28 C.F.R. § 115.13

Supervision and monitoring

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) The agency shall ensure that each facility it operates shall develop, document, and make its best efforts to comply on a regular basis with a staffing plan that provides for adequate levels of staffing, and, where applicable, video monitoring, to protect inmates against sexual abuse. In calculating adequate staffing levels and determining the need for video monitoring, facilities shall take into consideration:

(1) Generally accepted detention and correctional practices;

(2) Any judicial findings of inadequacy;

(3) Any findings of inadequacy from Federal investigative agencies;

(4) Any findings of inadequacy from internal or external oversight bodies;

(5) All components of the facility's physical plant (including “blind-spots” or areas where staff or inmates may be isolated);

(6) The composition of the inmate population;

(7) The number and placement of supervisory staff;

(8) Institution programs occurring on a particular shift;

(9) Any applicable State or local laws, regulations, or standards;

(10) The prevalence of substantiated and unsubstantiated incidents of sexual abuse; and

(11) Any other relevant factors.

(b) In circumstances where the staffing plan is not complied with, the facility shall document and justify all deviations from the plan.

(c) Whenever necessary, but no less frequently than once each year, for each facility the agency operates, in consultation with the PREA coordinator required by § 115.11, the agency shall assess, determine, and document whether adjustments are needed to:

(1) The staffing plan established pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section;

(2) The facility's deployment of video monitoring systems and other monitoring technologies; and

(3) The resources the facility has available to commit to ensure adherence to the staffing plan.

(d) Each agency operating a facility shall implement a policy and practice of having intermediate-level or higher-level supervisors conduct and document unannounced rounds to identify and deter staff sexual abuse and sexual harassment. Such policy and practice shall be implemented for night shifts as well as day shifts. Each agency shall have a policy to prohibit staff from alerting other staff members that these supervisory rounds are occurring, unless such announcement is related to the legitimate operational functions of the facility.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 12 cases (8 in the last 5 years), 2016–2024 · leading case: Ashley Franklin v. Franklin Cnty., Ky., 115 F.4th 461 (6th Cir. 2024).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Ashley Franklin v. Franklin Cnty., Ky., 115 F.4th 461 (6th Cir. 2024). “See 28 C.F.R. § 115.13 (a). In the absence of any such mandatory requirements, Rogers’s strategies, training, and compliance with the PREA’s goals are discretionary duties, “involving the exercise of discretion and judgment,” which entitles him to qualified immunity.”

Zollicoffer v. Livingston, 169 F. Supp. 3d 687 (S.D. Tex. 2016). “28 C.F.R. § 115.13 (requiring “adequate levels of staffing,' and, where applicable, video monitoring, to protect inmates against sexual abuse”).”

Tangreti v. Semple (D. Conn. 2019). · cites it 3× ““[P]rior to 2014,” McNeil and others “determined that the staffing in [York] was adequate to meet the requirements of the federal regs” and “adequate under the criteria listed in [ 28 C.F.R. § 115.13 ].” Id. at 52–53. Ms. Tangreti argues that there is a dispute whether York had…”

Unique v. Claybaugh (N.D. Cal. 2024). · cites it 2× “” 28 C.F.R. § 115.13 . PREA regulations also state: “If vulnerable detainees are identified 19 pursuant to the screening required by § 115.”

Strozier v. Warren Cnty., Ohio (S.D. Ohio 2020). · cites it 2× “28 C.F.R. § 115.13 (a)(5).” 15 Tangreti v.”

Edward Gladney v. United States (9th Cir. 2021). “§ 30307 (a)(1) (providing that "the Attorney General shall publish a final rule adopting national standards for the detection, prevention, reduction, and punishment of prison rape"); 28 C.F.R. § 115.13 (a) (providing that each prison 2 "shall develop, document, and make its best…”

Peterson v. United States of Am. (N.D. Cal. 2020). “12 at 14-15 (emphasis added); 28 C.F.R. § 115.13 (a). For the same reasons set forth 26 above, this provision is discretionary rather than mandatory in nature.”

L. C. v. USA (E.D. Ky. 2022). “11 and 28 C.F.R. 115.13. [R. 29 at 13, 16.] These regulations provide the following: § 115.”

United States v. State of New Jersey (D.N.J. 2021). “Within four months of the Effective Date, Edna Mahan shall develop a new staffing plan, designating the necessary security and custody posts to be staffed at Edna Mahan, based on gender-responsive principles, that provides for adequate security staffing levels, in accordance…”

Nichols v. Osei (E.D. Pa. 2023). “See 28 C.F.R. 115.13(a)–(c). Nichols alleges that Commissioner Carney and senior PDP officials decided to transfer inmates to facilities without surveillance systems, notwithstanding staffing shortages, and that this decision “allowed” Sergeant Osei to abuse Ms.”

Ashley Franklin v. Franklin Cnty., Ky. (6th Cir. 2024). “See 28 C.F.R. § 115.13 (a). In the absence of any such mandatory requirements, Rogers’s strategies, training, and compliance with the PREA’s goals are discretionary duties, “involving the exercise of discretion and judgment,” which entitles him to qualified immunity.”

WATTS v. United States (W.D. Pa. 2024). “§ 30307 (a) and 28 C.F.R. § 115.13 (a)] explicitly grant the BOP discretion in how to reduce the sexual assault of people in its charge.”

— 28 C.F.R. § 115.13(a) — 1 case

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.