There is historical information to indicate this is not a new problem.  As a point of reference, reviewing information taken from the 1980's is useful.  In  fiscal year 1981 the turnover rate at WSP was 53%, which is noted as a reduction of 32% from 1980 and in FY82 the turnover rate was 65%, with 75% of those occurring in the security staff ranks.  Reasons cited were low pay, long hours, and the non-availability of relief personnel, and interestingly "was the quantity and quality of potential employees available in the Rawlins area job market, while numbers of available applicants are larger than normal, due to an unprecedented high unemployment rate, interest in working within the correctional environment is low."   In FY83 the turnover rate was 38% and in FY85 the rate was 33% ; 72% of which were from the security force.  In FY86 the rate lowered to 25% and  in FY87 the rate stayed constant at 24%.  And finally, in FY88 the rate was 21%; 74% of which were security personnel.   These figures were reported in the Board of Charities and Reform annual reports. 

 

There are larger forces at play in the issue of turnover and retention.  Though this cannot, nor should not, relieve the department of its management responsibilities, it must be addressed as an issue.  Dr. George Camp is cited twice in the management audit report as a source of information, on page 42 as the co-director of the Criminal Justice Institute, and on page 51 as the author for the National Institute of Corrections report on retention and staff management.  Dr. Camp has served as a consultant to the Department of Corrections on several issues, including the 1995 report commissioned by the executive branch, to conduct the male inmate housing needs, projections, and recommendations.  This report was used as a guide by the Legislature in determining the additional prison needs for Wyoming and led to the building of the additional facility.  It specifically noted that any new facility should not be located in Rawlins.  He continues to assist in the transition planning to the new facility.

 

In that report Dr. Camp states (page 27) that the Rawlins area is not the best location for "building a qualified staff pool."  Dr. Camp is the one criminal justice expert from outside Wyoming who is most familiar with the corrections situation in Wyoming.  It is his belief that if the current need  for staff at WSP were lowered by some percentage, say one third,  turnover issues would very likely be reduced dramatically.

 

Though pay and benefits issues must continue to be addressed, and the Legislature has made several substantial efforts toward addressing these issues, the department must continue to work with the Governor and the Legislature to  meet these needs.  Employee comments around pay and benefit issues, such as insurance coverage, must be considered and examined. 

 

But this also relates to an issue made on page 43 of the report which points to the low average tenure of the correctional staff.  The low tenure is a product of the high turnover, which is in large part generated by people who came to work at WSP as correctional officers and have no intention of staying.  They were aware of the pay issues prior to starting, but likely were looking for another type of job.  It is possible that the longest tenured employees at WSP are life-time, or long-time residents, rather than officers who left after a short tenure, who may not have had any real connections to the community.  As mentioned on page 48, the possibility that nearly half of the correctional officers terminated between 1995 and 1998 left the state may indicate they wanted to live somewhere else.  In other words, it may relate back to the size of the actual resident labor pool in the area to sustain long-term employment.

A dilemma in  recruiting staff lies in the area of pre-employment screening.  As cited on page 49 of the report, it is mentioned that "more stringent hiring standards and increased training would promote a sense of professionalism and increased retention."  All things being equal, an in-depth screening process is time and money well spent.  Tests in the area of personality, drug testing, aptitude, and interpersonal skills would be beneficial, and as mentioned later, we are looking at several of these approaches.  However, if the labor pool is limited, is it better to develop a thorough screening process, knowing the pool will be limited further, and additionally impacting current staff already stretched too thin, or should individuals be hired, maybe ones who wouldn=t make it through a detailed screening process,  knowing later some will be terminated, quit, or not work out for other reasons?

 

The issues just raised must be part of the discussion because they are, in my view, a substantial part of the equation.  At the same time the department must do all it can to address the areas of retention and turnover.

 

DOC'S RESPONSE TO RETENTION AND TURNOVER ISSUES: The department has expanded its search for an employee pool to the regional area through advertisements, cable television commercials, attending regional job fairs at colleges, universities, and  military  bases, and utilizing a Department of Defense referral process.  Additional efforts underway include developing a full-time recruiter position, creating  an employee satisfaction survey, expanding the  use of the Internet and the department web page, utilizing a more detailed testing of potential applicants, including pre-service drug screening, increasing the use of internships and school-to-work programs, and expanding recruiting efforts throughout the western and central United States.   Retention efforts proposed, or currently underway, include the development of a

mentoring program, supervisory and management courses, education reimbursement programs, potential financial recognition of educational achievements, the development of a meaningful recognition program for employees, and the implementation of a $100 per month salary increase upon completion of 24 months of service.  Employees currently receive a $100 per month raise following the completion of the probationary period.  Several of these things were mentioned in the Legislative Service Office report and are useful suggestions.

 

I appreciate the suggestions put forth in the report dealing with these issues.  Some of the areas we are in the process of addressing and some of the areas noted will be added to our approach.  Doing these types of things is the right way to approach this issue, and they are only made more critical by the labor pool concerns I mentioned previously.

 

DISSATISFACTION WITH WAGES AND WORKING CONDITIONS:   There are several  characteristics of organizations  which are effective and well-managed operations.  They give their staffs responsibility and trust, listen to them, work in teams, give out praise and recognition, let employees know they are important, give clear direction and expectations, provide support, and allow for upward and downward communication.  Organizations which can demonstrate and incorporate as many of these traits as possible will be successful.

 

The report identifies several concerns in these areas.  These include problems perceived in communication, providing clear and consistent policies, management support, professionalism, and staffing.  The later has been addressed extensively.  The other three areas of concern are critical to a well-operating organization.  Though we have made efforts in this regard, we must do more.  The suggestions made in the report reiterate the importance of putting considerable energy into trying to improve these areas and perceptions.  However, it is also my thinking that to discuss working conditions and not look at actual prison operations is again a significant omission in the report.

 

DOC RESPONSE TO STAFF DISSATISFACTION ISSUES:  With my support and involvement, the warden is committed to trying to improve these areas in a number of ways.  The other administrators and managers in the department are, in many instances, interested and committed to the same set of values.  It is important to convince  mangers and supervisors throughout the organization of the necessity of these values.  Though it must begin at the top, it cannot sustain itself, if that's the only place these values and approaches exist.  Though the report focuses on WSP, there are components of the department operating with these values and I am committed to spreading the concept and practice. 

 

Focusing on WSP, the warden knows that his management style must include progressive, inclusive approaches.   We must emphasize professionalism, communication, and at the risk of using an overused term, empower the staff.  

 

Specifically what types of approaches are being considered?   The warden, along with key staff, will meet personally on a regular basis with all levels of staff, seeking input and information.  We are reviewing the development and formalization of a meaningful unit management system where all levels of staff are represented and play a role in the management of the facility.  The use of surveys  to solicit  concerns and suggestions from staff as to improving operations will be examined.  We will explore exchange programs within various components of the department for security supervisors and lead workers to help incorporate the desired approaches which are in place in certain locations.  Mandatory shift briefing meetings are being implemented to facilitate safety and security discussions and communication.  Unit managers are being required to hold unit management meetings with all staff.  A system will be reviewed which allows staff substantial, meaningful participation into the operation of their respective areas.  The warden will make every effort to be visible and available to staff at all levels of the facility.  This again stresses the importance of training mid-level supervisors in these approaches, as one individual simply cannot single-handedly make this process effective.  An organization must create a culture in which these approaches and values are important.   Part of my role will be to provide support and direction in this endeavor.

 

In closing, I on one hand appreciate  the concerns  pointed out by the report and concur  with the need to actively address them; and on the other hand I am frustrated by the difficulty in remedying a significant part of the problem.  I am committed to the course of action I have put forth in this response.   I welcome suggestions which may add to a positive resolution of these issues, and I believe this has been a worthwhile forum in which to continue to address these topics.  Thank you.

 

Sincerely,        

 

 

Judy Uphoff

Director