threatens immediate harm to a youth or others,’a JDAI summary of strategies to eliminate unnecessary use of room confinement states.” -Juvenile Justice Information Exchange
The JDAI recommendations and goals also address the topic of using data to make informed and educated decisions. If I had a RiteTrack system in my facility just two years ago, I wonder if I would have been more progressive in my decision-making because of the quality data and better statistics generated from the solution to help support better-educated decisions. Because not only would I have had up-to-date and valid data for the day, months and year, but I could have been tracking the data more effectively rather than relying on an end-of-the-year report.
I believe that many of my former colleagues share my belief that room confinement is necessary, on a limited basis, especially due to the nature of the work we perform. However, I also believe that directors and administrators want to always balance the safety of the facility without violating the rights of our youth. With a balance of protection and safety of rights in our policies and procedures and implementations, we can achieve the ideal of safely treating and serving troubled youth. The RiteTrack software system can and will assist administrators in creating that balance at their facilities.
Let me take this opportunity to introduce myself and tell you the story of how I became associated and eventually employed at Handel IT. My name is Steve Koenig and I was working as a Director in a juvenile correction facility in Ohio and really enjoyed my job. I enjoyed helping kids and I enjoyed seeing kids change and learn from their mistakes. I often enjoyed the challenges and struggles of working in a state-funded facility and working through the bureaucracy of trying to navigate the rules and politics to get things accomplished. However, in working with various standards and oversight I often became discouraged by the system that was inefficient and outdated; that still relied on paper to track incident reports, Excel spreadsheets to track data, and overall a paper system to run a facility.
In February of 2014 I received a call from the state requesting hours of seclusion in my facility for 2013. As all good Directors would answer–hoping to avoid the pending project–I said, “I didn’t know we were required to track seclusion hours.” Of course, my excuse did not work and the facility not tracking seclusion didn’t resolve the issue. The state kindly informed me that I would need to provide seclusion hours to the state by the end of the workweek. I pulled three staff from their normal job duties and put them on the task of reviewing every incident report from 2013 in order to tabulate seclusion data. All of our incident reports were documented on paper forms, which we had stored in binders, but hundreds of paper documents and hundreds and hundreds of paper forms (6 to 8 binders full) had to be reviewed. I had a great staff who worked very hard and they were able to collect the data in about 4 days, but I was a little hesitant about the validity of the data and concerned whether or not it was completely correct. What if we had missed a page in looking through all the paper binders? Not that my staff weren’t diligent, but they are human and humans make mistakes and this process was rushed and error prone. A few days later after I submitted our report I was thinking that there has to be a better way of doing business in a juvenile correction facility. At the end of February I spoke with my contact at the state and said, “We are now required to meet over 400 standards of ACA, PREA and other state standards but we are using the same process that was used in 1960, a paper process to collect data…there has to be a better way.” My contact agreed and said, “You have a great point; go find something and if it’s the right price and meets your needs then we can explore it further.”
So I began my search. While looking I found a lot of IT companies that were willing to customize a client-based data system to meet our needs but I also found that it would be work intensive and very expensive. I then came upon Handel IT and the RiteTrack software solution. We invited various vendors to do presentations and it became very clear that RiteTrack was the only software that was both cost effective and affordable and that met all of our needs. RiteTrack is a system that helps you to efficiently track, manage and report on the services you provide to your youth. It also allows you as an administrator to manage your facility more effectively, reducing the time spent on paperwork, and allowing more time providing services to the people that you are charged to serve. I became so impressed and inspired by RiteTrack that I chose to join the Handel team. Now my career mission has changed from providing services to youth to going throughout the country to all the youth-serving facilities to share with them a “better way” and the great benefits of the RiteTrack software system.
I look forward to my new opportunities and my new experiences with Handel. I also look forward to meeting new administrators and presenting the RiteTrack software to their various facilities. My hope and my belief is that our software system will benefit your facility allowing you, as service providers, to do more of what we chose this line of work for; allowing us more time to provide youth services while reducing our dependence in paperwork and functioning in outdated and inefficient systems. If you are interested in hearing more about our RiteTrack Juvenile Detention Model, please contact me at email@example.com. I would appreciate the opportunity to give you a personal or on-line demo about the capabilities of our RiteTrack system.
Those of you who know me have heard me say this before: when it comes to large-scale IT projects it is people, not technology, that makes the difference between success and failure. In the almost 20 years since Handel was founded I have been involved in well over 100 major software projects. Add in the projects from my pre-Handel days and that number grows to about 150. Sure, technology itself is key to success in any technology project. However, from my experience, technology never stands in the way of making a project a success or failure. If you have the right people involved, the technology part will work itself out. Likewise, if you have the wrong people involved, great technology is not going to save the project. Year after year, I credit the Handel team and our customers for the long string of successful RiteTrack projects. This year has been no different. In fact, this past year has seen some of the most complex projects in the history of Handel and in each and every instance, the projects have been very successful. As with most IT projects, there is a positive correlation between the amount of complexity and the number of people involved. The more complexity and the more people involved, the greater the risk and thus the greater the possibility for failure.
This past week has been quite eventful. Tuesday I attended the annual Wyoming Business Forum. Keynote speaker for this event was Rob O’Neill, best known as “the man who killed Osama Bin Laden”. Hearing his story first hand was spell binding. The conclusion: In spite of him being the one who pulled the trigger, taking out Bin Laden was very much a team effort of the most elite navy seals, SEAL Team Six. If you have not seen the Fox News Special on this, I suggest visiting Rob’s web site. http://www.robertjoneill.com/ Rob very much credits the team, not the individuals, of their success.
This weekend I was California attending the Big Game between Stanford and Cal Berkley. While there I had the opportunity visit Apple’s campus in Cupertino as well as Google’s campus in Mountain View. Getting behind the scenes at these two high-tech companies was a great experience. Perhaps the thing that struck me most was that none of the employees I encountered there looked any different than the employees I know at other companies. I am not sure what I had expected? Super-humans perhaps? Nope, didn’t see anyone who appeared to have super-human characteristics. Then what is the difference? What is the secret to the success of these companies? I believe the difference is the team and the team culture that these companies have created. Bringing the right people together on a team is what ultimately creates success. Whether SEAL Team Six, Apple, Google, or Handel, having the right people in the right place for the right project is what I believe makes the difference between failure and success.
As we enter this holiday season, one of the things I am the most thankful for is the amazing group of people we have here at Handel. Perhaps more than any other accomplishment, having helped assemble this world class team we have here, is one of the things I am the most proud of. When you put the three ingredients together, our team, our customer’s team, and the RiteTrack platform, success is close at hand!
Handel has opened its first office in the Eastern time zone. Steve Koenig, former Director of the Perry Multi-County Juvenile Facility in New Lexington, Ohio, joined the Handel team as a Juvenile Justice Sales Executive and he will be working locally out of his office in Lancaster, Ohio. With the opening of this new office, Handel now operates in every time zone in the lower 48.
Handel is the creator of RiteTrack, and RiteTrack, a web-based information management software, is used by juvenile justice agencies throughout the country. It provides the primary means for caseworkers, administrators and other professionals to manage their clients and caseloads.
Handel’s Vice President was selected to speak at this year’s National Tribal Child Support Association (NTCSA) Conference and presented to conference attendees on integrating data for tribal social service departments.
The presentation focused on exploring the best practices and principles a tribal organization should evaluate when considering implementing an integrated, centralized database system.
Vice president Casey Bader has presented at numerous conferences including the:
- 2013, 2014, and 2015 National Indian Child Welfare Association (NICWA) National American Indian Conferences on Child Abuse and Neglect
- 2012 and 2013 United South and Eastern Tribes (USET) Annual Meetings
- 2012 and 2013 TribalNet Conferences
Bader is available to present at conferences on a wide array of technology and tribal topics including enterprise-wide software implementations; system-of-care, case management models; and integrating data from multiple departments onto a centralized database; among other topics.
This most recent workshop addressed the issues of “data silos” that are created from developed separate databases to track client and benefit information for a wide variety of programs such as ICW/CPS, TANF Services, Enrollment, Financial Assistance, and Treatment Services. Data silos are often created in part because of data security concerns and also because service applications have been developed under the supervision of different departments and administrators. In many Tribes this has resulted in disassociated applications that do not share data.
The implications of data silos are many: data in any given department may be erroneous and/or out of date; necessary and relevant updates to data (e.g., contact information, household changes, employment changes, etc.) are not shared across departments; reports are difficult and time-consuming to produce; supporting data for grant applications can be difficult to develop and show justification for; information for Tribal Council needs may be incomplete or erroneous; evaluation of long-term program efficacy cannot be reliably evaluated; members may be unaware of other available services that could benefit them; and evidence of the depth and breadth to which the Tribe is serving its members is unavailable.
Enrollment services can be considered the gateway to access of services for members, and it is the department in which base-level demographic data is collected and verified. Much of this same enrollment data is collected by other service departments for verification of benefits as well. An integrated solution provides the ability to have member data collected and verified in one place, shared with other departments (defined by security parameters) and updated by other departments that have security access to the shared data points.
Indian Child Welfare and Support services and programs may be especially impacted by the lack of integration of Tribal data. Causing it to be difficult to identify children in need of services or families in need of assistance; to identify potential foster families; protective services may lag; proactive preventive programs may be difficult to implement for children or families; court orders or other court documents may not be served in a timely manner; cases may not be adequately documented or updated; or relevant documents may not be associated with a case.
Interesting linksHere are some interesting links for you! Enjoy your stay :)
- Full-Time Project Manager Position
- Honesty Integrity and Trust
- Junior Software Engineer
- Juvenile Facilities Solution
- Maintenance Mode
- Part-Time Database Developer
- Request Information
- RiteTrack 477 Module
- RiteTrack Enrollment
- RiteTrack Financial Assistance
- RiteTrack Indian Child Welfare/Child Protective Services
- RiteTrack TANF
- RiteTrack Tribal Treatment Services
- Sales and Marketing Assistant
- SQL Server Reporting Services Part-Time Report Developer
- Team Handel
- Tribal Court
- Tribal Foster Families
- The Handel Story
- Tribal Solutions
- Juvenile Justice Solutions
- Career Opportunities
- About Handel
- Executive Team
- Contact Us
- Adult Protective Services
- Case Study
- Child Protective Services
- Domestic Violence
- Foster Care
- Handel News
- ICW and CPS
- Indian Child Welfare
- Juvenile Conference
- Juvenile Facilities
- Juvenile Justice
- Juvenile Webinar
- Tribal Conference
- Tribal Government
- Tribal TANF