Access to Programming and Services

Individual Advocacy Within the Prison

 

  • An inmate who had an amputation and had used a prosthetic since childhood contacted Disability Rights Vermont, reporting that when he had entered prison a year prior, the prosthetic was old and in need of replacement; the inmate also reported that he had received surgery on his leg during this incarceration, which then required a new prosthetic fitting. The prison provided the inmate with a wheelchair and told him that he would be evaluated for a new prosthetic device. When the inmate met with the P&A, he had been waiting for the replacement for months. The P&A assisted the inmate in filing a request for an accommodation, seeking the promised prosthetic. The prison thereafter denied the request, arguing that the inmate had one leg and had been provided with a wheelchair, and that no additional accommodation was necessary because he was at a one-level accessible facility. The P&A appealed the decision, arguing that the inmate could not access specific programs and services without the use of the prosthetic. The denial was reversed and the request was granted; the inmate is now in the process of being fitted for a new prosthetic.

 

  • During routine monitoring, Disability Rights Washington noted that a facility’s infirmary was being used as long-term housing for some inmates with serious medical conditions. While the inmates were medically stable, they were considered vulnerable and were therefore segregated from the rest of the prison population. The P&A sent a letter to the facility’s superintendent as well as to the state department of corrections’ officials, identifying this as an issue and requesting follow-up.  The P&A was thereafter advised that the individuals had been moved from the infirmary and into minimum security housing, where they were integrated with the general population.

 

  • Disability Law Colorado was contacted by an inmate who was nearing release and seeking assistance in reinstating the federal social security benefits he had received prior to incarceration. The inmate reported there was a program available at the prison that was designed to assist inmates in accessing such benefits but his counselor was denying him access to the program because he believed the inmate should obtain employment rather than access the disability benefits. After contacting counsel for the state’s department of corrections, the P&A was informed that the counselor was now providing the inmate with information and assistance on reinstating his disability benefits upon parole.

 

  • An inmate with physical disabilities contacted Disability Rights Wisconsin regarding his need for accommodations related to his release planning. Specifically, he needed accessible housing and reported that there was no way for him to request that accommodation in relation to his release planning. Disability Rights Wisconsin worked with the state’s Division of Community Corrections to create a new policy for the Division that would provide a mechanism for individuals to have accommodations incorporated into their release plans.

 

  • An inmate using a wheelchair reported to Disability Rights New York that she was placed on “medically unassigned” program status, and therefore could not participate in any programming.  As a result of not participating in a vocational program, this inmate could not earn merit time towards an early release date. During a monitoring visit, the P&A reviewed the programming at the facility and advocated for the inmate’s participation in either of two mainly sedentary vocational programs, with or without accommodations.  The facility’s superintendent agreed that all “medically unassigned” inmates would be individually reviewed and assessed for programs.  The inmate who reported this problem was thereafter assigned and has completed a vocational course.

 

  • An inmate with mental illness and learning disorders contacted Disability Rights Vermont reporting that he needed an accommodation in order to participate in a mandatory prison program. The inmate had recently been removed from the program for 30 days because he was “not meeting expectations.” The inmate reported that he had required extensive special education services while in school, with one-on-one assistance, and had not graduated. When the inmate asked the prison for assistance in participating in the mandatory program, he was told that he could use his "peers" to help him. The P&A assisted the inmate in filing a grievance regarding the lack of accommodation and the inmate’s removal from the program. The prison thereafter removed the requirement that the inmate complete the program, due to his disability, and stated that this waiver from the program would not affect the inmate’s release date.

 

  • An inmate with a disability contacted Disability Rights Washington to report that a family member had been delayed in the prison’s visitor screening process due to her disability. The inmate reported that the visitor’s use of a wheelchair and oxygen tank required her to be hand searched before visiting and that, as a result, she had been admitted later than other visitors. The inmate had attempted to grieve the issue on his visitor’s behalf, due to her disability, and the grievance had been rejected. The P&A contacted the grievance program manager for the prison system, as well as the grievance coordinator for the facility, and advocated for the grievance to be reviewed and investigated. The grievance was thereafter processed and the investigation resulted in changes to the visitor screening process to ensure that visitors with disabilities are not delayed.

 

  • Disability Rights New York was contacted by a female inmate who had been recommended for the prison’s specialized residential trauma treatment program for women who have histories of physical or sexual abuse.  The inmate could not participate in the program because its second-floor location rendered it inaccessible to women with mobility impairments. The P&A toured the program on a monitoring visit, interviewed several women who had been denied access to the program because of their mobility impairments, and reviewed their mental health and programming records. Disability Rights New York then wrote to the commissioner of the state’s prison system, as well as facility administrators, notifying them that the P&A was prepared to litigate the ADA and Rehab Act violations unless this critical program was relocated.  The state’s prison system thereafter agreed to relocate the trauma treatment program to an accessible housing unit.  The program was moved to its new location, and the prison publicized to inmates that the program is now accessible.

 

  • Protection and Advocacy for People with Disabilities, the P&A for South Carolina, received a request from an attorney representing a death row inmate with an intellectual disability, a speech impairment, and schizophrenia.  Although a court had previously ordered that the inmate receive appropriate mental health services in light of his intellectual disability, the inmate had not been transferred to a more appropriate facility.  After the P&A contacted the system’s ADA coordinator, the inmate was transferred to a prison designed to provide more intensive mental health services.

 

  • The South Carolina P&A, Protection and Advocacy for People with Disabilities, was contacted by a relative of an inmate that used a walker because prison staff had refused to allow the inmate to take his walker on the bus for an off-site doctor’s appointment. The inmate reported that he could not go to the appointment without his walker.  After the P&A contacted the prison’s ADA Coordinator, the appointment was rescheduled and the inmate was allowed to take his walker.

 

While P&As accept calls and letters from friends and family of inmates with disabilities, P&As will generally reach out directly to the individual with a disability before engaging in advocacy on their behalf. This ensures that the expressed intent of the individual with a disability guides the direction of the agency’s intervention and advocacy.

 

  • An inmate with vision impairments contacted Disability Rights Washington regarding his need for audio materials, sunglasses, white cane, and other accommodations that would assist him in participating in prison programs. The P&A provided technical assistance regarding the process for requesting such items within the prison, including information about appealing denials for such accommodations. As the inmate approached release to the community, the P&A also provided technical assistance relating to potential release locations, including information regarding specialized work release programs for people with disabilities. Following release, the P&A continued to follow-up with him regarding his reentry process.

 

  • An inmate with extreme difficulty reading and writing contacted Disability Rights Vermont because the prison was requiring him to complete a mandatory program prior to release. The inmate felt he needed an accommodation in order to successfully complete the program, but his case worker refused an accommodation. The P&A assisted the inmate with completing an ADA Request, specifically asking for a tutor to assist him with classroom and homework assignments. This request was initially denied by the prison, which argued that the inability to read and write was not considered a disability under the ADA. The P&A then assisted the inmate with filing an appeal to the commissioner, who overturned the denial and granted the accommodation.  The inmate now has the benefit of working with a designated program interventionist who will assist him through the program requirements and adjust the program to meet the inmate’s literacy needs.

 

  • An inmate contacted the Connecticut Office of Protection and Advocacy for Persons with Disabilities, reporting that he had worked as a clerk for prison industries for fifteen years but, after falling ill, became unable to work. Due to his illness the inmate had impaired mobility and therefore began using a wheelchair. When the inmate sought to be rehired in his old position, he was told that he could not return to work because his wheelchair presented a safety and security concern. The P&A contacted the director of the program and educated him on the prison’s obligation to provide the inmate with accommodations to get back to work, including providing another wheelchair inside industries to alleviate any concerns about safety and security. The director thereafter agreed the inmate would be considered for the next available clerk position in industries.

 

  • Disability Rights Vermont was contacted by an inmate with mental illness and a learning disability. The inmate needed an accommodation in order to participate in a mandatory prison program and though he had requested help, he had been denied. The P&A assisted the inmate, negotiating with the prison for an accommodation to complete the program in a 60-day assignment interval instead of the normal 30-day time frame and to allow the inmate to complete the required coursework with assistance from mental health staff.

 

 

Systemic Advocacy with Corrections Officials

 

  • Disability Rights Wisconsin conducted a training with twenty-five ADA coordinators from across the state’s prison system. At the training, the P&A presented an overview of ADA law and focused on accommodations that may be reasonable for inmates with mental health issues seeking to participate in prison programming and services.

 

  • New York’s state department of corrections created a “Shock Incarceration Program,” a six-month rehabilitative program that prepares non-violent drug offenders for early parole release consideration.  Upon learning that the program absolutely excludes all prisoners who have mental illness and take psychiatric medication, Disability Rights New York notified the state’s commissioner for corrections that the blanket exclusion violates the ADA and must be rectified, and that two clients with mental illness should be immediately considered for the program.  The P&A awaits corrections’ response and is also taking steps to investigate exclusions of inmates with diabetes from the Shock program.  This case is ongoing.

 

  • While monitoring the state’s prisons, Disability Rights Washington spoke to numerous inmates with disabilities that expressed frustration at their inability to access recreation equipment during their assigned yard time. These inmates explained that due to limited mobility, they were often the last people to reach the yard and that, as a result, by the time they arrived at the yard all of the recreation equipment was already occupied by other inmates. These inmates reported that another prison in the state had designated a specific recreation time for inmates with limited mobility in order to ensure that they had access to recreation equipment. The P&A raised this concern with the prison’s administration, and since that time, additional yard time has been designated specifically for inmates with mobility limitations at that facility.

 

  • Disability Rights Iowa monitored a prison after receiving complaints alleging that the programs and services of the facility were inaccessible to inmates with mobility disabilities. During monitoring, the P&A found that that the chapel and auditorium were located at the top of very steep stairs. The agency asked the prison warden to allow inmates with mobility restrictions to have access to these program areas by using a service elevator, which was normally reserved for staff.  Although the warden argued that this option would require more staff and additional security protocol, the P&A explained that the chapel and auditorium, and associated meetings and events, were “programs and services” protected under the ADA, and as such, this area needed to be accessible to all inmates. As a result of Disability Rights Iowa’s advocacy, inmates can now use the elevator to access the chapel and the auditorium.

 

  • After working with an inmate on a “medically unassigned” program status, which prevented her from earning merit time towards an early release date, Disability Rights New York expanded its investigation to address the facility’s overall policy on this issue.  According to the policy, any “medically excused” inmate – defined as an inmate who has “any temporary restriction which limits assignment,” is placed on “medically unassigned” status.  Moreover, both “medically unassigned” and “medically excused” inmates are confined and segregated pursuant to the policy directive.  Disability Rights New York alerted the facility that while there are many inmates whose medical restrictions may warrant limited program assignment, those inmates should not be precluded from program assignment altogether. The P&A advocated with the facility as well as central administration to modify the policy. The facility eliminated the blanket policy, and now requires that all inmates be considered for programming and reviewed for reasonable accommodations as appropriate and pursuant to the system’s statewide reasonable accommodations directives. Disability Rights New York will be working to identify similar policies and practices at other prisons in need of reform.

 

Because P&As can engage in both individual and systemic prison advocacy, an issue that was originally identified by an individual may be assessed for more systemic reform, transforming what was an individual concern into wide-reaching advocacy impacting hundreds of inmates.

 

  • Inmates whose disabilities required them to be housed in a prison’s medical unit contacted Disability Rights New York about their lack of access to law clerks as well as legal materials. In response, the P&A visited the facility and advocated with the superintendent and corrections’ counsel.  The P&A followed up with a second visit to the unit nearly a year later, and found that medical unit inmates were still not permitted physical access to the law library, do not have access to a computer terminal to do legal research, are permitted to borrow fewer items and provided with less time with law clerks to discuss legal matters than are non-disabled inmates. After visiting the law library, Disability Rights New York met with corrections’ counsel, the facility superintendent, and the deputy superintendent for security, as well as the head law librarian for corrections.  Counsel for the state corrections system agreed to follow up on the issues raised, and stated that this may lead to comprehensive review of law library access at all five regional medical units.  This case is ongoing.

 

  • Disability Rights Washington met with prison administration officials to raise concerns relating to the conditions of confinement for individuals with intellectual disabilities and traumatic brain injuries. Based on observations and discussions with inmates, the P&A was concerned that inmates with cognitive disabilities were enduring prolonged segregation due to their inability to participate in programming. With input from Disability Rights Washington, the prison administration increased inmate screening for intellectual disabilities and traumatic brain injuries upon intake and created a new missioned housing unit for individuals with cognitive disabilities with a specialized programing area.

 

  • Inmates contacted Disability Rights New York regarding access to assistants to push their wheelchairs across the prison campus.  Because of the long distances between buildings, the physical limitations of inmates who use wheelchairs, and the heaviness of the chairs built for limited indoor use, someone to push the chair to and from activities was usually needed.   In response to grievances from the inmates and the P&A’s initial discussions with the facility, the facility administration asserted that inmates using wheelchairs could obtain assistance from any inmate. However, inmates with disabilities reported that the inmates they asked, who received no payment or other incentive to assist them, usually resented having to perform this time-consuming task, especially in poor weather.  Instead of risking retaliation, inmates went without access to meals, medical call-outs, and programs. After the P&A advocated with the facility administration and counsel for a return to a prior policy of paid mobility assistants, the central administration ultimately agreed to pay and train inmate mobility assistants.  The facility implemented a new mobility assistant program and policy where inmates are screened and trained for paid work as a mobility assistant, and assistants are assigned to each housing unit at the facility.

 

  • During routine prison monitoring Disability Rights Washington was advised that inmates in the mental health unit could not access sex offender programming. Inmates and prison staff both reported that such programs were only offered at two of Washington’s twelve state prisons, neither of which provided significant levels of mental health services. Thus, inmates with serious mental illness were often unable to complete the sex offender programming required in order to be considered for release by the state’s Indeterminate Sentence Review Board.  The P&A raised this issue with prison officials and the state is now in the process of hiring staff to provide specialized sex offender programming in the mental health unit.

 

  • Inmates with mobility impairments contacted Disability Rights New York to report lack of access to the prison commissary and clothing shop because of the shops’ location in an inaccessible building. The P&A addressed this issue with the prison administration, which issued directives for corrections officers to arrange for porters to carry packages for inmates with mobility impairments. This directive was later incorporated into a new mobility assistant policy that provided a process for accessing these programs for inmates with disabilities.   A ramp has now been constructed to the shop and commissary.

 

  • The designated P&A for South Carolina, Protection and Advocacy for People with Disabilities, received several letters from female inmates who use wheelchairs.  The doctor assigned to the women’s facility had denied them inmate “caregivers” to assist them in getting to the medical and dining area. Some inmates were also unable to get to the infirmary, where medications were dispensed, due to their inability to get their wheelchairs up an incline without assistance. After the P&A brought this issue to the attention of the facility’s ADA Coordinator, caregivers were provided.

 

  • Disability Rights Wisconsin partnered with the state’s department of corrections and the state’s mental health council to increase screening and mental health treatment for incarcerated veterans. After conducting an extensive investigation and literature review, the P&A presented a proposal to the mental health council to improve the care of incarcerated and releasing veterans. As a result, the prison now screens for veteran status and combat related issues at intake and has provided increased training for prison staff regarding combat related mental health concerns, including potential treatments for such issues.

 

Administrative Advocacy and Litigation

 

  • Disability Rights New York filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of inmates housed in the “Unit for the Physically Disabled” at a state prison. Inmates in this unit lacked access to the facility’s alcohol and substance abuse treatment programs because of their mobility impairments. The lawsuit claimed violations of the ADA and the Rehab Act.  The prison settled the litigation by providing the programming on the unit.

 

  • The Disabilities Law Program at the Community Legal Aid Society, the Delaware P&A, advocated on behalf of an inmate with intellectual disabilities who was seeking education services in prison. The inmate had an Individualized Education Program that mandated a specific number of hours of education per week. When the prison refused to provide that level of programming, the P&A filed an administrative complaint with the state’s department of education, alleging that the prison’s failure to follow the inmate’s Individualized Education Program constituted a violation of his right to a free and appropriate public education. The department of education thereafter ordered that the prison follow the inmate’s Individual Education Program.

 

  • The Minnesota Disability Law Center, the state’s designated P&A, brought suit under the ADA on behalf of a deaf inmate  who had been directed to take a sex offender treatment program offered at the prison. The inmate requested an American Sign Language interpreter but the prison failed to provide one for over seven months, when the inmate finally quit the program. Following a bench trial, the defendants were ordered to pay compensatory damages for emotional harm under Minnesota state law. They were also directed to pay for a sex offender treatment program with interpreters and to pay a civil penalty.

 

  • Equip for Equality, the P&A for Illinois, received several letters and complaints from prisoners with disabilities who were denied access to educational or vocational programming. Specifically, the P&A found that the prison uses the TABE test as a gatekeeper for all educational and vocational programming but fails to provide necessary accommodations for people with disabilities to fairly take the test. After attempting to negotiate with the state correctional system, the P&A filed an individual lawsuit against the prison system on behalf of a blind prisoner who had been denied any access to educational or vocational programming for more than two years. The case raises claims under the ADA and Rehab Act and is currently pending.

 

  • Disability Rights Maine represented an inmate with limited mobility in a lawsuit claiming violations of the Rehab Act for the prison’s failure to provide the inmate with reasonable access to a legal research class. Specifically, the prison failed to give him access to the class in a manner that reduced the amount of walking required to get to class. Following a three day trial, a jury found in favor of the inmate.

 

  • An inmate with multiple sclerosis contacted the Disabilities Law Program at the Community Legal Aid Society, the designated P&A for Delaware, to report that he was being permanently housed in the infirmary due to his disability. Because of this placement, the inmate was unable to participate in prison programming, thereby precluding him from accruing earned time and, in turn, an earlier release date from prison. The P&A filed a federal lawsuit, alleging violations of the ADA; the case is currently pending.

 

  • Alabama Disabilities Advocacy Program joined litigation brought by several prisoners with disabilities, challenging the accessibility of the services and programs offered at a state prison for “aged and infirm” inmates, many of whom had mobility limitations, as well as serious medical and cognitive issues. After extensive negotiation,  a settlement was reached, whereby the state’s department of corrections agreed to implement architectural barrier removal and policy changes so that all services and programs offered at the prison are fully accessible to and usable by inmates with disabilities. The prison spent two years undertaking the improvements and completing its obligations under the settlement.

The AVID Prison Project is a collaboration between The Arizona Center for Disability Law, Disability Law Colorado, The Advocacy Center of Louisiana, Disability Rights New York, Protection and Advocacy for People with Disabilities of South Carolina, Disability Rights Texas, Disability Rights Washington and The National Disability Rights Network.